High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 09 J&K CK 0033

K.K. Sharma @APPELLANT@Hash State of J&K and ors

Jammu And Kashmir High Court · Decided on 12 September 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjay Kumar Gupta, J
RESULT
Disposed Off
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneousl Case No. 102 Of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

30 paragraphs · 684 words
1.

The factual matrix of the case is that the petitioner, who is Assistant Engineer in Power Development Department and is having an unblemished

carrier was transferred by the Development Commissioner, Power from Jammu to Mahore vide order dated 29th August, 2014 and has performed his

duties efficiently and with great dedication and utmost satisfaction of the senior officers as well as the people till unfortunate incidence happened.Â

On 30th July, 2017, due to heavy rainfall and strong winds and storm, one tree fell on the electric wires, due to which, the pole connected with the

wires was broken down, as a corollary of which, one old aged lady, namely, Sayeeda Begum was going towards field due to the reason that her ox ran

away by breaking ropes at the last hours of the night at about 3.00 P.M when there is darkness and the day light is yet to commence. This fact is

also evident from the Report of the Numberdar and Chowkidar along with other prominent persons of the area, informing the police and district

administration. The information given by the Numberdar and Chowkidar also transpires that the pole was broken down due to the fall of tree on the

electric wires due to heavy rainfall, wind and storm during the intervening night of 30th July, 2017.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no negligence on the part of the petitioner, as he was not aware about the incident said to be

happened on 01.08.2017 till he received a Communication from the Lineman (Annexure-C) dated 01.08.2017, whereby it was informed by the

Lineman that due to falling of pine tree, the LT line was completely damaged and due to the short circuiting, one lady, namely, Sayeeda Begum got

electric shock. Respondent No. 3, i.e., Station House Officer, Police Station, Mahore, District Reasi registered an FIR No. 53/2017 dated 30th July,

2017, registered at Police Station, Mahore, District Reasi under Section 304-A, 429 RPC, whereby it was alleged that due to negligence of the

petitioner, one lady, namely, Sayeeda Begum and one Ox was caught in the electric wires and received the electric shocks and the incident was

alleged to be of 11:30 A.M and it was also mentioned in the aforesaid FIR that the information was received from the reliable source and the distance

between the place of occurrence is about 12 Kilometer from the Police Station.Â

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the said FIR was registered at 12:30 P.M within one hour of the incident and the place of

occurrence is remote area, having no road connectivity and it is quite improbable for any person to reach the Police Station within one hour and to give

information about the incident, because it is the respondent No. 2, i.e., Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Mahore, District Reasi, on whose direction, the

said FIR was registered against the petitioner, which is totally misconceived, whereas the fact is that due to the heavy rainfall, wind and storm, the

said incident was occurred. In this factual backdrop, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant petition.

4.

When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the respondents submitted at bar that investigation in the case has been completed and

Challan has been sent to Government for sanction under Section 197 of the       Cr. P.C, as the accused/petitioner is a State Government

Employee.

5.

In view of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the facts of the case, I deem it appropriate to

dispose of the instant petition by giving liberty to the petitioner to take all the pleas taken in this petition and argue the case before the Court below

when the Challan is presented and arguments are being heard at the time of framing of charge. At that time, the Trial Court shall consider the

arguments of the petitioner and shall decide the case in accordance with law.

6.

With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of.