IMPORTANT POINT
Parallel prosecutions under IPC and Factories Act for the same incident are impermissible, necessitating prosecution under one enactment only.

ORDER :

Mohammad Nawaz, J.

Since, the question involved in this case is already decided in the case of Ananthakumar vs. State of Karnataka, reported in AIR Online 2019 KAR 565, instant petition is taken up for final disposal.

2. It is contended by the learned counsel for petitioners that parallel proceedings, leading to parallel act in respect of the very same incident cannot go on and the culmination of the same, will result in double jeopardy. Hence, it is submitted that, petitioners have sought to quash the criminal proceedings arising out of Crime No.235/2017, registered at Raichur Rural Police Station, for the offence punishable under Section 304A read with Section 34 of IPC.

3. The above case came to be registered against petitioners, working as owner cum occupier and the manager of one ‘Krishnaprasad Rice Mill Industries’, Vadlur road, Raichur, as one of the employee of the said Rice Mill by name Sujeet Paswan died due to electrocution while pumping water using a ½ H.P. electric motor.

4. In the complaint lodged by the co-worker by name Sanjeetkumar, it is alleged that the electric motor was old and the manager of the Rice Mill without taking any precaution and providing safety measures, instructed the deceased to lift water from the tank by using the said electric motor.

5. The police on completion of investigation filed chargesheet against petitioners for the offence punishable under Section 304A read with Section 34 of IPC, alleging that by not providing safety measures and without proper precautions, they instructed the deceased to remove water using the old ½ H.P. motor and therefore, the deceased died due to the negligence on the part of the petitioners.

6. It is not in dispute that a separate complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. is filed by the State represented by the Assistant Director of Factories, Raichur Division, Raichur, against both the petitioners, namely occupier and manager of the factory, alleging violation of the provisions of the Factories Act, 1948 and Karnataka Factories Rules, 1969, wherein the said violations are made punishable under Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948.

7. The incident took place on 06.10.2017 at about 05.00 p.m. near gauge elevator sump of the paddy cleaning section of the factory in question. In the complaint filed under Section 200 of Cr.P.C., it is averred that there was water logging in the gauge elevator sump of the paddy cleaning section of the factory and the deceased was engaged in dewatering the sump using a ½ H.P. portable motor with metallic body with pipe arrangement and electric supply through one of theelectrical points in the factory, provided with MCB rating 10 amperes. During the course of doing the job, at around 05.00 p.m., he fell near the pump used for dewatering near the elevator sump of the paddy cleaning section and died due to electric shock and deceased / worker was not using hand gloves or shoes while doing the said job.

8. It is alleged that the occupier failed to provide maintain plant & systems of work in the factory in a safe manner and without risks to health, failed to provide such information, instruction, training as are necessary to ensure the health and safety of all workers at work in the factory, failed to provide earth leakage to prevent electrocution or other hazard etc., and thereby violated Section 7A (2) (a), 2(c) of the Factories Act, 1948 and Rules 86 (2) and 136 of the Karnataka Factories Rules, 1969, punishable under Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948.

9. It is relevant to extract Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948, which reads as under:

“92. General penalty for offences, Save as is otherwise expressly provided in this Act and subject to the provisions of Section 93, if in, or in respect of, any factory there is any contravention of any of the provisions of this Act or of any rules made thereunder or of any order in writing given thereunder, the occupier and manger of the factory shall each be guilty of an offence and punishable w