Death by Negligence | Prosecution Not Allowed Where Crime U/S 304A IPC Offense U/S 92 Factories Act Has Already Been Initiated: Karnataka HC

The Karnataka High Court reiterated that prosecution against the owners/managers of a factory under Section 304-A (causing death by negligence) of the Indian Penal Code is not currently permissible for an offense punishable under Section 92 of the Factories Act. It was launched in 1948.

single judge bench Judge Muhammad Nawaz It allowed the petitioner filed by G. V Prasad and another and quashed the investigation initiated against him under Section 304-A of the IPC.

The court said: “This Court is of the view that while prosecution is initiated for the offense punishable under Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948, prosecution under Section 304-A of the IPC is not permissible against the petitioners; In view of the penalty prescribed under Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948, concurrent prosecution should be instituted in respect of the same incident.”

The deceased employee, Sujeet Paswan, died due to electric shock while pumping water with an electric motor. In the complaint filed by his colleague Sanjeet Kumar, it was alleged that the electric motor was old and the Rice Mill manager, without taking any precautions and safety precautions, instructed the deceased to take water from the tank using the said electric motor. engine. After the investigation, the police filed a criminal complaint regarding the incident.

The petitioners submitted that parallel proceedings in respect of the same incident leading to parallel Act cannot continue and culmination of the same would result in double jeopardy.

Bank noted that “Under Section 200 of Cr.PC, a separate complaint has been filed by the State represented by Deputy Director of Factories, Raichur Division, Raichur against both the petitioners and the occupier and manager of the factory for alleged violation of the Factories provisions. Act 1948 and Karnataka Factories Rules 1969; wherein said violations are punishable under Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948.

The court relied on the coordinate bench decision in the case of Ananthakumar v. State of Karnataka reported in AIR Online 2019 KAR 565; wherein the offenses made punishable under Section 92 of the Act and Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code are of the same nature and are liable to the same amount of punishment and therefore Section 26 of the General Clauses Act becomes applicable requiring the offender to be prosecuted only under one statute. The scheme of the Factories Act does not permit parallel investigations under two different Acts against a person accused of committing an offense under the Factories Act.

Thereupon, the court accepted the petition and canceled the prosecution.

Appearance: Counsel for Shivanand Patil and Varun Patil on behalf of the Petitioners.

HCGP Jamadar Shahabuddin for R1.

Quote Number: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 451

Case Title: GV Prasad & ANR AND State of Karnataka

Case No: 200662 2024 CRIMINAL PETITION

Click Here to Read/Download the Order