Karnataka High Court
Mrs N. Lakshami vs State Of Karnataka on 10 February, 2016
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PRADEEP D. WAINGANKAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8366/2015
BETWEEN:-
MRS. N. LAKSHAMI
S/O NALLUSWAMY
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/AT. NO.615, BHARATHINAGAR
4TH CROSS, VIJAYAPURA TOWN
DEVANAHALLI TALUK-560 300.
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-560 097.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI: NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADV.,)
AND:-
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER
PUTTUR POLICE STATION
REP. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. ABUBAKKAR
S/O IBRAHIM
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
GUDDE MANE, PERNE VILLAGE
BANTWAL TALUK, D.K-575019.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI: CHETHAN DESAI, HCGP FOR R-1)
2
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HER IN
C.C.NO.518/2015 (CR.NO.84/2013 OF PUTUR TRAFFIC
POLICE) PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRL. SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND ACJM COURT PUTTUR, D.K., FOR THE
ALLEGED OFFENCES UNDER SEC.279, 304(A), 338, 285, 287
OF IPC AND SEC.9B(1)(b) OF EXPLOSIVE ACT 1884.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
Petitioner who is accused No.2 in Crime No.84/2013 of Puttur Traffic Police Station has filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings initiated against her for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 304-A, 338, 285, 287 of IPC and Section 9B(1)(b) of Explosive Act.
2. This petitioner is R.C. owner of LPG tanker bearing registration No.KA-01-AC-6600. Accused No.1 was the driver of the said lorry. The petitioner entered into a contract with Hindustan Petroleum Corporation to transport Gas in the said vehicle. On 09.04.2013, the driver/accused 3 No.1 drove LPG tanker bearing registration No.KA-01-AC- 6600 in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger human life or personal safety of others. Because of his rash and negligent driving, vehicle toppled due to which the Gas in the tanker leaked and there was a explosion and the fire gutted nearby houses, garage, shops and agricultural lands. One Aboobaker lodged a complaint in that connection. A crime came to be registered for the aforesaid offences. During the course of investigation, accused No.1/driver died. The police after investigation filed charge-sheet against this petitioner who is shown as accused No.2/registered owner of the tanker.
3. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the criminal liability cannot be fastened upon this petitioner, she being registered owner of the tanker. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer examined as many as 94 witnesses. Though as many as 94 witnesses are examined, nothing is seen in their statement so 4 as to hold the petitioner herein is responsible. The accident occurred purely on account of rash and negligent driver of the driver who also died in the said accident. Even if the trial is continued, no useful purpose would be served having regard to the contents of the statements of the witnesses recorded by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation. Moreover, at the time of accident, petitioner was neither present on the spot nor she was in the said tanker. The accident occurred purely due to the negligence of the driver who was arrayed as accused No.1 and who died during the course of investigation. As such, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of process of the Court.
4. Hence, the petition is allowed. The proceedings initiated against the petitioner in C.C.No.518/2015 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and ACJM Court, Puttur, Dakshina Kannada, are hereby quashed.
5
In view of disposal of the petition, I.A.No.1/2015 for stay does not survive for consideration and the same stands disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE PMR