Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
J.C. DOSHI, J.
Imtiaz Yusufbhai Shaikh and Others – Appellants
Versus
State of Gujarat and Others – Respondents
Criminal Misc. Application No. 14919 of 2015
Decided On : 08-08-2023
Culpable Homicidal Death - Electricity Act - Section 304 of the IPC - Section 299 of the IPC
Fact of the Case:
The petition was filed to quash the FIR registered for the offence punishable under section 304 of the IPC. The deceased was electrocuted while sitting on a tractor due to a loose 11 kv feeder electric line. The FIR alleged that the officers of the GEB were negligent and caused the death.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the FIR did not disclose the essential ingredients of the offence under section 299 of the IPC. It concluded that there was no intention or knowledge attributable to the accused for culpable homicidal death not amounting to murder. The court also noted that the incident was an unfortunate accident and did not prove any deliberate act by the accused.
Issues: The main issue was whether the accused could be charged with culpable homicidal death not amounting to murder under section 304 of the IPC based on the allegations in the FIR.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the essential pre-requisite of the offence of culpable homicide is the intention or knowledge of causing death, which was not established in the present case. It also highlighted the distinction between intention and knowledge, stating that the knowledge and intention are basic ingredients of the offence punishable under section 299 of the IPC.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petition and quashed the impugned FIR and all consequential proceedings, as it found that the criminal proceedings were manifestly attended with ulterior motive and no ingredient of the offence under section 299 of the IPC was made out.
JUDGMENT :
J.C. DOSHI, J.
1. This petition is filed for quashing and setting aside the FIR being I-C.R. No. 15 of 2015 registered with Bilkha Police Station for the offence punishable u/s 304 of the IPC.
2. The petitioners under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short “the Code”) seeks following reliefs:
(B) Pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this application, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to stay the further proceedings arising out of the complaint being FIR being I-C.R. No. 15 of 2015 registered with Bilkha Police Station for the offence punishable u/s 304 of the IPC.”
3. The facts giving rise to present petition succinctly stated that deceased Gandubhai Randhhodbhai was sitting on the agriculture implement attached with Massey Ferguson tractor, which was ridden by complainant Valjibhai Mavjibhai Dodariya. The complainant along with Vinubhai Babubhai Solanki was ridding this tractor into the agriculture field belonging to Gopalanand Bapu. This agriculture field was situated on the bank of reservoir of Ozat river. All of them were ploughing the agriculture field by riding tractor, attached with implement. The 11 kv feeder electric line was passing from north to south across the agriculture field. While they were ploughing the field by riding the tractor, deceased Gandubhai was standing on the tractor. The angle fitted in tractor touched to 11 kv feeder electric line and due to such electrocution, the complainant as well as Vinubhai received minor injury, but deceased Gandubhai flung from the tractor as he was electrocuted and later on, it is found that he has expired. In background of this incident, it is alleged that the officers of the GEB have not kept the electric line in proper condition and let them to loose and as such, they have derelicted from their duty. It is alleged that deceased Gandubhai died due to criminal rashness and negligent act of the officers of the GEB. As such, the act is alleged to be culpable homicidal death not amounting to murder
4. The above facts were reported to Bilkha Police Station, Dist: Junagadh by the first informant. The FIR being I-C.R. No. 15 of 2015 came to be registered against the officers of the GEB, for the offence punishable u/s 304 of the IPC.
5. The contents of the FIR are reproduced hereunder after it being translated into simple English:
On being asked personally, I dictate that I have been residing with my family at the aforesaid address, and I have been farming in the land of Gopalanand Bapu for many years. Upon my police statement dated 25/09/2013 being read over to me, I further dictate that as Vinubhai Babubhai Solanki came with the Massey Ferguson tractor belonging to Sanjaybhai to the field of Gopalanand situated near boundary of the dam over Ozat river at about half past nine in the morning on 24/08/2013, I and Vinubhai were ploughing the field with the tractor. Upon our arrival on the boundary of the field at about half past ten, Gandubhai Ranchhodbhai of the next field(vaadi) came. He also sat on the wooden blade of plough to give weight. When tractor was passing under the 11 KV electric line of G.E.B. running in the north-south direction in the field at about quarter to eleven, I, Gandubhai and Vinubhai were thrown away from the tractor. I sustained electric shock on the thumb, palm and fingers of my right hand. Looking at Gandubhai, he was found to be unconscious and was not speaking anything and was breathing. Therefore, I called Bharatbhai Anandbhai and Mansukhbhai Dhanjibhai, who were working in the next field (vaadi). As I called
The main legal point established in the judgment is that for the offence of culpable homicidal death not amounting to murder, the intention or knowledge of causing death is essential, and the absence....
Point of law : A court exercising its inherent jurisdiction must examine if on their face, the averments made in the complaint constitute the ingredients necessary for the offence.
Criminal proceedings against public servants for negligence cannot be quashed on the ground of lack of sanction under Section 197 CrPC, as negligent acts or omissions do not constitute acts performed....
The High Court can quash FIRs for non-compoundable offences under Section 482 of the CrPC if a settlement is reached and gross negligence is not established, serving the ends of justice.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that heinous offences with a serious impact on society cannot be compromised, while offences affecting private parties can be compromised.
(1) Discharge of accused – By its very nature, discharge is at a higher pedestal than acquittal – Acquittal is at end of trial process, may be for a technicality or on benefit of doubt or prosecution....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the principle of res ipsa loquitur, the concept of strict liability, and the duty of the electricity department to maintain elec....
The court ruled that the actions of the appellants amounted to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, reducing their conviction from Section 302 to Section 304 Part II IPC due to lack of intent.
The prosecution under different statutes for distinct offences does not constitute double jeopardy. Lack of evidence for negligence is crucial in cases of criminal prosecution for causing death by ne....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
