JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner challenges the First Information Report being C.R. No.11191065200923 of 2020 lodged at Narol Police Station, Ahmedabad City for the offences punishable under Sections 304, 308, 284, 285, 286, 436, 427, 337, 338 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 7, 8, 9, 15 and 16 of the Environment Protection Act, 1986. It is submitted that the petitioner is nowhere connected with the offences and on that ground, a prayer is made to quash and set aside the First Information Report under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

2. The facts of the First Information Report inter-alia suggest that on 04.11.2020 at 11.30 in the morning, a blast took place in the godown of a chemical company. The complainant’s mother and 12 other died in the incident and about 9 persons were injured. The petitioner and two others are arraigned as accused in the First Information Report.

2.1. The complainant was informed by his sister about the blast and fire and that their mother had got stuck in the premises. The complainant rushed to the place where his mother was serving and saw that one godown of Sahil Chemicals, adjoining the godown where the mother of the complainant was serving was burning. The complainant has stated that his mother was serving at Kanika Fashions which is used for storage of readymade garments and because of the fire in the adjoining godown, Kanika Fashions got destroyed and several persons including the complainant’s mother working there died. It is alleged that it was because of the negligence of the owner of the premises, as no necessary proper access was provided in the premises and there was no facility of fire extinguisher, fatality took place

3. The petitioner states that he is merely the owner of the premises where Kanika Fashions was using the premises as a godown. The godown at Survey No.293/2 and the Godowns No.9, 10 and 11 admeasuring 3600 sq. ft. situated at Shahwadi, Ahmedabad, was given on a Leave and License Agreement to the owner of Kanika Fashions - Dhaneshkumar Rujukumar on 25.03.2015. The petitioner states that one of the convenants of the Leave and License Agreement was that necessary statutory requirements and compliance was the responsibility of the Licensee prior to utilizing the premises as a warehouse for fashion fabrics. The premises was on the basis of charging license fee from the concerned Licensee from the year 2015. According to the petitioner, since then the Licensee was utilizing the premises for warehouse purpose. The petitioner states that on the day when the incident took place, the adjoining premises was in the possession of Sahil Chemicals and owing to the blast, surrounding 2-3 godowns including that of the petitioner got destroyed and the persons who were serving in the said Kanika Fashions, owned and managed by the Licensee - Dhaneshkumar Rujukumar lost their lives.

4. Learned Senior Counsel Mr. Premal Nanavaty appearing with learned Advocate Mr. Meetkumar J. Pandit for the petitioner stated that the owner of the Kanika Fashions has not been made an accused in this case. Referring to the Leave and License Agreement, it was submitted by Mr. Nanavaty that clause laid down in the Agreement clarifies that it was the absolute responsibility of the Licensee to keep the interior of the premises in good condition and it was the responsibility of the Licensee for all times during the course of the Leave and License Agreement not to carry on offensive trade or business in the premies and the premises was to be used as a godown and workshop. It is submitted that it was duty of the Licensee to take care of his employees and if so required to take all reasonable care and measures for the safety of his employees. Mr. Nanavaty stated that the Leave and License Agreement does not carry any of the conditions with regard to the functioning of Kanika Fashions nor about any employees working under the control of the owner of Kanika Fashions, laying the responsibiliti