( 1 ) THIS revision is directed against the order dated 16-1-2009 passed in Crl. M. P. No. 3410 of 2008 in C. C. No. 241 of 2006 by the learned judicial Magistrate of First Class, Suryapet.

( 2 ) THE brief facts of the case are as follows. The de facto complainant Kolishetty venkateswarlu reported to the police on 24-5-2005 that he got admitted his son Uttam kumar, aged about 11 years, in Hyma Resorts for learning swimming and that he had paid a sum of Rs. 300/- for 15 days learning. On 23-5-2005 at about 6. 00 p. m. he dropped his son at Hyma Resorts and returned to home. Again at about 7. 00 p. m. when he went there to pick up his son, initially the coaches informed him that his son was outside the swimming pool. Then he searched the surroundings of the swimming pool and resort for his son, but he could not trace his son. Again when he insisted the coaches about his son, they dived into the swimming pool and brought out his son who was in unconscious state. He noticed that forth was coming from the nose of his son. The boy was immediately shifted to KVR hospital, where the Doctors declared that boy died. It is alleged that due to negligence of the owner of hyma Resorts, namely Brijesh Reddy and his uncle, who was supervising the management, and four coaches of swimming pool the son of the de facto complainant drowned into the swimming pool and died. Basing on the said report, the police registered a case in Crime No. 138 of 2005 of suryapet Police Station on 24-5-2005 under section 304-A IPC.

( 3 ) AFTER completing the investigation, charge sheet was filed against A-1 to A-3. As per the contents of the charge sheet, accused no. 1 Bandaru Venkat Reddy had taken hyma Resorts on lese for a period of one year from 1-12-2004 from its owner Brijesh Reddy and that A-1 had power to enlist private employees and to maintain the swimming pool properly with all responsibilities. He had to look after the customers and to provide services to the customers, which include providing of life jackets, tubes and divers. A-2 is the Supervisor and A-3 is the observer of the swimming pool. It is also alleged that due to their negligent attitude and mismanagement of swimming pool, the deceased drowned into the swimming pool and died. Thus though it is mentioned that brijesh Reddy is the owner of Hyma Resorts the police did not array him as an accused on the ground that A-1 had taken the Hyma resorts on lease from Brijesh Reddy.

( 4 ) IN this case, the trial Commenced and the revision petitioner herein, who is the father of the deceased, has been examined as p. W. 1. P. W. 1 in his evidence deposed that on 12-5-2005 he got admitted his son and daughter in Hyma Resorts for learning swimming and that he paid Rs. 300/- for 15 days learning. He categorically deposed that at the time of admission one Brijesh Reddy and his staff were present and the said Brijesh reddy used to run the resort and also the swimming pool. He further deposed that on the date of incident i. e. , on 23-5-2005 at about 6. 00 p. m. he dropped his son and daughter at swimming pool and returned to his house and that at about 7. 00 p. m. when he went to the swimming pool his daughter alone was swimming and that his son was not seen. According to P. W. 1 then he questioned the staff of Brijesh Reddy (A-1 to A-3 present in the Court) about his son and that they asked him to search for his son around the swimming pool. He further deposed that after search, again he questioned the accused and Brijesh Reddy to search for his son in the swimming pool. Then one of the staff members dived into the swimming pool and on search found his son inside the pool and brought his son to the floor. According to him, froth was coming out from the mouth of his son and no staff member came near his son. Then he himself gave first aid to his son and then shifted the boy to KVR Hospital, suryapet, where the Doctors declared that his son was brought dead. He further deposed that about 100 children were learn

Click Here to Read the rest of this document