The State of Karnataka vs Amruthrao Yadal, Shivakumar Bukkegar, Shivaraj Bulla and Akram

Anand Byrareddy, J.—Heard the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for the appellant. The appellant is the State, seeking to question the acquittal of the respondents for the offence punishable u/s 304(A) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Hereinafter referred to as the ''IPC, for brevity). The allegation was that one Gujjamma, while drying clothes, had put them on a wall which had an electricity leak passing through it, as a result of which she was electrocuted.

It was the case of the prosecution that on the basis of the complaint of one PW.3 who is said to have made a complaint earlier, to the Gulbarga Electricity Supply Company as regards the leak in the electricity in the wall, has led to the accidental death of Gujjamma, which could have been avoided by the respondents if they had been diligent in attending to the complaint of PW-3 regarding the leak in electricity.

However, the court below has noted the several circumstances which did not establish the commission of the offence beyond all reasonable doubt by the respondent, as for instance the complaint by PW.3 was not produced. Secondly, the physical impossibility of having dried the clothes was also not questioned and therefore the court below has acquitted the accused on account of the fact that the prosecution not having put-forth a clear case and not having produced material to establish the allegations beyond all reasonable doubt. Though the learned Additional State public prosecutor makes a futile effort to question the reasoning of the court below, as there is no evidence which was produced, it cannot be said that the reasoning of the court below could be faulted. Accordingly, the appeal is rejected.