Delhi District Court
Cr. Case/5281347/2016 on 19 December, 2019
State v. Manish Sharma and Ors.
IN THE COURT OF MS. RASHMI GUPTA, MM06, NORTH
DISTRICT, ROHINI COURTS, NEW DELHI
State v. Manish Sharma and Ors.
FIR no. 153/08 Date of Institution 26.11.2009
Police Station Adarsh Nagar Judgment Reserved on Not reserved
Sections 304A/34 IPC Date of Judgment 19.12.2019
JUDGMENT
a) Serial Number of the case 5281347/16
b) Date of offence 07.07.2008
c) Name of Complainant Sh. Ashok Kumar
d) Name and address of the i) Manish Sharma, S/o Sh. Surinder
accused persons Sharma, R/o B5/6, Double Storey
Ramesh Nagar, Delhi and Permanent
address : VPO, Bhainsrawali, PS
Chhaisa, Teh. Ballabh Garh, Distt.
Faridabad, Haryana.
ii) Rajesh Sharma, S/o Sh. Lakhi Ram
Sharma, R/o V17, (ground floor),
Green Park, ext. New Delhi110017.
iii) Chetan Sharma, S/o Sh. Lakhi Ram
Sharma, R/o V17, (ground floor),
Green Park, ext. New Delhi110017.
e) Offence complained of Sections 304A/34 IPC
f) Plea of accused persons Not guilty
g) Final Order Acquitted
h) Date of Order 19.12.2019
FIR No. 153/08, Police Station Adarsh Nagar Page 1 of 4
State v. Manish Sharma and Ors.
JUDGMENT:
1. Accused persons namely Manish Sharma and Rajesh Sharma have stood trial for the offence under section 304A/34 IPC.
2. Accused Chetan Sharma expired during the trial of the case on 12.12.2018 and the factum of his death was got verified from the PS concerned.
3. In a nutshell, it is the case of the prosecution that the accused persons on 07.07.2008 at about 10.00 am at Azadpur Chowk near Timber Market, Kewal Park Extn. Delhi acted rashly and negligently and omitted to provide safety measures to the deceased namely Karidass and complainant Ashok Kumar at the site where the work of laying underground water line was being carried out and as a result of the same the deceased Karidass got electrocuted from the electric installations which were present at the spot and thereafter got expired.
4. After taking the cognizance and compliance of section 207 Cr.P.C, notice against the accused persons was framed for offence under section 304A/34 IPC vide order dated 25.10.2012.
5. Thereafter, the matter was fixed for prosecution evidence. In support of its case, the prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses.
6. Ashok Kumar was examined as PW1. ASI Ashok Kumar was examined as PW2. Duryodhan Dass was examined as PW3. Ganaur Dass was examined as PW4. Dr. Deepak, CMO, BJRM hospital was examined as PW5. Dr. Munish Wadhawa, Specialist, SGM Hospital, Mangolpuri was examined as PW6. Sh. Mukesh Kumar Sharma, Assistant Electrical Inspector, GNCTD, 5 Shyam Nath Marg was examined as PW7. Sh. Rakesh Kumar Singhal, Assistant Engineer, Flyover Project Division F132 now F FIR No. 153/08, Police Station Adarsh Nagar Page 2 of 4 State v. Manish Sharma and Ors.
12, PWD Department, Mukarba Chowk, GT Karnal Road, Delhi was examined as PW8. Sh. Rohit, Photorapher was examined as PW9. HC Bijender was examined as PW10. Retired SI Om Prakash was examined as PW11. Inspector Sudesh Ranga was examined as PW12.
7. Thereafter, the prosecution evidence was closed and the matter was fixed for recording the statement of the accused persons under section 313 Cr.P.C.
8. At the stage of recording the statement of the accused persons u/s 313 CrPC Ld. Defence counsel Sh. Ajay Paul contended that there was no incriminating evidence against the accused persons on record and requested for dispensing with the requirement of recording the statement of the accused persons u/s 313 CrPC.
9. Both the sides were heard and the record was carefully perused.
10. Perusal of the record shows that out of the 11 prosecution witnesses there were only two eye witnesses of the case who were present at the time of the spot during the allged electrocution of deceased Karidass. They were Ashok Kumar who was examined as PW1 and Ganaur Dass who was examined as PW4. Both these witnesses turned hostile during their examination in the court and stated that they were not present at the spot during the alleged incident. Nothing incriminating surfaced against the accused persons even in their crossexamination by Ld. APP for State. All other witnesses are formal/official in nature. PW7 Electrical Inspector deposed that during the inspection of the submersible electric pump motor he observed that the insulation and earthing was not proper as per the applicable standards. But it would be of no avail in the absence of any concrete evidence on the point that the deceased got electrocuted from the same submersible FIR No. 153/08, Police Station Adarsh Nagar Page 3 of 4 State v. Manish Sharma and Ors.
electric pump motor. Morever, the incident took place on 07.07.2008 and the inspection of the said motor pump was carried out on 05.09.2008 after a gap of about two months. Moreover, there is also nothing on record to suggest that the said submersible electric pump motor was immediately sealed after its seizure from the spot.
11. Thus, in view of the above I am of the considered opinion that no purpose would be served by recording the statement of the accused persons u/s 313 Cr.P.C. as no incriminating evidence has surfaced on record against the accused persons even after the examination of 11 prosecution witnesses and the prosecution evidence being already closed.
12. Thus, the accused persons namely Manish Sharma and Rajesh Sharma are hereby acquitted in the present case i.e. FIR No. 153/08 PS Adarsh Nagar u/s 304 A IPC.
13. Put up for furnishing bonds under section 437 A Cr.P.C. for 20.12.2019.
Digitally signed by RASHMI RASHMI GUPTA
GUPTA Date:
Announced in open court 2019.12.21
16:05:02 +0530
on 19thDay of September, 2019
(Rashmi Gupta)
MM06, North District
Rohini Courts, Delhi/19.12.2019
FIR No. 153/08, Police Station Adarsh Nagar Page 4 of 4