Padama Singh Padam S/O. Bupasingh Vs the State of Karnataka

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4889 CRL.P No. 101875 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101875 OF 2024

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

PADAMA SINGH PADAM S/O. BUPASINGH, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: ENGINEER, R/O: AMBEDKAR PARK, SAILA, FIROZABAD.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI PRAVEEN KUMAR G., ADVOCATE APPEARED FOR SRI ANAND R. KOLLI, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD, THROUGH MUNIRABAD POLICE STATION, PIN – 583 227.

¶13

Digitally signed by ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad

¶14

SRI KALAKAPPA S/O. RUDRAPPA PATANGARAYA, AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: HOTEL BUSINESS, R/O: HITNAL, TQ: DIST: KOPPAL, PIN – 583 227.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI RAMESH B. CHIGARI, AGA FOR R1; SRI SAJEED A. TAMBOOLI, ADVOCATE APPEARED FOR SRI B. SHARANABASAWA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT, FIR AND CHARGE SHEET IN CC NO.202/2022 (ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO.11/2022 REGISTERED BY MUNIRABAD P.S.) FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 283, 279, 304(A) IN CRIME NO.11/2022 (CC NO.202/2022) PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC KOPPAL INSOFAR AS PETITIONER IS CONCERNED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4889 CRL.P No. 101875 of 2024

¶20

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶21

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

This petition is filed by the petitioner -accused No.1 praying to quash the complaint, FIR and charge sheet in C.C.No.202/2022 pending on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Koppal.

¶24

The case of the prosecution as narrated in Cl.No.17 of the charge sheet is that on 11.01.2022 at about 9.30 p.m the petitioner –accused No.1 has put up cement road blocks on one way road in NH-50 leading from Kustagi to Hosapete and did not put up any radium cone or sign board on road. Due that accused No.2 who was rider of KA -37 EE 9809 drove his motor cycle towards Kustagi to Hosapete in high speed, in rash and negligent manner, dashed to cement road blocks, sustained injuries and died on the spot. The said charge sheet is filed against petitioner –accused No.1 for offences punishable

¶25

under Section 283 and 304A of Indian Penal Code

¶26

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4889 CRL.P No. 101875 of 2024

¶27

(hereinafter referred as ”IPC” for brevity) and for offence punishable under Section 279 of IPC against deceased – accused No.2. On the basis of the said charge sheet a case came to be registered against the petitioner –accused No.1 and it is pending in C.C.No.202/2022 on file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Koppal. The proceedings of the said case sought to be quashed in this present petition.

¶28

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and learned AGA for respondent No.1-State.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner –accused No.1 would contend that the petitioner is employee of Oriental Structural Engineers Private Limited and he has taken all precautions while blocking one way road and put

¶30

up stop sign board and also road diversion is mentioned. He submits that it is only due to rash and negligent driving of the motor cycle by the deceased –accused No.1, the accident occurred, he sustained injuries and died on the

¶31

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4889 CRL.P No. 101875 of 2024

¶32

spot. The proceedings against the petitioner –accused No.1 are abuse of process of law. With these, he prays to allow the petition and quash the proceedings against the petitioner –accused No.1.

¶33

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 and learned AGA for respondent No. 1- State would contend that charge sheet materials indicate that cement road blocks were put up on one way road for blocking the road and not put up any radium cone or sign boards visible during night hours . The charge sheet materials indicate that the petitioner is site engineer and he is responsible for the negligent act of not putting radium cone or sign

¶34

board at the place of blocking one way road from cement road blocks. With these, they prays for dismissal of the petition.

¶35

Having heard learned counsel, this Court has perused the charge sheet materials.

¶36

The petitioner is site engineer working in Oriental Structural Engineers Private Limited. The letter

¶37

5 -

¶38

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4889 CRL.P No. 101875 of 2024

¶39

dated 02.02.2022 issued by the Oriental Structural Engineers Private Limited indicate that the petitioner is Senior Project Engineer of Structure. The photos contained in the charge sheet indicate that cement road blocks are put up on the one way road to block the road. The accident occurred during the night hours at 9.30 p.m. on 11.1.2022. As there were no radium cone and sign board visible during night hours, the deceased drove his vehicle and dashed to the said road blocks, sustained injuries and died in the accident. The charge sheet materials indicate the negligent act of the petitioner who was working as site engineer in not putting up any radium cone or sign boards to visibility of cement road blocks during night hours. The said act alleged against the petitioner –accused No.1 is negligent act. Hence, there are no grounds for quashing the proceedings in C.C.No.202/2022 pending on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Koppal.

¶40

6 -

¶41

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4889 CRL.P No. 101875 of 2024

¶42

In the result, the petition is dismissed.

¶43

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶44

DSP/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15

Padama Singh Padam S/O. Bupasingh v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Padama Singh Padam S/O. Bupasingh v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Dr Virupaxi S/O Shivalingappa Sadhunavar Vs the State of Karnataka

Dr v S Sadhunavar Foundation (R) Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Trupti Virupaxi Sadhunavar Aliyas Smt Trupti W/O Santosh Patil Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri. Prithvi Singh Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Venkateshwari G S W/O K Kotresh Vs the State of Karnataka

Mali Vivek Reddy S/O. Mali Prabanjan Reddy Vs State of Karnataka