Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sri M. Srinivas, filed a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking quashing of proceedings in C.C. No. 10878/2016 pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Traffic Court-III, Bengaluru. The case arose from a fatal accident on 13.02.2016 at about 15.05 hours when a tipper lorry bearing registration No. KA.02.AE.0928, driven by accused No.1 in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against a motorcycle driven by the deceased near Balaji Motors, Srinivasapura, Kogilu-Bellalli Main Road, Yelahanka, resulting in the death of the motorcyclist. The petitioner, who was the Supervisor Engineer of M/s. Malu Constructions (India) Pvt. Ltd., was arrayed as accused No.2 on the ground that he was supervising the work order executed by the company. The petitioner contended that there was no material to show his involvement in the alleged offence and that he was not present at the scene. The State opposed the petition. The High Court examined the charge-sheet and found that the only allegation against the petitioner was that he was the Supervisor Engineer of the company. There was no specific overt act attributed to him, nor any evidence that he abetted or conspired with the driver. The court held that vicarious criminal liability cannot be imposed in the absence of such material. Accordingly, the court allowed the petition and quashed the 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 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Petitioner, a supervisor engineer, was arrayed as accused No.2 for an accident caused by the driver of a tipper lorry - No allegation that petitioner was present at the scene or instigated the driver - Held that in the absence of any specific overt act or evidence of abetment, criminal proceedings against the petitioner are liable to be quashed (Paras 4-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a supervisor engineer can be held vicariously liable for rash and negligent driving by the driver of a vehicle in the absence of any specific overt act or evidence of abetment or conspiracy.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The entire proceedings in C.C. No. 10878/2016 pending on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Traffic Court-III, Bengaluru, and the charge sheet filed against the petitioner are quashed.
Law Points
- Vicarious liability in criminal law
- Quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC
- Ingredients of Sections 279 and 304A IPC
- Liability under Motor Vehicles Act for owner/supervisor
Case Details
2019 LawText (KAR) (01) 111
Criminal Petition No.9124 of 2016
Murthy D Naik (for petitioner), I.S. Pramod Chandra, SPP-II (for respondent)
The State represented by Yelahanka Traffic Police, Bengaluru City
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of proceedings in a traffic accident case.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of entire proceedings in C.C. No. 10878/2016 and the charge sheet filed against him.
Filing Reason
Petitioner was arrayed as accused No.2 in a case arising from a fatal accident caused by the driver of a tipper lorry, on the ground that he was the Supervisor Engineer of the company executing the work.
Issues
Whether the petitioner, being a supervisor engineer, can be held vicariously liable for the rash and negligent driving of the driver in the absence of any specific overt act or evidence of abetment.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that there is no material to show his involvement in the alleged offence and that he was not present at the scene.
State opposed the petition, but the court found no specific overt act attributed to the petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi
In the absence of any specific overt act or evidence of abetment or conspiracy, a supervisor engineer cannot be held vicariously liable for the rash and negligent driving of the driver of a vehicle. Criminal proceedings against such a person are liable to be quashed under Section 482 CrPC.
Judgment Excerpts
Petitioner has sought to quash the proceedings initiated against him in C.C.No.10878/2016 pending on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Traffic Court-III at Bengaluru for the offences punishable under sections 279, 304A of Indian Penal Code and sections 134(a) and (b) read with 187 of Indian Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
The allegation against the present petitioner is that he being the Supervisor Engineer of M/s.Malu Constructions (India) Pvt., Ltd., while executing the work order...
In the absence of any specific overt act attributed to the petitioner, the criminal proceedings initiated against him cannot be sustained.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed a petition under Section 482 CrPC before the High Court of Karnataka seeking quashing of proceedings in C.C. No. 10878/2016 pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Traffic Court-III, Bengaluru. The petition was heard and disposed of on 15.02.2019.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 279, 304A
- Indian Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: 134(a), 134(b), 187
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 482
