1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

Crl.Petition No.

/ 2013 Rank of the parties In the Court below In this Court

BETWEEN: 1. Sri. T.C. Manjunath Son of Chandrappa Aged about 31 years, Residing at KEB Quarters, Chikmagalur-577101. 2. Sri.G.Rajashekhar, Son of Gangadharappa Aged about 41 years Residing at Kiran House, 1st Cross, Kalidasanagar, Chikmagalur-577101. 3. D.R.Dinesh, Son of Rangaswamy, Aged about 27 years, Residing at MESCOM Quarters, Chikmagalur.577101.

Accused no.3

Petitioner

Accused No.2

Petitioner

Accused No.1

Petitioner.

AND: State of Karnataka Mallandur Police, Chikmagalur District.-577101.

Complainant

Respondent

UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE The petitioners named above states as follows: 1. The petitioners have filed the above petition praying to quash the charge

sheet filed in C.C.No. 292/2013 filed by the respondent Police in Crime No. 60/2012 for the alleged offence committed by the petitioners under Section 304 (A) of Indian Penal Code as per Annexure A to this petition.

2. The petitioners named above are working in MESCOM Rural Sub-division Chikmagalur in various capacities. The first petitioner is working as Assistant Executive Engineer, the petitioner No.2 is working as Junior Engineer and the petitioner No.3 is working as Lineman. The 1st petitioner is the accused no.3, the 2nd petitioner is the accused no.2 and the 3rd petitioner is the accused no.1 in C.C.No.292/2013 registered by the respondent police.

3.

In the above case registered by the respondent police, it is alleged that at

about 6.30 PM on 13.5.2012, the deceased persons namely one Shankare Gowda and his wife Yashodamma have come into contact with the snapped live electric wires and have died on account of electrocution in the lands belonging to one Noronha in Muddenahalli of Basagodu Village within limits of Mallandur Police. It is further alleged that the deceased Shankare Gowda had gone to the above said place to fetch his cows which were left for grazing and at that time accidentally he had come in to contact with the live electric wire and has died due to electrocution. It is further alleged in the complaint that Yashodamma, wife of deceased Shankare Gowda, came in search of her husband and she has also come into contact with the live electric wire and died due to electrocution. The certified copy of the F.I.R. is produced here with and marked as annexure-A.

4. The respondent police initially registered the case as UDR have subsequently registered the case suo-motu and have allegedly investigated the same and have filed the charge sheet against the petitioners for the offence punishable under Section 304(A) of IPC. The petitioners most respectfully states that they are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in the above case even though they have not committed any act of omission or commission and they are in no way responsible for the cause of the unfortunate death of persons named above.

5.

The petitioners state that they have been carrying on their work most

diligently and with utmost commitment. They further submit that the electricity supply network that comes within the jurisdiction of MESCOM, Rural Sub

Division, Chikmagalur is about 60 sq. Km, having 5 sub-divisions with sanctioned strength of 154 posts in various categories. Out of the above sanctioned posts only 53 posts have been filled up who have been discharging their duties in the above area. The entire area is situated in the Western ghats (Malnad area). The electricity network runs for approximately 700 Kms. The topography of the entire area comprises of forest, mountains, valleys, coffee plantations and private Land holdings. The sanctioned staff strength for the O & M section 5 under which the petitioners are working is 31 posts of various categories whereas; the present strength is only 8 inclusive of 5 linemen. The petitioners along with their

colleagues are required to maintain electricity supply to about 80 villages and habitations.

6.

The then Asst. Executive Engineer of MESCOM Rural sub-Division at

Chikmagalur, by his letter dated 09/09/2011 has requested the Executive Engineer, MESCOM Rural sub-division, Chikmagalur to fill up the vacancies to effectively discharge their duties and to maintain the electricity supply in a more effective matter. The true copy of the said letter is produced herewith and marked as annexure-C.

7. It is further state that the petitioners had not received any complaints with regard to any damage or snapping of wires earlier to the date of the unfortunate accident by the residents of occurred. the Muddenahalli where in the accident

The petitioners state that on the date of the accident from there

residents of the said area the said place had received a very heavy kind rain fall. Further it being the monsoon period, there can be incidents of snapping of electric wires due to heavy winds, fall of trees and landslides and flooding. The snapping of wire is due to the above reasons is quite common during the

monsoons. The petitioners produces herewith the certificate issued by the Deputy Tahsildar recording the extent of rainfall on 12.05.2012 and same is produced and marked as Annexure-D.

8.

The petitioners most respectfully states that the unfortunate accident can be

termed as an Act of God and not on account of any negligence on the part of the petitioners. Moreover the petitioners have been doing their best to prevent such accidents, and inspite of their due diligence such accidents do occur, which are however very rare. The petitioners most respectfully states that the only way to prevent such accidents is to cut off the power supply during the rainy season. But that cannot be done as the residents of the above area will have to live without electricity for months together. I view of the above facts and circumstances the charge sheet filed by the respondent Police is therefore without any basis and does not constitute any offence under Section 304 (A) of the IPC and the same is liable to be quashed on the following to the other grounds. The petitioners have not preferred any other petition or proceeding on the same cause of action and they do not have any other alternative and efficacious remedy.

GROUNDS a. The charge sheet filed by the respondent Police is an abuse on the process of law and do not make out a prima facie case of negligence.

b. There is no iota of evidence to connect the cause of death with the alleged negligence on the part of the petitioners. c. The unfortunate incident at the most can be termed as an Act of God and the petitioners are not in any manner responsible for the same. d. There is no material on record to connect that the accident was a result of any direct act of rash and negligent act on the part of the petitioners. e. The mere fact that two precious lives has been lost in the said accident cannot be a ground to frame the petitioners in the criminal case and proceed against them which is an abuse on the process of law. f. The fact that the said accident has occurred due to heavy rain and winds ought to have been taken note of before filing the charge sheet. g. The fact that the span of the wires at the scene of incident between two poles is too long cannot be attributed as an act of negligence on the part of petitioners as the line was erected in the year 1994. h. The alleged findings of the Electrical Inspector that there were too many joints in the snapped wire and that the tree branches ought to have been cut and removed which would have avoided the accident is hypothetical and cannot be termed as an act of negligence on the part of the petitioners. i. Even otherwise the prosecution initiated against the petitioners is malicious and intentional and only to harass the petitioners and liable to be set aside. j. The aver by Police or Electrical Inspectorate are purely suppositional as they have not sought any reports regarding the line erection, individual responsibilities of the petitioners from the higher authorities of the MESCOM.

PRAYER Wherefore, the petitioner named above prays that this Honble Court be pleased to: a. Call for the records from the respondent police in C.C.No. 292/2013 in Crime No. 60/2012 as per Annexure A to this petition. b. Quash the charge sheet filed by the respondent police in C.C.No. 292/2013 in Crime No. 60/2012 for the offence under section 304-A of the IPC as per Annexure A to this petition. c. Grant such other relief/s as deems fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the ends of justice and equity.

Bangalore. Dated: 26.10.2013. Advocate for Petitioners.

Address for Service:

M.C.Jayakirthi Advocate, No.6,3rd Floor,Amar Towers, 1st Cross, 1st Main, Gandhinagar, Bangalore-9.