The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of establishing intention or knowledge in causing death, particularly in cases falling under Section 304 of IPC.

JUDGMENT :

B.A. Patil, J.

Criminal Petition No.100869/2019 is filed by accused No.3 & Criminal Petition No.100870/2019 is filed by accused No.2 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking their release in Crime No.46/2019 of Sub- Urban Police Station, Dharwad for the offences punishable under Sections 304, 337, 338 of IPC.

2. I have heard the learned Senior Counsel Sri. M.T.Nanaiah for Sri. Jagadish Patil, Advocate for the petitioners-accused Nos.2 and 3. For the respondent- State I have heard Sri. V.M.Banakar, Addl. State Public Prosecutor.

3. The genesis of the case of the complainant is that the Assistant Commissioner, HDMC, filed the complaint alleging that R.S.No.1, Housing Site No.11A to 11E, measuring 9 guntas 3.50 anas of Kumareshwar nagar, Dharwad was purchased by a partnership firm viz, M/s. Sri. Renukadevi Constructions, Dharwad. It is further alleged in the complaint that the said firm sought permission for construction of a commercial building by preparing the plan and construction work was started after obtaining necessary permission. Since basement and two parking basements were finished with all work, they requested to issue permission to occupy the same through all the partners and the corporation has given permission to use the ground floor and first floor subject to imposing the condition that they have to take security and safety measures and it is the owners, Architect and the building Engineers who are responsible to any act as the remaining building was under construction. The owners of the Renukadevi Constructions and the person, who prepared the map, and the supervisors have not followed the rules and they have constructed the low quality work by using the low quality material and even though they knew that by use of such material if it is constructed, it will be endangering the human life even, and inspite of that with an intention/knowledge they constructed the said building and let out the basement though it was under construction. In that light on 19.03.2019 at about 4 p.m. the entire building collapsed because of the low quality work and as a result of the same 19 lives have been lost and about 54 persons suffered injuries and also the material which was kept was damaged. On the basis of the said complaint a case has been registered.

4. It is the submission of the learned Senior Counsel Sri. M.T.Nanaiah that the accused-petitioners are the partners, the entire work was entrusted to the contractor and engineers and they had nothing to do with the quality and quantity of work which has been carried out. It is his further submission that ex-facie the provisions of Section 304 of IPC are not attracted. It is his further submission that there must be a nexus between the cause of the demolition and the act of the petitioners-accused. It is his further submission that Section 304 totally excludes the ingredients of Section 299 or 300 of IPC. In case of Section 299 or 300 that there will be intention to cause the death, but in 304 it is the only knowledge that which make a room for serious charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. It is his further submission that the facts found in the case do not make out a case of any willful or deliberate act on the part of the accused-petitioners in order to cause death of the deceased persons. It is his further submission that the accused-petitioners, in no way are concerned with the cause of death. No direct rash and negligent act can be attributed on them and there is no proximate and sufficient cause to connect them to the alleged crime. He further submitted by relying upon the decision in the case of Keshub Mahindra Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 1996 LAWS(SC) 94 that accused had no intention to cause the death of human beings while constructing the building. It is his further submission that the accused had no knowledge that the said building is going to collapse and as such the provisions of Section 304 of IPC are not attracted and even other offences that which