Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: engineering contract in State vs . Kamal Prasad Chauhan Anubhav Jain on 13 September, 2018Matching Fragments
4.12 PW12 Dinesh Kumar, JMRO AIIMS proved the postmortem report no. 1077/18 of deceased Surender Kumar Ex. PW12/A. 4.13 PW13 Jugnu deposed that on 22.10.2008 he was working as a time keeper at Skyline Engineering Contracts India Pvt. Ltd. at Today Hotel, OIA Phase1 and on that day he received a call from the gate that somebody has fallen down while working. He further deposed that at about 55.30 am when he reached at the gate he found that Surender was brought to the gate by the guard. He further deposed that they noticed that blood was coming out from the ears of Surender and he alongwith some persons took Surender to hospital which is near at the left hand of Okhla Gole chakkar to Kalkaji. He further deposed that Surender was declared brought dead by the doctor and thereafter they brought back dead body of Surender to hotel and police was informed and investigation was conducted by the police. He further deposed that IO seized the copy of attendance register vide seizure memo Ex. PW4/C which was presented by him to IO and left the job. He correctly identified the accused in the Court.
1) There was an act / omission on part of the accused
2) Said act was rash or negligent to endanger the human life
3) Because of the said act Surender Kumar fell down from the second floor of the site and succumbed to the injuries.10
8. As per the case of prosecution M/s Today Hotel have entered into a construction contract with M/s Sky Line Engineering Contracts India Pvt. Ltd. regarding the construction work to be conducted at the site of M/s Today Hotel. In order to prove the same the prosecution has placed on recored the copy of agreement entered into between Today Hotel and M/s Sky Line Engineering Contracts India Pvt. Ltd. Nikhil Kinna who appeared as PW11 prove the fact that he had handed over the said contract to investigation agencies. Although there is no witness brought forth by the prosecution to prove that the said contract was entered into between Hotel Today and Skyline Engineering Contracts India Pvt. Ltd., however execution of same is not denied by the accused. Furthermore, accused in his statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C admitted the execution of said contract between M/s Today Hotel and M/s Sky Line Engineering Contracts India Pvt. Ltd.
Perusal of contract reveals that as per the safety rules, the contractor is liable to comply with the safety of labour and welfare rules and all the safety equipments are to be provided by the contractor.
9. As such it was for the prosecution to prove that the construction work was carried under the supervision of accused Kamal Prasad Chauhan and further that accused was entrusted by the M/s Sky Line Engineering Contracts India Pvt. Ltd. with the safety gears to be provided to the workers working at the construction site of M/s Today Hotel.
10. Accused Kamal Prasad Chauhan was named by the witness Jugnu (Jagnu), S/o Kishan Lal in his statement u/s 161 CrPC wherein he has stated that he was working as Time Keeper with M/s Sky Line Engineering Contracts India Pvt. Ltd. and that he and deceased Surender have asked Kamal Prasad Chauhan several times to put a railing at the place from where the deceased has fallen down, however he did not pay any heed to their request. He further stated that Kamal Prasad Chauhan did not use to provide any safety gears to the staff members at the construction site.