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

1965 Supreme(MP) 59

N.M.GOLVALKER
GANESHGIR, SUKHAGIR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.P.SEN

GOLVALKER, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioners, who at the relevant time were respectively serving as "overman" and "sirdar" in the Eklehra Colliery situate in tahsil and district chhindwara, are being prosecuted under Section 304-A, Indian Penal Code, in two trials as there were two deaths as a result of their negligence while working as such "overman" and "sirdar" (Criminal Cases Nos. 164 of 1964 and 165 of 1964 ).

( 2 ) THE prosecution case in short is that the petitioners as such "overman" and "sirdar" were to periodically inspect the roof inside the mine where working was going on; that the roof at a certain place inside the mine collapsed killing two persons underneath its debris; that if the said roof had been duly inspected by the petitioners, its weakness and imminent danger of its collapsing would have been detected and remedied and deaths of the two individuals would have been averted.

( 3 ) THE petitioners contended before me, as was unsuccessfully contended in the courts below, that their prosecution under Section 304-A, Indian Penal Code, is incompetent, since the negligence attributed to them is made punishable under the Mines Act which being a special law excludes the operatio















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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top