Delhi District Court
State vs Vijay Kishore Mishra on 13 May, 2024
IN THE COURT OF SH. ANUBHAV JAIN
ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
SHAHDARA DISTRICT, DELHI.
State Vs. Vijay Kishore Mishra
FIR No.: 210/2012
PS: Anand Vihar
JUDGMENT
A Case Identification 84910/2016
Number
B Name of the SI Narender Singh
Complainant
C Name of the accused & Vijay Kishore Mishra his parentage and S/o Late Sh. Ramanand Mishra address R/o H. No. 3056-A, Sector-3, Faridabad, Haryana.
D Date of commission of 06.08.2012 the offences E Date of Institution of the 06.08.2015 case F Offences charged Offences u/s 287/304-A IPC G Plea of accused persons Pleaded not guilty H Order Reserved on 26.04.2024 I Date of Pronouncement 13.05.2024 of judgment J Final Order Accused is acquitted of the offence charged.
K State represented by Sh. Arun Kumar Mavi, Ld. APP for the State.
Digitally signed ANUBHAV by ANUBHAV JAIN JAIN Date: 2024.05.13 16:14:41 +0530 FIR No. 210/2012 PS : Anand Vihar State v. Vijay Kishore Mishra Page No. 1/12
BRIEF STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION OF THE CASE
1. Present accused person namely Vijay Kishore Mishra was produced before the court to stand trial for the offences punishable u/s 288/304A IPC.
2. In brief, it is the case of the prosecution that on 06.08.2012 at about 11.32 am, DD no. 18A was received from Hedgewar Hospital wherein it is stated that one Altaf fell down from Taj Hotel due to electric shock and he was admitted in the hospital by Mohd. Akram. It is further informed that the said Altaf was decleard 'brought dead' at the hospital.
Upon receipt of said information, SI Narender along with Ct. Satender reached at the hospital and collected the MLC of Altaf.
Further, SI Narender called the crime team and dead body of Altaf was got preserved at Sabzi Mandi Mortuary. IO further get the FIR registered for the offences punishable u/s 288/304-A IPC. Further, during the course of investigation, spot was inspected where from, one drill machine with electric wire and one iron stand was seized and IO recorded statement of witenss Narender.
Further on 07.08.2012, SI Narender get the postmortem of dead body conducted and thereafter handed over the dead body to relatives of deceased.
Further, on 09.08.2012, IO got the insepction of drill machine from Electrical Inspector, as per which, it was found that there was non-compliance of 'measures related to safety and electric supply' by Centre Electricity Authority Regulations, 2010.
Digitally signed by ANUBHAV ANUBHAV JAIN Date: JAIN 2024.05.13 16:14:54 +0530 FIR No. 210/2012 PS : Anand Vihar State v. Vijay Kishore Mishra Page No. 2/12
It is further alleged that as per the postmortem report, the cause of death was found to be "shock as a result of ante-mortem electrocution which is sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature'.
Furhter, during the course of investigation, it was found that responsibility was given to Aman Hospitality by Taj Hotel and IO issued a notice to DGM Aman Hospitality, however, no information could be received.
Further, the investigation was transferred to ASI Brij Bhan and thereafter to SI Harjender, however, both of the said IOs could not trace out the accused persons. Thereafter, investigation was transferred to SI Prateek Saxena, who got Aman Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. joined the investigation, upon which, one of the employee namely Amit Chaudhary informed the IO that in the year 2012, construction at Taj Hotel was being carried out and that the work of ducting was given to V. S. Enterprises of which authorized signatory is Mr. Vijay. IO further seized the documents with regard to the same and on 03.08.2015, issued notice u/s 41 (A) (1) Cr.PC to Sh. Vijay, who joined the investigation and stated that he was given the job of ducting by Aman Hospitality and that on 06.08.2012, one of the labour got expired due to electrocution and furthr that V. S. Enterprises is responsible for the same.
After completion of investigation, IO filed the charge-sheet against accused Vijay Kishore Mishra for the offence punishable u/s 288/304-A IPC.
3. Upon filing of charge-sheet, ld. Predecessor Corut directed that further investigation be carried out in the present matter. Further, cognizance of Digitally signed by ANUBHAV ANUBHAV JAIN JAIN Date:
FIR No. 210/2012 PS : Anand Vihar State v. Vijay Kishore Mishra Page No. 3/122024.05.13 16:15:05 +0530 the offences was taken by Ld. Predecessor Court on 17.05.2017 and summons were issued upon the accused. Further, accused appeared before the court on 14.11.2017 and copy of charge-sheet was supplied to accused in terms of Section 207 Cr.P.C.
