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

2012 Supreme(Jhk) 1490

JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
H.C. MISHRA, J.
Dr. J.J. Irani & Anr. - Petitioners
Versus
State of Jharkhand & Anr. - Opposite parties
Cr. Revision No. 506 of 2005
Decided on : October 1, 2012

Advocates appeared:
T.R. Bajaj, Sr. Adv. and H.K. Shikarwar, for the petitioners;
D.K. Chakravorty, APP, for the State.

The main legal point established is that under Section 92 of the Factories Act, the factory's management is not automatically liable for accidents unless it is proved that they failed to take all reasonable measures for prevention.

Headnote:

Factories Act - Occupational Safety - 92 - Summary

Fact of the Case:

A fatal accident occurred in a factory, leading to the death of a worker. The factory's occupier and manager were convicted under Section 92 of the Factories Act for contravening safety rules.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the negligence leading to the accident was primarily on the part of the worker, and the factory's management had not failed to take reasonable measures for accident prevention.

Issues: The key issue was whether the factory's management was liable for the accident under Section 92 of the Factories Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the factory's management could not be held guilty for the accident unless it was proved that they failed to take all reasonable measures for its prevention.

Final Decision: The court acquitted the factory's occupier and manager of the charges, setting aside the previous judgments and ordering the refund of the fine deposited by the petitioners.

JUDGMENT

H.C. Mishra, J.

Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State.

2. This revision is directed against the judgment dated 16th May 2005 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 182 of 1999 by the learned Sessions Judge. East Singhbhum Jamshedpur whereby the appeal filed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 4.10.1999 passed in C/2 Case No. 663 of 1991/T.R. No. 553A of 1999 by Sri B.C. Jha learned Judicial Magistrate 1st class, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur convicting and sentencing the petitioners for the offence under Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) has been dismissed with modification in the sentence by the learned Appellate Court below. It may be stated that the trial Court below had convicted the petitioners for the offence under Section 92 of the Act and upon hearing on the point of sentence sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment for two years each and to pay the fine of Rupees One Lakh each and in the event of default in making the payment of fine the petitioners were directed to undergo the enhanced imprisonment for six months. The Appellate Court below while confirming the judgment of conviction passed by the trial Court modified the sentence to the extent that substantive sentence of two years imprisonment was set aside but the fine of Rupees One Lakh each was maintained and it was directed that the fine, if realized shall be paid to the widow of the deceased workman.

3. The petitioner No. 1, Dr. J.J. Irani was the Occupier and the petitioner No.2, Sri P.N. Roy was the Manager of the factory namely TISCO Ltd. situated in Jamshedpur. On 14.3.1991 at about 12 Noon a fatal accident took place in S.M.S-3 inside the TISCO works when some scrap materials suddenly fell down from a railway bogie commonly known as ‘Gandola’ in course of movement on the rails and one Shunting Jamadar namely. Sagar Sinku was crushed under the weight of the scrap, materials who was standing by the side of the railway track and was giving signal to the loco Driver. The said workman died at the spot. The Management of the TISCO informed the Inspector of Factories who reached at the site of the accident at about 2 P.M. and conducted his enquiries. After conducting the due enquiry under the provisions of the Act a complaint petition was filed in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Jamshedpur which was registered as C/2 No. 663 of 1991.

4. The complaint petition shows that the Inspector of Factories upon enquiry found that the work and process in the factory were carried out in the most unsafe manner resulting in the death of a Shunting Jamadar Sagar Sinku and the Occupier and Manager of the factory contravened the provisions of Rule 55A (2) and (3) of the Bihar Factories Rules. 1950 and made themselves liable for prosecution for the offence under Section 92 of the Factories Act 1948.

5. The detailed statement• forming part of the complaint petition shows that following unsafe acts and conditions prevailing in the factory were found to be the basis for filing the complaint against the petitioners:-

"4. That from the findings of the enquiry as appearing on page Nos. 4 and 5 of the enquiry report it will appear that the accident resulted because the work of handling different materials by loco was being performed in the most unsafe manner in the following respects:-

(a) Before placing the ingot embedded with scrap materials on the open bogie called Gandola the scrap was not removed from the ingot with the result the material was resting on the open bogie in most unstable manner and it was allowed to be moved in most unsafe conditions.

(b) Before allowing the loco coupled with Gandola to move, no proper arrangement was made to ensure that the railway track was free from all kinds of obstructions with the result the wheel of Gandola jumped over a huge scrap material which was lying on the railway track which provided tremendous jerk on all the mater

































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