IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
J.C. DOSHI, J.
Mahendrabhai Ghemarbhai Patel – Petitioner
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
R/Criminal MISC. Application (For Anticipatory Bail) No. 22797 Of 2023
Decided On : 18-01-2024
Negligence - Anticipatory Bail - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections 304, 427, 114 of the Indian Penal Code
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought anticipatory bail in connection with an FIR registered for offences under Sections 304, 427, 114 of the IPC. The case involved the construction of a bridge where girders fell due to negligence, resulting in the death of two individuals.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner, as the project in-charge, was negligent in ensuring safety measures during the construction, leading to the unfortunate incident. The court also noted the petitioner's absence during the investigation and dismissed the petition for anticipatory bail.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the petitioner's alleged negligence in ensuring safety measures during the construction, the severity of the accusation, and the petitioner's cooperation with the investigation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the petitioner's role as the project in-charge made him responsible for ensuring safety measures and preventing accidents. The court also considered the gravity of the accusation and the petitioner's absence during the investigation.
Final Decision: The petition for anticipatory bail was dismissed, and the court held that the petitioner's negligence and absence during the investigation warranted denial of bail.
ORDER :
1. By way of the present petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in case of his arrest in connection with the FIR being No.11195034230811 of 2023 registered with Palanpur East Police Station for the offences punishable u/s 304, 427, 114 of the IPC.
2. Brief facts of the case are as under:-
2.1 That the construction work of bridge was going on the railway line which is passing from Palanpur Old RTO Circle to Ambaji road the work of the new bridge is allotted and done by the Company namely GPC Infrastructure Ltd (in short "the Company").
2.2 That the directors of the the Company are 1. Ganeshbhai Parthibhai Chaudhary, 2 Parth Ganeshbhal Chaudhary, 3. Daljibhai Parthibhai Chaudhary, 4. Mahendra Ghemarbhai Chaudhary, (appears that the name has been incorrectly mentioned in the FIR, the correct name is Mahendra Ghemarbhai Patel), 5. Vipulbhal Daljibhai Chaudhary, 6. Doliben Ganeshbhai Chaudhary, 7. Takhiben Daljibhai Chaudhary as well as 8. Jalmaram Vanzara was the testing engineer, 9. Sanibhal Mewada and 10. Hardik Parmar and 11. Naman Mewada were the site engineer appointed by the the Company at the construction of bridge.
2.3 That the other persons who were found negligent in the supervision of the construction work of the bridge and for the work approach of girders (beam) placed on the bridge is in progress, as it fell on road due to the negligence two person have been died by not keeping barricades as well as traffic marshal under the bridge where construction work was going on and despite knowing that by keeping negligence in work may result in the death of someone.
2.4 That the complainant is a deputy executive engineer serving in National Highway Division, posted at Idar District Sabarkantha. It is further alleged that on 23.10.2023 the complainant was on leave during which approximately around 03:00 PM his friend Mr. SM.Patel who is posted as deputy executive engineer informed the complainant on the call that the bridge which built on the railway line near to Palanpur Old RTO Circle to Ambaji has been damaged, On which complainant called the petitioner herein for taking information, that on call he revert that today approximately in between 2.00 PM to 03:00 PM approach girder topple/fallen and the incident was occurred, on which complainant informed his superior officer who is executive engineer at Ahmedabad in National Highway Division namely Sirishkumar A Sinh about the incident and in evening hours complainant came to Palanpur where the officers of the committee which was constitute by the state government in regards to the topple of the approach girder were present and along with them the complainant went to the place of incident, on the way of Palanpur Old RTO Circle to Ambaji on National Highway Road No. 58 from the railway line north towards on the bridge over the DP. 11 to R.P 03 where Six horizontal girders (beams) were found to be toppled down and particles of the cement concrete of the said girders (beams) were lying on the spot as well as a tractor and a rickshaw were crushed in it and it seems that some damage was caused to them and in the said incident due to topple of girders of the bridge girders two persons (1) Mayurbhai Mohanbhai Chandrethia and (2) Ajay Khodidas Shrimali died due to topple/fallen of girders on them.
2.5 That construction of the new bridge being ROB with Approaches in lieu of LC no.165, of Ahmedabad-Palanpur (IR Ch-650/2-3) between Rly station - Karjoda & Palanpur NH-58 on EPC mode under NH(O) In the state of Gujarat. (Job No.0 58-GJ- 2020-21-635) site work was allotted to the Company by approving Tender No. 1D-2020 Mo RTH_581300_1 on Rs.89,14,13,300/ and the directors of the said Company are (1) Ganeshbhai Parthibhai Chaudhary (2) Parth Ganeshbhai Chaudhary (3) Daljibhai Parthibhai Chaudhary (4) Mahendrabhai Ghemarbhai Chaudhary (5) Vipulbhai Daljibhai Chaudhary (6) Doliben Ganeshbhai Chaudhary (7)
Rajesh Ranjan Yadav @ Pappu Yadav Vs. CBI Through its Director
Nitinchandra Somnath Raval Vs State of Gujarat
Barun Chandra Thakur Vs. CBI, (2018) 12 SCC 119
Mahadev Prasad Kaushik Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth Vs. State of Gujarat reported in AIR 2015 SC 3090
Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP
Pratibha Manchanda and another Vs. State of Haryana and another reported in (2023) 8 SCC 181
State Rep. by the CBI V/s Anil Sharma reported in 1997 (7) SCC 187
Adri Dharan Das V/s State of W.B. reported in 2005 (4) SCC 303
Anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy, granted sparingly in serious cases, and requires compliance with court conditions; failure to do so can lead to rejection of bail applications.
Anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy that should be granted sparingly, especially in serious cases, and requires strict compliance with court-imposed conditions.
(1) Mens rea is essential for a negligent act to be brought in ambit of criminal liability.(2) Negligence in civil law may not be necessarily a negligence in criminal law.
Contractors are held fully responsible for safety measures during public works; negligence resulting in fatality warrants strict legal repercussions.
The discretion for granting anticipatory bail should be exercised with care and circumspection, and the nature and gravity of the accusation, the antecedents of the applicant, and the possibility of ....
Anticipatory bail can be denied if the applicant fails to comply with court orders and conditions, especially in serious cases involving multiple FIRs.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.