SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(Cal) 456

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA
JOYMALYA BAGCHI, J.
Dr. Mani Kumar Chhetri - Petitioner
Versus
State of West Bengal - Respondent
C.R.R. No. 1918 of 2016
Decided On : 30-06-2017

Advocate Appeared:
Saswata Gopal Mukherjee, learned P.P., Samaraditya Pal, learned Senior Advocate, Somopriyo Chowdhury, Deepan Kumar Sarkar, Avishek Bhandari, Ayan Bose, Anasuya Sinha, Sanjay Banerjee, Advocates, Paromita Guha Thakurta (Intervener).

Headnote:

Petitioner, Managing Director of AMRI Hospitals Ltd., challenged the order framing charges against him for offences punishable under Sections 304 Part II, 308 read with Section 36 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 11C read with Sections 11J, 11L of the West Bengal Fire and Emergency Services Act. The charges arose from a fire that broke out in the basement of the hospital, resulting in the deaths of 92 patients. The petitioner argued that he was not personally responsible for the acts and omissions that led to the fire, that the offences under the Indian Penal Code do not involve vicarious liability, and that the company, not him, should have been prosecuted under the West Bengal Fire Services Act. The Court held that the petitioner was constructively liable for the acts and omissions of the other accused persons, that the prosecution had made out a prima facie case of rash and negligent act causing death under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code, but that the evidence did not support a charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304(II) of the Indian Penal Code. The Court also held that the petitioner could be prosecuted under the West Bengal Fire Services Act, even though the company had not been arraigned as an accused. The Court quashed the charges under Sections 304(II)/308 read with Section 36 of the Indian Penal Code and directed the trial court to frame charges against the petitioner under Sections 304A/337/338 read with Sections 35 and 36 of the Indian Penal Code.

Fact of the Case:

A fire broke out in the basement of AMRI Hospitals Ltd., resulting in the deaths of 92 patients. The petitioner, the Managing Director of the hospital, was charged with offences punishable under Sections 304 Part II, 308 read with Section 36 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 11C read with Sections 11J, 11L of the West Bengal Fire and Emergency Services Act.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the petitioner was constructively liable for the acts and omissions of the other accused persons, that the prosecution had made out a prima facie case of rash and negligent act causing death under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code, but that the evidence did not support a charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304(II) of the Indian Penal Code. The Court also held that the petitioner could be prosecuted under the West Bengal Fire Services Act, even though the company had not been arraigned as an accused.

Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner was personally responsible for the acts and omissions that led to the fire. 2. Whether the offences under the Indian Penal Code involve vicarious liability. 3. Whether the company, not the petitioner, should have been prosecuted under the West Bengal Fire Services Act.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The petitioner was constructively liable for the acts and omissions of the other accused persons because he was in a supervisory role and had knowledge of the deficiencies in the hospital's fire safety measures. 2. The offences under the Indian Penal Code do involve vicarious liability when the acts and omissions of several persons taken as a whole create an effect which constitute an offence. 3. The petitioner could be prosecuted under the West Bengal Fire Services Act, even though the company had not been arraigned as an accused, because the definition of "owner" in the Act includes an agent of the owner entitled to receive rent.

Final Decision: The Court quashed the charges under Sections 304(II)/308 read with Section 36 of the Indian Penal Code and directed the trial court to frame charges against the petitioner under Sections 304A/337/338 read with Sections 35 and 36 of the Indian Penal Code.

JUDGMENT :

1. The petition is directed against judgment and order dated 19th March, 2016, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court, Alipore, South 24 Parganas in S.C. 26(11)/2013 rejecting the prayer of the petitioner to discharge him from the instant case and framing charges under Sections 304 Part II, 308 read with Section 36 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 11C read with Sections 11J, 11L of the West Bengal Fire and Emergency Services Act.

2. The petitioner along with fifteen other accused persons were prosecuted on the allegations of commission of offences punishable under Sections 304 Part II/308 read with Section 36 of I.P.C. and under Section 11C read with Sections 11J and 11L of West Bengal Fire Services Act on the allegations reflected in the charge-sheet is as follows:-

3. In the early hours of December 9, 2011 a big tragedy took place as the wintry morning was rend asunder by the helpless cries of patients trapped inside a premium hospital namely AMRI Hospitals Ltd situated at 15, Panchanantala Road. In the midst of the night, a fire suddenly broke out in the basement of the Annexe-I building, a G+5 storied structure. As the basement area remained ablaze, toxic smoke began to accumulate inside the building. This contributed to poor visibility and induced suffocation amongst those present on the premises, thus greatly restricting the movements of those trapped inside. Additionally, rescuers were prevented from having direct access to the hospital premises as the security staff stood guard at the main gates.

4. The incident was initially dealt with in a casual manner by the ill trained and poorly equipped staff of the hospital. Once the situation reached an aggravated stage, the Fire Brigade and the Police were informed. As news of the fire spread, locals began to assemble and assist the fire brigade and police in the ongoing rescue operation. The Fire Brigade personnel used sky ladders and broke several glass windows in the building in the course of the rescue. While some patients were brought out alive, dozens of dead bodies were also recovered. As per reports, 92 patients admitted in the Annexe-I building succumbed to death on the night of the fire. The patients who were successfully rescued were shifted to other hospitals.

5. Following the incident, an official filed a formal complaint on behalf of the Fire Brigade. Subsequent to the General Diary Entry No 765 of Lake Police Station dated 09.12.11, a case vide Lake PS Case No 293 dated 09.12.11 u/s 304/308/285/34 I.P.C. and 11C/11J/11L of West Bengal Fire Services Act was registered. The control of the investigation of the case was taken up by a Special Investigation Team of Detective Department, Lalbazar, Kolkata.

6. The dead bodies recovered were subjected to inquest followed by post mortem examination. The autopsy surgeon opined in his report that the cause of death was asphyxia followed by suffocation.

7. In the course of the investigation, a number of witnesses were examined and their statements were recorded. The surviving patients and the relatives of deceased patients narrated the incidents of the unfortunate night in their statements. The patients who managed to escape provided detailed accounts about how the smoke circulating in the building had caused irritation in their eyes. They also related how the lack of support from the AMRI staff and overall absence of an evacuation team worsened the situation. Several patients were infirm and/or bed-ridden and thereby compelled to inhale noxious smoke in their feeble condition. Even those who were mobile had to overcome various hurdles in order to escape the smoke. Kolkata Police and the Fire Brigade worked tirelessly to rescue those trapped inside the building. Local youths assisted them during the continuance of the rescue operation. The patients who survived mentioned that most doctors, nurses and other staffs had fled the premises and they did not receive assistance from the AMRI staff, alb

































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top