Patna High Court - Orders
Neeraj Gandhi vs The State Of Bihar on 1 August, 2024
Author: Satyavrat Verma
Bench: Satyavrat Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48962 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-276 Year-2024 Thana- KOTWALI District- Patna
======================================================
Neeraj Gandhi SON OF Ravindra Kumar Gandhi Resident of Flat No. 802,
Pushpanjali Venkatesh Apartment, Budh Marg, P.S. -Kotwali, Town and
District -Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. S.D. Sanjay, Sr. Advocate
Mr.Mohit Agarwal, Adv
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 01-08-20241. Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP, Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad.
2. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is that informant received a secret information about a sudden fire that had engulfed Pal Hotel on 25.04.2024, accordingly the informant reached the spot for verification and saw that Pal Hotel and Amrit Hotel adjacent to Pal Hotel were engulfed in fire, thereafter Fire Brigade along with Kotwali Police officials also reached and eventually the fire was brought under control within 2-3 hours, later NDRF and SDRF also arrived, it is next alleged that almost 30 people who were stuck in the room of the hotel were brought out safely with help of Fire Brigade, few people received burn injuries while being rescued however, six Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48962 of 2024(2) dt.01-08-2024 2/5 people died on account of injuries suffered by fire, it is next alleged that both hotel had a very narrow passage for entry without any alternative passage, it is further alleged that rules and regulations related to fire safety and health have been ignored on account of which when the fire broke out none of the guest could escape as there was absence of alternative passage, it is also alleged that reason for fire was that the kitchen and entry gate of Pal Hotel are adjacent to each other, where refrigerator and AC outlets are located, the chef was cooking and and due to his negligent act the kitchen caught fire which could not be controlled as there was no arrangement to extinguish the fire.
3. The learned APP, Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad at the outset submits that section 299 IPC defines culpable homicide, the offence is committed when an individual causes death of another intentionally or by an act with the knowledge that the act is likely to cause death, further section 300 IPC defines murder, a murder is a type of culpable homicide where the death is caused intentionally or a bodily injury is caused with an intention to cause death.
4. It is next submitted that the offence of murder consists of intention and knowledge while culpable homicide is Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48962 of 2024(2) dt.01-08-2024 3/5 committed either with both knowledge and intention or with knowledge, but without any intention, hence all culpable homicide are not murder but all murders are culpable homicide.
5. It is also submitted that mens rea and actus rea are prerequisite for committing an offence of murder i.e. if only mens rea is present and no actus rea is performed, the offence would not be termed as murder, similarly if there is actus rea sans mens rea and an offence of murder is committed then also it would not fall within the definition of murder.
6. The learned APP further submits that the essential ingredients of section 304 of the IPC are - there must be a death caused to an individual, the death caused either should be with both intention and knowledge or with knowledge but without intention, whereas section 304A deals with death caused by negligence and there is no involvement of any knowledge and intention.
7. The learned APP next submits that in the present case the hotel was built but then mandatory statutory compliances for safety were missing, as such petitioner may not be harboring any intention to cause death but then it can be culled out that he had the knowledge that if an eventuality of the present nature in absence of mandatory statutory compliances Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48962 of 2024(2) dt.01-08-2024 4/5 takes place, in that event innocent lives would be at peril. It is next submitted that altogether six innocent lives were lost in the fire who had absolutely no knowledge that if such an occurrence takes place, the hotel would be bereft of the basic facilities to save lives.
8. The learned APP also submits that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the informant specifically alleges that statutory mandatory compliances required for running the hotel were missing as such, it can be well presumed that the petitioner was inviting trouble for himself, if any occurrence occurred in the nature as alleged in the FIR. The learned APP next submits that from perusal of the pleadings made in the anticipatory bail application it would manifest that the same does not even remotely suggest that the petitioner had even applied for obtaining fire clearances from the competent authority.
9. At this stage the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that no doubt six people died but those six people who died were not guest in the hotel of the petitioner, rather were guest of Amrit Hotel which was adjacent to the hotel of the petitioner, on which the learned APP, Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad submits, that makes the offence more grave for Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48962 of 2024(2) dt.01-08-2024 5/5 the reason that innocent guest who were staying in Amrit Hotel were not even aware that the hotel adjacent to it namely Pal Hotel does not have the basic requisites required for running a hotel. It is also submitted that guest of Amrit Hotel died because of the fire which started and engulfed Pal Hotel and thereafter spread taking life of six innocent people staying in Amrit Hotel.
10. At this stage, the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner seeks time for filing a supplementary affidavit for bringing on record that as to whether the petitioner had applied for mandatory fire clearances etc. or not.
11. Put up this case on 12.08.2024 as prayed for.
12. At this this, the learned APP further submits that since a supplementary affidavit is going to be filed by the petitioner, as such the same should also record that as to whether the building in question was constructed after getting the plan sanctioned by the competent authority or not.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Prakash Narayan
U T