The essential ingredient of 'knowledge' is crucial in establishing culpable homicide under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code.

Rakesh Saksena, J.

1. This judgment shall govern disposal of both the above appeals, as both the appeals arise out of the common judgment passed by the Trial Court.

2. Appellants have filed these appeals against the judgment dated 9th December, 2002, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Ashta District Sehore, in Sessions Trial No. 101/2000, convicting them under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Appellant Hemraj has been sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for ten years with fine of Rs. 2 lakhs and appellant Pannalal has been sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for two years with fine of Rs. 2 lakhs, with default stipulation. It has further been directed that on amount of fine being deposited, an amount of Rs. 4 lakhs shall be paid to heirs of deceased as compensation.

4. In short, the prosecution case is that on 18-1-2000 appellant Hemraj was working as Lineman and appellant Pannalal was working as Line Helper in the M.P. Electricity Board and were posted at Sub Station Siddikganj. At about 2.00 p.m. Pannalal informed Dhannalal Koshta, Junior Engineer that somebody was hanging on the 11 KV line of Jasmatghati. He was dead. Dhannalal went at the spot and found that it was Babulal of Village Dharampuri. He had died of electrocution. The report of the incident was lodged by Dhannalal Koshta at Police Station, Siddikganj. Police registered a Merg and proceeded for enquiry. Dead body of Babulal was sent for post-mortem examination Dr. R.C. Gupta, vide his report (Exh. P-9) opined that the deceased had died of electrocution. It was found in the enquiry that when Pannalal had gone to repair the line, he had taken Babulal with him on a Bajaj M-80 motorcycle and had asked him to climb over the D.P. While he was severing the jumper, he received shock and died. After enquiry, police registered of offence under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code against accused Pannalal and after investigation filed charge-sheet against him in the Court. While recording evidence, Trial Court found that accused Hemraj Jain, Lineman, was also liable for commission of the offence. Therefore, in exercise powers under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure he was also made accused and put up for trial.

5. During trial, Pannalal abjured his guilt and pleaded false implication. Accused Hemraj also pleaded false implication. According to him, he had been maliciously involved in the incident by Dhannalal Koshta, Junior Engineer to whom he did not give money by recovering from the persons who ran their pumps illegally by tapping the electricity lines. He also examined two defence witnesses viz., Dinesh Kumar Sharma (D.W. 1), Jagdish Kumar Sharma (D.W. 2).

6. Prosecution examined 15 witnesses.

7. Trial Court, relying mainly on the evidence of Puran Singh (P.W. 3), Mohan Singh (P.W. 4), Mukesh (P.W. 5) and Dhannalal Koshta (P.W. 7) held both the accused persons guilty and convicted and sentenced them as mentioned above.

8. Learned Counsel of both the appellants submitted that the evidence adduced by the prosecution in the case was not reliable. Evidence of Dhannalal Koshta (P.W. 7) was inconsistent and discrepant. From his evidence it appeared that he himself was negligent and the incident occurred due to his carelessness. At the time of occurrence accused Pannalal had gone for patrolling of the line and for repairing the fault after obtaining permit and that the electricity at that time was also off for the load shedding. Somebody from the Power Station charged the line carelessly, as a result of which Babulal got electrocuted. Even if accused Pannalal would have been repairing the fault instead of Babulal, he would have died. Even if it was accepted that accused Pannalal asked the deceased to repair the jumper, it was under the belief that electric current was off. It could not be held that he knew or that it was likely to cause his death. Learned Counsel for the appellant Hemraj submitted that it was not established by the prosecution that Hemraj sw