Prosecution has to prove that negligence of accused went beyond carelessness.

The State has preferred this appeal against the acquittal of the four respondents by the Judicial First-Class Magistrate, Asifabad of the charges framed against them under section 304-A, Indian Penal Code. The case against the four respondents (accused) is this: They are employed in the health centre, Collieries Hospital at Bellampalli. Accused No. 1 was the Sanitary Inspector. Accused No. 3 was a vaccinator and accused No. 4 was compounder-cum-store-keeper in the Collieries Hospital. It was one of the duties of accused No. 4 to receive stocks of medicine, maintain the stock register and disburse the medicines as and when indented by the concerned officers and make relevant entries in the stock register. It was the main function of accused 1 to 3 to conduct vaccinations with due diligence and care. On 21st February, 1966, the Sanitary Inspector (accused No. 1) received vials of triple antigen vaccine from the compounder (accused No. 4) for vaccinating 105 school children of the primary school, Hanuman Basti, a part of Bellampalli. Seventy vials of triple antigen were indented by accused No. 1 through accused No. 3’, the vaccinator. Accused No. 4 while issuing triple antigen vials, also issued scoline vial and all these vials were entrusted by accused No. 1 to accused Nos. 2 and 3 for giving triple antigen injections to the school children. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 used those vials obtained from the stores through accused No. 1 and injected nearly 172 children. Accused No. 3 was given the duty of drawing out the vaccine from the vials into the syringes and changing the needles while accused No. 2 was entrusted with the work of injecting the vaccine. Accused No. 3, it is the case of the prosecution, without verifying whether the vial from which he was drawing into the syringe was triple antigen vial or scoline vial, which is a poisonous drug, drew from out of scoline vial and gave the syringe for injecting to the school children. This scoline vial was used for injecting 10 children and four of them, viz., (1) K. Vijaya Kumar, 7 years ; (2) M. Satyanarayana, 10 years ; (3) D. Rajanna, 7 years, and (4) B.Ganapathi, 12 years died on the way to hospital and the remaining six survived after timely medical aid was given to them at the hospital. It is for the reason that accused No. 4 gave scoline vial negligently when the indent was made for triple antigen vials and accused No. 1 without verifying whether what was intended for was given to him or not and accused Nos. 2 and 3 without taking any further care as to from what vials they were drawing the vaccine, they were negligent in injecting the medicine from the scoline vial which resulted in the death of four innocent boys and endangered the life of 6 others, that these four respondents (accused Nos. 1 to 4) were charge-sheeted for an offence under section 304-A, Indian Penal Code.

The defence of the accused was that accused No. 3 who went to the stores to Tiring the vaccine checked the vials and handed them over to accused No. 2 and that no scoline vial was issued to accused No. 3 on the indent made by accused No. 1 and that what was injected into the boys was from out of triple antigen vials and therefore they were not in any way negligent or rash in the discharge of their duties and as such not directly or indirectly responsible for the death of the affected school boys. The Magistrate, on a consideration of the entire evidence, was of the view that scoline vial was not issued by accused No. 4 on the indent placed by accused No. 1 and that what was injected into the unfortunate boys was only from out of the triple antigen vial and that therefore the death of the boys is not due to the negligence of the accused. He therefore acquitted all the accused holding that the prosecution failed to bring home the guilt of the respondents beyond reasonable doubt.

Mr. Somakonda Reddi appearing for the Public Prosecutor contended that the Magistrate has not correctly appreciated the eviden