4. Further, Ld. Predecessor Court vide order dated 01.08.2018 framed notice u/s 287/304-A IPC against the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. Prosecution in order to prove its case has examined the following witnesses:
PW-1 ASI Balwan Singh deposed that on 06.08.2012, he was on beat duty at Cross River Mall, CBD Ground, when he received a phone call from the IO regarding death of a person due to electrocution. He further deposed that he reached at the spot i.e. under construction building of Taj Hotel Basement, he found one electric machine, some electric wire and one large stand, however, no eye witness was found at the spot. He further deposed that after some, crime team reached at the spot and inspected the place of incident & clicked some photographs. He further deposed that IO handed over to him tehrir for registration of FIR in the present case and after registration of FIR, he came back at the spot along with copy of registered FIR & original rukka and same was handed over to PW2 SI Narender. He further deposed that IO seized one iron stand vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/A, seized the wire vide Ex.PW1/B and also sealed the same with the seal of NK and seal after use, was handed over to him and the case property was deposited in the malkhana.Digitally signed by ANUBHAV JAIN
ANUBHAV Date:
JAIN 2024.05.13
16:15:13
+0530
FIR No. 210/2012 PS : Anand Vihar State v. Vijay Kishore Mishra Page No. 4/12
PW2 Inspector Prateek Saxena deposed that on
20.06.2015, he was posted at PS Anand Vihar as SI and on that day, in-
vestigation of the present case was marked to him & he received the case file. He further deposed that he gave notice u/s 91 Cr.PC to Aman Hospi- tality Pvt. Ltd. to produce the document and Sh. Amit Chaudhary from Aman Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. gave reply of said notice along with docu- ments vide Ex.PW2/A (colly.) He further deposed that thereafter, he gave notice to V. S. Enterprises and Sh. Vijay from V.S. Enterprises has joined investigation and said Vijay also accepted his responsibility of the said offence. PW2 further deposed that he bound down said Vijay u/s 41 (A) Cr.PC vide Ex.PW2/B and said accused Vijay gave reply upon the said notice vide Ex.PW2/C. He further deposed that he also recorded state- ment of Amit Chaudhary and after completion of investigation, he pre- pared the charge-sheet against accused Vijay Kishore Mishra and submit- ted the same in the Court. Witness correctly identified accused Vijay Kishore Mishra in the court.
PW3 SI Narender Singh deposed that on 06.08.2012, he was posted at PS Anand Vihar as SI and on that day, he received DD no.18A Ex.PW3/A regarding one person was admitted in Hedgewar Hos- pital and he was declared 'brought dead' as he sustained injury due to electric shock at Taj Hotel, CBD ground. He further deposed that he along with Ct. Surender went to Hedgewar Hospital where he received MLC no. 2301/12 (Ex.PW3/B) of deceased Altaf and thereafter, he called crime team at the hospital & got clicked photographs of the deceased. He further deposed that he sent Ct. Balwan, beat officer at CBD ground, to the spot and gave a request to Ct. Satender to preserve the dead body at Sabzi mandi mortuary. He further deposed that thereafter, he along with Digitally signed by ANUBHAV ANUBHAV JAIN JAIN Date:
2024.05.13 16:15:22 +0530 FIR No. 210/2012 PS : Anand Vihar State v. Vijay Kishore Mishra Page No. 5/12 crime team went to the spot i.e. Minus Two basement, parking C, Taj Ho- tel, CBD ground where he clicked photographs of the spot. He further de- posed that thereafter, he prepared a rukka Ex.PW3/C and got FIR regis- tered through Ct. Balwan and after registration of FIR, he came back at the spot along with copy of registered FIR & original rukka and same was handed over to PW2 SI Narender. He further deposed that he got conducted inspection of the spot from the crime team and also recorded statements of the crime team officials and relieved them. He further de- posed that he seized one drill machine which was lying at the spot with the help of white colour cloth and sealed with the seal of NS vide seizure memo Ex.PW3/D and he also seized one iron stand of four legs (chopaya stand) vide seizure memo Ex.PW3/E. He further deposed that thereafter, he along with Ct. Balwan went to the PS and case property was deposited in the malkhana. He further deposed that on the same day, Akram, who was eye witness of the incident, along with sh. Shahabuddin, father of de-
ceased, and deceased' brother Shamshad came at PS and he recorded their statements and he also recorded statement of Ct. Balwan. He further deposed that on 07.08.2012, he called Shahabuddin & Shamshad at Subzi mandi mortuary where he got identification of the dead body vide memo Ex.A-1 & A-2. He further deposed that he got conducted postmortem of the deceased in the mortuary and after postmortem and handed over the dead body of the deceased to the father & brother of deceased vide memo Ex.PW3/F and also recorded statements of both the said witnesses also recorded statement of Ct. Satender. He further deposed that on 09.08.2012, he called Electrical Inspector from Connaught Place, who in- spected the drill machine and during investigation, he collected post- mortem report from the hospital and the documents of the postmortem re-
port are Ex.PW3/G (colly.). and also collected report from the concerned Digitally signed
ANUBHAV by ANUBHAV
JAIN
JAIN Date: 2024.05.13
16:15:31 +0530
FIR No. 210/2012 PS : Anand Vihar State v. Vijay Kishore Mishra Page No. 6/12
electricity department vide Ex.PW3/H. He further deposed that he also gave notice to Aman Hospitality but they did not give their reply and on 08.05.2013, he was transferred to PS Gazipur and he submitted the case file with MHC(R).
