Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sri M. Srinivas, filed a criminal petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of proceedings in C.C.No.10878/2016 pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Traffic Court-III, Bengaluru, for offences punishable under Sections 279, 304A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 134(a) and (b) read with 187 of the Indian Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The petitioner was shown as accused No.2 in the charge-sheet. The case of the prosecution was that on 13.02.2016 at about 15.05 hours, accused No.1, the driver of a tipper lorry bearing registration No.KA.02.AE.0928, drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against a motorcycle driven by the deceased, leading to his death. The allegation against the petitioner was that he, being the Supervisor Engineer of M/s. Malu Constructions (India) Pvt. Ltd., while executing the work order, failed to take precautionary measures and did not provide safety measures, thereby causing the accident. The petitioner contended that there was no specific allegation that he was present at the scene or that he instructed the driver to drive rashly. The court examined the charge-sheet and found that the only allegation against the petitioner was that he was the supervisor engineer and that he failed to take precautionary measures. The court held that in the absence of any specific overt act or mens rea, criminal proceedings cannot be sustained against the petitioner. The court observed that the petitioner cannot be held vicariously liable for the acts of the driver. Accordingly, the court allowed the petition and quashed the entire proceedings against the petitioner.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Vicarious Liability - Quashing of Proceedings - Sections 279, 304A IPC and Sections 134(a)(b) r/w 187 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Petitioner, supervisor engineer of the company, was arrayed as accused No.2 for an accident caused by driver of tipper lorry - No allegation that petitioner was present at the scene or that he instructed or abetted the driver to drive rashly - Held that in the absence of any specific overt act or mens rea, criminal proceedings cannot be sustained against the petitioner - Proceedings quashed (Paras 4-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the criminal proceedings against the petitioner, who is the supervisor engineer of the company owning the offending vehicle, can be quashed in the absence of any specific allegation of rash or negligent act on his part.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The entire proceedings in C.C.No.10878/2016 on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Traffic Court-III, Bengaluru, and the charge-sheet at Annexure-D are quashed against the petitioner.
Law Points
- Vicarious liability in criminal law
- Quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC
- Rash and negligent driving
- Offence under Section 304A IPC
- Offence under Section 279 IPC
- Offence under Motor Vehicles Act
