Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

9. PW 4 Sh. Shamim deposed that on 27.9.06, he was engaged by Akhileshwar, the owner of H.no. D­35/A, Jawahar Park to carry out the construction/repair work at the aforesaid house as a mason. Beside him, one Moharram, Sattar Naushad, Mangu Rukhi were also working as labourer with him. When they were repairing the wall of one of the rooms of the said house and were to put the column for the foundation, in the meantime, the wall of the said house collapsed and few labourers came under the debries of the wall due to which they sustained injuries. In the said incident, the labourer Sattar died. Thereafter, the police was informed who came to the spot. The injured persons have already been removed to the hospital in an ambulance. The said Sattar thereafter, died in the hospital. The police inquired about the incident from him and recorded his names and addresses. The wall collapsed on its own and there was no fault on the part of anyone including the owner of the said house. The accused is the son in law of the owner of the said house. The accused had never asked them to State Vs. Akhleshwar 3/13 FIR no. 740/06 carry on the construction work at the site nor he had made any payment for the construction work to them. He was cross examined by Ld. APP for the State wherein he stated that the police have not recorded his statement. He denies having stated that due to the rash and negligent act of the accused Akhileshwar who had awarded the contract for construction/repairing work at the site as despite their repeated request and declining not to demolish the walls of the house as the walls were very weak and it may fall down if the same is broken and despite our refusal to demolish the wall, the accused asked us to carry on the work to demolish the wall which resulted into the fall of the said wall in which the deceased Sattar had died and some other labourers had sustained injuries (confronted with the statement of the witness Mark A from portion A to A wherein it is so recorded). He denied the suggestion that that he is deposing falsely as he is won over by the accused. He further denied that he is deliberately not identifying the accused as the owner of the said house or that accused used to pay the daily wages to him and other labourers for the said work. He was cross examined by Ld. Counsel for the accused.

10. PW 5 Sh. Rukhi Mian deposed that he does not remember the date and month but it was about 5­6 years ago when he was doing the work of labour in a house at Jawahar Park. He does not know the number of the said house as he is illiterate and also due to the lapse of time. Apart from him Sh. Moharram, Sattar and Naushad were also working with him as labourer. On that day, when they were removing the plaster of the wall, in the meantime, the wall of the said house collapsed as the bricks of the said wall have been removed on which the wall was based. This work was asked them to carry on by the owner of the said house. The accused was also one of the family members of the owner of the said house who also used to remain present at the spot many times and he had told them to carry on this work, due to which the wall collapsed. He sustained injuries on his left leg. In the said incident, one Sattar also came under the State Vs. Akhleshwar 4/13 FIR no. 740/06 wall and sustained injuries. Thereafter, they have been taken to the hospital by the police. The deceased Sattar died on the spot. The police did not inquire about the incident from him. He was cross examined by Ld. Counsel for the accused.

11. PW 6 Sh. Imamddin proved the dead body identification memo of deceased as Ex.PW1/C. He was not cross examined by Ld. Counsel for the accused despite according opportunity.

12. PW 7 Sh. Rojadin proved the dead body identification memo of deceased as Ex.PW1/B. He was not cross examined by Ld. Counsel for the accused despite according opportunity.

13. PW 8 Sh. Moharam Ali deposed that he does not remember the date but it was sometime in the month of September, 2006 when he was working under the supervision of the contractor Shamim at D­35A, Jawahar Park, Ambedkar Nagar who called me to do the work there as some construction work was going on. When they were working there, one wall which was already erected in the said building got collapsed as its foundation was very weak and in the said fall of wall, one Sattar who was also working as beldar died as the entire wall fell on him. He also sustained injuries in the said falling of the wall. Apart from him, one Naushad, Nasruddin and Mansoor were also doing the work as labourer. He was cross examined by Ld. APP for the State wherein he admitted that his LTI was taken by the police which is appearing at point A on document Mark A but at the time of putting his LTI, it was blank. He denies having made any such statement that the owner of the said building one Akhileshwar had hired him on a daily wages of Rs.100/­ to work as a labourer in the construction site i.e D­35A, Jawahar Park where during the work, one wall collapsed and fell on the deceased Sattar who was also working as a labourers apart from other labourer. He denied that on 27.9.2006, incident had taken place due to the rash and negligent act of the owner of the said building who insisted us to continue with the work State Vs. Akhleshwar 5/13 FIR no. 740/06 of construction despite being caution to him by the mason Sh. Shamim (confronted with the portion A to A where it is so written). He denied the suggestion that he is deposing falsely as he is won over by the accused. He further denied the suggestion that the incident had taken place due to the rash and negligent act of the accused who asked us to continue with the construction work despite being warned by all of them that the foundation of the said wall is very weak and there is no support to resist the said wall. He was not cross examined by Ld. Counsel for the accused despite according opportunity.

29. Now turning to the testimony of PW 5 Sh. Rukhi Mian who to some extent has supported the case of the prosecution. Although, he did not remember the date and month of the incident but he has deposed that on that day he alongwith other labourers were doing the work of labour on the house at Jawahar Park where accused was also present being one of the family members of the owner of the said house and who had told them to carry out the construction work. At that time, the wall collapsed leading to injuries on his left leg and Sattar also came under the said wall who then died due to severe injuries. In his cross examination, he categorically stated that the repair work was being done at the instance of the owner of the said house. He has also deposed that accused is neither the owner of the said house nor has ever made any payment to them for the construction work. In the latter part of his cross examination, he has also gone to the extent of deposing that there was no fault of anyone in the collapse of the wall and the wall collapsed on its own while the plaster of the said wall was being removed.