PW4 Mukesh Kumar Sharma, Dy. Electrical Inspector, de- posed that on 08.08.2012, he was working as Assistant Electrical Inspec- tor and on that day, a request from SHO PS Anand Vihar was received by the office for inspection of electric dill machine. He further deposed that on 09.08.2012, he along with his colleague Sh. Daya Ram, Electrical Overseer, conducted the inspection of electrical installation of electric drill machine at Malkhana PS Anand Vihar in the presence of SI Naren- der Singh and prepared his detailed technical report Ex.PW3/H in respect of said electric drill machine and same was sent to SHO PS Anand Vihar through post. He further deposed that upon inspection of the machine, naked joints were observed in the wires of the machine and the insulation of the wires was also found damaged at some locations.
PW5 Inspector Karamvir deposed that on 06.08.2012, he was posted at Crime Team East District as SI and on that day, IO / SI Narender called him at Dr. Hedgewar Hospital and he along with other crime team staff namely photographer Ct. Vikas went to Dr. Hedgewar Hospital where Ct. Vikas got clicked photographs of the dead body of de- ceased who died with the electric current. He further deposed that there- after, they along with IO went to spot i.e. second level parking, Taj Hotel, Plot no.1, CBD ground, Cross river mall, where one constable was al- ready present and they saw one iron stand of four legs was stand there and one drill electric machine (screw driver) was lying there. He further deposed that Ct. Vikas got clicked photographs of the spot and he in- Digitally signed by ANUBHAV ANUBHAV JAIN JAIN Date:
2024.05.13 16:15:40 +0530 FIR No. 210/2012 PS : Anand Vihar State v. Vijay Kishore Mishra Page No. 7/12 spected the spot. He further deposed that IO handed over rukka to Con- stable and got registered FIR in the present matter.
6. It is pertinent to state in here that accused admitted the dead body identification memo by witness Sharafat Ali, Dilshad Ahmad and Shamshad, MLC no. 2301/2012 and PM report no. 1476/2012, u/s 294 Cr.PC and his statement in this regard has been recorded separately on 15.02.2023.
7. Thereafter, prosecution evidence was closed and matter was lised for recording of statement of the accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C. The statement of accused u/s 313 Cr.PC was recorded on 03.02.2024, wherein accused denied all the allegations leveled against him. Further, accused choses to not to lead defence evidence.
8. It is argued by Ld. APP for the State that admittedly, deceased was working as a labour at the consturction site of Taj Hotel and was working under V. S. Enterprises, who has responsibility to provide all the safety gears to the labours working over there. It is further argued that deceased was expired while working on drill machine and as per the report filed by Electric Inspector, since there is non-compliance of appropriate safety measures, the victim got electrocuted and thereafter, expired. It is further argued that from the documents so placed on record and the testimony of the prosecution witnesses, prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and therefore accused is liable to be convicted for the offences he is charged for.
Digitally signed by ANUBHAV ANUBHAV JAIN JAIN Date:
2024.05.13 16:15:56 +0530 FIR No. 210/2012 PS : Anand Vihar State v. Vijay Kishore Mishra Page No. 8/12
9. On the other hand, it is argued by Ld. counsel for accused that there is no evidence prima-facie on record to show that deceased was working on the drill machine at the alleged point of time or that he got electrocuted from the said drill machine thereby resulting into his death. It is further argued that prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and acucsed is entitled to be acquitted for the offences he is charged for.
10. I have heard the arguments so led Ld. APP for State and perused the file carefully.
11. It is settled proposition of law that burden lies upon prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt by leading reliable, cogent and convinc- ing evidence. Further, it is a settled proposition of criminal law that in or- der to prove its case, prosecution is supposed to stand on its own legs and it cannot derive any benefit from the weaknesses, if any, in the defence of the accused.
