- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:6831 CRL.P No. 1595 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1595 OF 2025 (438(Cr.PC) / 482(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SRI. K.V. GIRIRAJ S/O K.N. VARADARAJ AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT NO.16/18, NAGASHRI NILAYA, VASAVI COLONY, OLD TOWN, BHADRAVATHI - 577 301. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VENKATESHA T.S, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, HOSAMANE POLICE STATION, BHADRAVATHI REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RANGASWAMY, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 438 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 482 BNNS) PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT THAT, IN THE EVENT OF ARREST OF PETITIONER IN CRIME NO. 0199/2024 AND COURT CR NO.1247/2024 REGISTERED BY HOSMANE Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:6831 CRL.P No. 1595 of 2025 POLICE STATION, BHADRAVATHI, ON THE FILE OF THE ADD. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) AND JMFC-3 COURT AT BHADRAVATHI FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 289, 125(A), 324(4) OF BNS AND SECTION 2 OF PREVENTION OF DESTRUCTION AND LOSS OF PROPERTY ACT, 1981, AGAINST THE PETITIONER AND HE MAY BE RELEASED ON BAIL. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel for petitioner, learned High Court Government Pleader for the State and perused the material on record. 2. This petition under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 is preferred seeking to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in Crime No.199/2024 of Hosamane Police Station, registered for offences punishable under Section 289, 125(a) and 324(4) of BNS 2023 and Section 2 of the Prevention of Destruction and Loss of Property Act, 1981. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:6831 CRL.P No. 1595 of 2025 3. In the complaint lodged by one Mohamad Fayaz, an employee of one Sri. Ganesha Rice Mill, situated on C.N. Road, Bhadravathi, Shivamogga, he has stated that in the said Rice Mill, one Raghu was working as Boiler operator and Faizan and Bilal were working as helpers and one Rajappa was working as security guard. At about 06:30-06:40 p.m. on 19.12.2024, the Rice Mill Boiler exploded due to which Raghu, Rajappa, Bilal, Faizan and other employees sustained injuries and the boiler operator Raghu succumbed to the injures at the spot. The injured were taken for treatment to Mcgan hospital, Shivamogga. One of the injured by name Rajappa, working as security guard succumbed to the injuries on 28.12.2024, while undergoing treatment in the hospital. 4. It is alleged that, the incident took place due to the negligence of the petitioner, owner of the Rice Mill, as he failed to maintain the boiler and provide safety equipments to the workers. 5. Learned High Court Government Pleader has contended that the petitioner being the owner of the Rice - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:6831 CRL.P No. 1595 of 2025 Mill ought to have provided safety equipments, such as helmets, gloves etc. to the workers which he has failed to provide and due to his negligence in not maintaining the boiler, the said boiler exploded, resulting in the death of two persons and several persons sustaining injuries. He has therefore, contended that the petitioner is not entitled for anticipatory bail. 6. Learned counsel for petitioner has contended that he has been legally running the Rice Boiler under a licence issued by the Assistant Director of Boilers and the said boiler was being inspected from time to time by the concerned officials and there was no allegation of any misuse or violation of the license conditions. He further contended that even accepting that the Rice Boiler exploded due to some negligence, it cannot be said that the petitioner has committed any such act with an intention of causing death or causing injuries to the employees. 7. Learned counsel has relied on a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in SHAMSHER KHAN V/s. STATE OF - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:6831 CRL.P No. 1595 of 2025 (N.C.T) DELHI, reported in AIR 2000 SC 3662, wherein the Hon'ble Apex court has held that 'the act must have been done with the knowledge that such act by itself was likely to cause death. If some other act had intervened which the offender did not do consciously which triggered the explosions that could not be counted as the act for that offender'. 8. At this stage, there is no material to show any intention or knowledge on the part of the petitioner. Rice mill boiler was being run under a license. Cause of explosion is not known. The allegation against the petitioner has to be proved in trial. 9. The learned counsel for petitioner submitted that a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- has been paid as compensation to the family members of deceased Raghu and sum of Rs.8,00,000/- to the family members of deceased Rajappa and Rs.3,00,000/- to the owner of the lorry, which was damaged in the incident. Copies of the documents showing payments are annexed to the petition. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:6831 CRL.P No. 1595 of 2025 10. Petitioner has undertaken to furnish adequate surety and to co-operate with the investigation of the case. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be required. Hence, by imposing necessary conditions, the relief sought by the petitioner can be granted. Accordingly, the following:- ORDER i) Petition is allowed. ii) Petitioner / accused in Crime No.199/2024 of Hosamane Police Station is ordered to be released in the event of his arrest, subject to following conditions: a) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and shall execute a bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two sureties for the likesum. b) He shall furnish proof of his residential address and shall inform the - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:6831 CRL.P No. 1595 of 2025 Investigating Officer/Court, if there is change in the address. c) He shall be available for the purpose of investigation as and when required and shall co-operate with the investigation. d) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission till completion of the investigation of the case. e) He shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses either directly or indirectly. f) He shall be regular in attending the Court proceedings. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE LDC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33 CT: BHK