RAHIMA; T VELAYUDHAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ACCUSED Nos. 2 and 3 in Crime No153/2006 of Thrithala police station and accused Nos. 1 and 2 in S.C.No.584/2007 on the file of Assistant Sessions Judge, Palakkad, are the revision petitioners in Crl. R.P.Nos.1957/2014, while first accused in the same crime and sole accused in S.C.No.367/2008 of the same court is the revision petitioner in Crl.R.P.1958/2014.

(2.) THE revision petitioner in Crl.R.P.1958/2014, who is the sole accused in S.C.No.367/2008 is the husband of first accused in S.C.No.584/2007 and first revision petitioner in Crl.R.P.1957/2014. The first accused is having landed property in Survey No.391/2006 of Vattenadu Desom Pattithara Village in Mala Amsom and it is being managed by the 2nd accused who is his wife as the first accused was working abroad. First and 2nd accused according to the prosecution has entrusted construction of a well in that property to the 3rd accused and a well was under the process of construction, abutting the public pathway without providing any protection or precautionary methods to avoid persons falling into the well and in spite of warning given by the neighbours to the 2nd and 3rd accused to provide precautionary protection measures to avoid persons falling into the well which is being constructed very adjacent to the pathway, but they did not heed for the same. On 28.05.2006 at about 8.00 p.m., deceased Balan for the purpose of going to a marriage house through the pathway happened to fall into the well and sustained injuries and died and thereby all of them have committed the offence punishable under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) FALLING of deceased Balan into the well and his death was intimated to the police and Crime No.153/2006 of Thrithala police station was registered against three accused persons, who are the revision petitioners herein originally for the offence under Section 304A of Indian Penal Code. After investigation, final report was filed, alleging offence under Section 304 of Indian Penal Code against all the accused. Accused Nos. 1 and 2 in the above case filed Crl.M.C.No.4350/2008 for quashing the proceedings as against them and this court by Annexure -B order in that case, disposed of the petition leaving open the right of the petitioners to apply for discharge under Section 226 and 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Thereafter, revision petitioners in Crl.R.P.No.1957/2014 filed Crl.M.P.No.165/2013 and revision petitioner in Crl.R.P.No.1958/2014 filed Crl.M.P.No.164/2014 for discharge and those applications were dismissed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge by the impugned common order, which is being challenged by the revision petitioners, by filing the above respective revision petitions.