12. The prosection in order to prove its case has heavily relied upon state-
ment of PW4 i.e. Mukesh Kumar Sharma i.e. Deputy Electrical Inspector and his report Ex.PW3/H. As per the report so filed, it is stated that the drill machine was not maintained in safe condition. Relevant portion of the report dated 24.12.2012 Ex.PW3/H is being reproduced hereunder :
"At the time of inspection, the following provisions of the Central Elect Authority (measures relating to Safety and Electric Supply) Regulations, 2010 been found complied with:-
1.The electrical installation of electric drill machine had not been maintained in a safe condition in the following Digitally signed by ANUBHAV ANUBHAV JAIN Date: JAIN 2024.05.13 16:16:09 +0530 FIR No. 210/2012 PS : Anand Vihar State v. Vijay Kishore Mishra Page No. 9/12 manner, in contravention of the provisions of regulation 12 (1) of the said regulations:-
a) Two nos of partially naked joints were observed in the supply wires of electric drill machine near the handle and these joints had not been found covered with proper insulation tape.
b) The insulation of supply wires of the drill machine was found damaged at four places thereby exposing the conductor and these places had also not been found covered with proper insulation tape.
2.The electric drill machine had not been connected with 3 core type cable as required under the provisions of regulation 21 of the said regulation.
3.The electric drill machine had not been earthed, in contravention of the provisions of regulation 41(xiv) of the said regulations."
13. It is pertinent to state in here that in the entire charge-sheet so filed, the IO for the reasons best known to himself, has not disclosed as to how or in what manner, deceased Altaf got electrocuted due to which he expired.
14. Perusal of record reveals that statement of one Mohd. Akram was recorded by the IO u/s 161 Cr.PC, wherein he stated that while he along with Altaf was carrying out the work of ducting, then one of their col- league namely Mohd. Shariq asked them to shift the iron stand and when Altaf touched the iron stand, he got electrocuted, upon which, Mohd. Akram removed the plug of drill machine and separated Altaf from the said stand.
15. As such, from the statement of Mohd. Akram, it can be made out that de-
ceased Altaf was not working with the drill machine at the alleged point Digitally signed
ANUBHAV by ANUBHAV
JAIN
JAIN Date: 2024.05.13
16:16:20 +0530
FIR No. 210/2012 PS : Anand Vihar State v. Vijay Kishore Mishra Page No. 10/12
of time or that he got electric shock while working on the same. Rather, Altaf was stated to be electrocuted while he touched the said iron stand. Furthermore, Mohd. Akram no where stated in his statement u/s 161 Cr.PC that the said drill machine or any of its electric wire was touching upon the said iron stand.
16. It is further pertinent to state in here that Mohd. Akram never stepped into witness box to prove the averment so made by him in his statement u/s 161 Cr.PC and he was dropped from the list of witnesses on 03.02.2024. furthermore, the prosecution has not made any other person witness who would have witnessed the said incident from his own eyes.
17. Even if for the sake of arguments, the complete story of the prosection in-
cluding the statements u/s 161 Cr.PC, are believed to be correct and true, there is no investigation done with regard as to who provided the said drill machine to the laborers for work. There is also nothing to show on record as to whether the said drill machine was handed over to the labourers in the defective condition i.e. with naked joint and damaged in- sulation wire or whether the same got faulty during the process of work. Witness Mohd. Akran no where during his statement u/s 161 Cr.PC have stated that the said drill machine was handed over to him by accused Vi- jay Kumar Mishra in a faulty or defective condition.
18. In light of the law and facts discussed above that the main eye witness never stepped into the witness box to depose and further that there is no other witness produced by the prosection who has witnessed the incident and further considering that there is no clear evidence as to how the de-
ceased Altaf was electrocuted or who had handed over the said dril ma- Digitally signed
ANUBHAV by ANUBHAV
JAIN
JAIN Date: 2024.05.13
16:16:34 +0530
FIR No. 210/2012 PS : Anand Vihar State v. Vijay Kishore Mishra Page No. 11/12
chine to the laborers working at the site, the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.
19. In view of the same, accused stands acquitted for the offences u/s 287/304A IPC.
Digitally signed by ANUBHAV ANUBHAV JAIN
JAIN Date:
2024.05.13
16:16:41 +0530
Announced in the Open Court (ANUBHAV JAIN)
on dated 13th May, 2024 ACMM/SHAHDARA DISTRICT/
KKD COURTS/ DELHI/13.05.2024
Present judgment consisted of 12-pages and each page bears Digitally signed my signatures. ANUBHAV by ANUBHAV JAIN JAIN Date: 2024.05.13 16:16:48 +0530 (ANUBHAV JAIN) ACMM/SHAHDARA DISTRICT/ KKD COURTS/ DELHI/13.05.2024 FIR No. 210/2012 PS : Anand Vihar State v. Vijay Kishore Mishra Page No. 12/12