- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:11778 CRL.P No. 3770 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3770 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. MR. SHANTHARAMA SHETTY SON OF CHANDRASHEKAR SHETTY AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS PRINCIPAL AT MORARJI DESAI VASATI SCHOOL, BADAGERE VILLAGE, HAROHALLI TALUK, RAMANAGARA-562 112. (NOTE: NAME OF THE PETITIONER STATED AS PER AADHAR CARD SINCE IN CHARGE SHEET WRONGLY STATED) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ABHIJITH S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA HAROHALLI POLICE STATION, REP.BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001. 2. MR. VISHWA H.S. SON OF HUCCHAIAH AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS RESIDENT OF HAROKOPPA VILLAGE, VIRUPAKSHAPURA HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA-562 160. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M V ANOOP KUMAR, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. ARUN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2) Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:11778 CRL.P No. 3770 of 2025 THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET NO.330/2023 FILED AGAINST THE PETITIONER AND PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.245/2024 (CR.NO.223/2022) FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 304(A) OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C KANAKAPURA. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER The petitioner, who is the accused and is sought to be prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section 304A of the IPC, is before this Court seeking relief. 2. The prosecution alleges that the complainant’s brother, employed as a security guard at Morarji Desai Residential School—where the petitioner holds the position of Principal—was involved in the incident. On the date in question, the security guard was summoned to switch on the generator due to a power cut. While attempting to do so, he was suddenly electrocuted, resulting in his death. 3. The learned counsel for the parties was heard. 4. The parties have appeared before the Court and have submitted a settlement agreement. Under the terms of this agreement, the wife of the deceased has been compensated a sum of Rs.2,00,000 and has also been employed as a cook at a Government school. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:11778 CRL.P No. 3770 of 2025 5. The offence under Section 304A of the IPC is punishable by imprisonment for up to three years, or with fine, or with both. 6. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Ambalal D. Bhatt v. State of Gujarat [(1972) 3 SCC 525], laid down the following principles regarding the application of Section 304A IPC: "(i) In a prosecution under Section 304A, the Court must determine whether the accused’s act was directly the result of a rash and negligent act and whether such an act was the proximate and efficient cause of the death, without the intervention of any other negligence. The mere fact that an accused contravenes certain rules or regulations while performing an act does not automatically constitute an offence under Section 304A. (ii) The act causing death must be the causa causans (the immediate or proximate cause) and not merely the causa sine qua non (a necessary condition). The Court must ascertain whether the accused’s act was the direct and proximate cause of death or whether an intervening cause broke the chain of causation, thereby absolving the accused’s act of being the immediate cause. Moreover, for an offence under Section 304A, the conduct must amount to gross negligence or a reckless disregard for human life; the mere occurrence of a tragic loss of life, however unfortunate, cannot by itself serve as the sole basis for conviction." 7. In the instance, there is no material evidence that the act of the petitioner was the direct and proximate cause for the death of the security guard. In light of the above, it is submitted that the continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioner would amount to an abuse of the process of law. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:11778 CRL.P No. 3770 of 2025 8. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The impugned proceedings in CC No. 245/2024, pending on the file of the learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Kanakapura, are hereby quashed. 9. Sri Aruna Kumara, learned counsel, has filed vakalath on behalf of the respondent No. 2. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE BKM List No.: 4 Sl No.: 1