RATAN KUMAR KEJRIWAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 30th July, 2002 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. I, Darbhanga in Sessions Trial No. 266 of 1997 whereby the prayer of the petitioner for discharge has been rejected holding that the material prima facie constitute offence for framing charges under Ss. 304, Part II, 120-B and 287 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) On the basis of a report given by one Sharwan Kumar, Darbhanga Sadar P.S. Case No. 41 of 1989 was registered under Ss. 287 and 304 of the Indian Penal Code. Police after investigation submitted charge- sheet against the petitioners under Ss. 287, 302 and 120-B / 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Charge-sheet was laid before the Chief Judicial Magistrate who by order dated 12-12-1995 took cognizance of the offence under Ss. 287, 302 and 120-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and transferred the case to another Magistrate for commitment. The case was ultimately committed to the Court of Session where the petitioners filed an application for discharge. According to the prosecution petitioners had established a factory which was making utensils and running in the name of Darbhanga Aluminium Industries on lease which started 3-4 months prior to the occurrence. It was alleged that on 17-3-1989 there was blast in the furnace which demolished the wall and broke the glass panes causing injury to 15-16 persons. It was further alleged that two employees of the factory died at the spot and many of them had sustained grievous in- Jury. During the course of investigation it transpired that there was no proper arrangement for their safety. It also came into light that in spite of repeated request by the labourers to the employer to remedy the wrong the management did not take any step in this regard.

(3.) During the trial an application was filed for discharge which has been rejected by the learned Judge observing that the case diary contains sufficient materials to frame charge against the accused persons at least for offence punishable under Ss. 304, Part II along with 120-B of the Indian Penal Code because the accused persons even on demand by the employees did not take step for their protection from explosion.