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

2024 Supreme(Ker) 1396

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
NAGARAJ PILLAI, S/O. SATHASIVAN – Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 3912 OF 2019
Decided On : 08-07-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: B.RAMAN PILLAI (SR.), SRI.VIZZY GEORGE KOKKAT, SRI.NITHIN GEORGE, SRI.B.DEEPAK.
For the Respondent: ADDL.DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION, SRI. M.P. PRASANTH, PP.

IMPORTANT POINT
The prosecution under Section 304A IPC was quashed due to lack of evidence proving negligence or rashness by the accused.

Headnote:

(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 304A - Causing death by negligence - Prosecution alleged negligence leading to electrocution during event setup - Court found insufficient evidence of rashness or negligence by the accused, who joined after installation - Prosecution deemed an abuse of process. (Paras 12-14)

(B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Jurisdiction to quash proceedings - Court held that allegations do not warrant criminal prosecution against the accused, leading to quashing of all proceedings. (Paras 11-14)

ORDER :

P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

The petitioner is an accused in CC No.1258 of 2017 on the files of Judicial First Class Court-I, Kochi. The above case is charge sheeted against the petitioner and others alleging offence punishable under Section 304A IPC.

2. The prosecution case is that an annual meeting of Thodupuzha Round Table was scheduled to be held on 30.9.2017 at Taj Vivanta Hotel situated at Willington Island in Thoppumpadi Village, Ernakulam.

3. The lawn of the Hotel east to the lake on the western side of the Hotel was the venue selected for the meeting. ‘M/s.Pattathil Decorations,’ an establishment owned by Mr. Jomon, Charge Witness No.14 was given the contract to construct a panthal in that lawn for the conduct of the meeting. Accused No.2 the supervisor of ‘M/s. Pattathil Decorations’ was in charge of the above panthal work. The inner decoration work of the panthal was subcontracted by ‘M/s.Pattathil Decorations,’ to ‘M/s.Oorni love’ which is owned by Charge Witness No.8 and the said work was in turn subcontracted by CW8 one Lijo Paily, the first informer who is Charge Witness No.1 Lipson Joseph was a local attached to Charge Witness No.1 and he was engaged to do the work in the above site.

4. It is alleged that construction of a temporary panthal with Ion pipes and Aluminum pipes was carried out by the establishment of CW14 on 29.09.2017 which work involved nailing a GI rode of 95 cm length to the ground of the South East portion of the panthal to hold the Aluminum wall of the panthal. It is alleged that the above GI rode having sharp pointed edge penetrated into 4x16 mm2 AYFY M.V underground cable laid to energies lights provided in the lawn and in that process the GI rode came into contact with the conductor of the underground cable.

5. It is a case of prosecution that the interior decoration workers including Lipson Joseph continued their work in panthal without knowing about the above penetration of the GI rode. Lipson Joseph was doing his work by standing on a ladder with winding wires tied to his body. While so, at about 7.30 PM for the purpose of lighting the bulbs in the lawn, PW16, a worker in engineering department of the hotel switch on the breaker in the electric control panel installed on the north western side of the lawn. As a result, the current conducted by the underground cable leak through the GI rode to the poles of the panthal and the frames of the panthal. The Lipson Joseph who was doing decoration work holding winding wires by mounting a ladder resting on the panthal lawn got electrocuted a few other workers suffered mild shocks. Lipson Joseph got seriously injured because of the winding wires were stuck to his body. Injured was immediately attended by the doctors who were residing in the Hotel. After giving first aid, injured was immediately taken to the hospital of Port Trust from there he was referred to Medical Trust Hospital, Ernakulam.

6. It is alleged that if 30 MA ELCB was provided in the yard light circuit instead of the available 32 MCB, the ELCB would have tripped during electricity leakage and that would have prevented the accident. It is further alleged that there is carelessness on the part of the accused No.1 who is an Engineer of the Engineering Department of the Hotel. The second accused who supervised the work was aware that no cable to the light lawn was visible and under such circumstances acted negligently in pegging the GI rod deep into the earth without making any proper enquiries. On the basis of the above it is alleged that the accused persons committed the offences punishable under Section 304(A) IPC r/w 34 IPC.

7. Heard the learned Senior Counsel Sri. B. Raman Pillai assisted by his retaining counsel.

8. The petitioner herein is the 1st accused. The senior counsel submitted that the solitary allegation concerning the petitioner raised in the final report is that, if 30 MA ELCB was provided in the yard light circuit instead of the available 32 MCB, the ELCB would have tripped

    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