LAWS(KAR)-2014-11-301

SRIDHAR PUNACHITHAYA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Decided On November 12, 2014
Sridhar Punachithaya Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KARNATAKA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have approached this Court seeking quashing of the entire proceedings in C.C. No. 802/2011 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) and JMFC, Doddaballapur registered against them for the offence under Section 304A of IPC. I have heard the arguments of the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and also the learned High Court Government Pleader. Perused the records.

(2.) The Doddaballapur Rural Police has registered a case against the petitioners herein for the offence under Section 304A of IPC on the ground that on 5.2.2011 at about 6.30 p.m. in the premises of the factory by name M/s. Hexagon Bio-Pharma Pvt. Ltd., one Sri Arun Kumar was discharging his duty in the II Shift. At that time, there was an explosion of fuse as a result of which he suffered injury to his stomach. On the way to the hospital, he succumbed to the injuries. On the same day, at about 8.30 p.m., the father of the deceased, on the allegations that the employer has not taken careful measures to protect the interest and safety of the workers, filed a complaint before the Doddaballapura Police Station and as such the charge sheet has been filed for the aforesaid offence.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that on the same set of facts and circumstances, the Assistant Director of Factories, Division-14, Bangalore, Karmika Bhavan, Dairy Circle, Bannerghatta Road, Bangalore - 29, has lodged a private complaint before the same Court in C.C. No. 468/2011 for the offences under Section 92 of the Factories Act, making the above said allegations against the occupier of the said premises Sri Sheikh Bhasheer, accused No. 4 in the police FIR and the said case was ended in conviction. It is alleged in the said private complaint that the occupier of the said premises has contravened the provision of Rule 84 of the Karnataka Factories Rules, 1969, r/w Section 41 of Factories Act, 1948. It is specifically alleged that said person was negligent in not following unsafe acts and unsafe conditions, that is to say: