FIROZ AHMAD Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this revision is to the order dtd. 28/10/2022 passed by Special Judge (constituted under Electricity Act, 2003), Raigarh (C.G.), in Special Criminal Case (under the Electricity Act) No. 158/2021, whereby the learned Special Judge has framed the charges under Ss. 304 Part-II, 201 of the IPC and Sec. 146 of the Electricity Act, 2003.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the MSP Steel and Power Limited Company, in which the petitioner was working as Safety Officer since 12/7/2010, had issued a work order dtd. 13/4/2020 to Sumit International Company Limited for slag crushing execution work and according to work order, the accommodation to the employees/labour working under the control of Sumit International Company was to be provided by the MSP Steel and Power Limited Company. Accordingly, co-accused Rakesh Tripathi, an employee of MSP company was deputed for making arrangement of accommodation for the employees/ labour of Sumit International Company. A hall in SMS Labour Colony was arranged and In the said hall, in the kitchen, a temporary electric wiring has been done by the MSP Steel and Power Limited. On the fateful day i.e. on 14/7/2020, deceased Rohit Kenwat, after completing his night shift, returned along with his brother-in-law Bharat Kenwat in the said hall and after tea, when he put his wet T-shirt on the G.I. wire, came into contact of electric current flowing in the G.I. wire through MS Pipe and died during the course of treatment at Hospital. Thereafter, after receiving the merg intimation, investigation was carried out and on 21/7/2020, FIR under crime No.182/2020 was registered at Police Station Chakradhar Nagar, Raigarh, against the present applicant along with two others for the offence punishable under Ss. 304(2), 201, 34 of the IPC and Ss. 146 and 149 of the Indian Electricity Act, 2003. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed and charges were framed against the applicant and co-accused persons under Ss. 304 Part-II, 201 of the IPC and Sec. 146 of the Indian Electricity Act. Hence, the present criminal revision by the applicant.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that impugned order is illegal and against the settled principles of law. There is no prima facie evidence for framing the charge under Sec. 304 Part II of IPC. To constitute the offence under Sec. 304 Part II of IPC, the prosecution is required to prove (i) the intention of the accused to cause death, (ii) that the accused acted with the knowledge to cause death and (iii) premeditation. The aforesaid ingredients are missing in the case. Hence, the learned trial Court has erred in framing the charge.