Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Soneram Vs. State of M.P.

Soneram vs State of M.P.

Disposition Misc. criminal case allowed Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Aug 30, 2000
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/504075

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Misc. Criminal Case No. 5701/2000
Subject
Criminal
Disposition
Misc. criminal case allowed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1890.Sections 307 & 324: [Lokeshwar Singh Panta & B.Sudershan Reddy,JJ] Assault Proof - Appellant allegedly dealt sickle blow to deceased - Testimony of eye-witnesses showed that sudden altercation ensued between appellant and deceased - No evidence to indicate any previous enmity between parti...

Key legal issue
Criminal
Outcome / disposition
Misc. criminal case allowed
Acts & sections
Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 287 and 338; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1974 - Sections 482

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Soneram

Advocate Shri R.P. Chopra, Adv.

Respondent

State of M.P.

Advocate Shri Prakash Gupta, Panel Lawyer

Legal References

Acts
Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 287 and 338; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1974 - Sections 482
Reported In
2001(2)MPHT220

Excerpt

- indian penal code, 1890.sections 307 & 324: [lokeshwar singh panta & b.sudershan reddy,jj] assault proof - appellant allegedly dealt sickle blow to deceased - testimony of eye-witnesses showed that sudden altercation ensued between appellant and deceased - no evidence to indicate any previous enmity between parties - single blow of sickle had been inflicted by appellant on back of deceased - incised wound allegedly inflicted by appellant - however opinion of doctor proved that deceased had not died due to direct result of said injury held, appellant is therefore liable to be convicted under section 324 of i.p.c., sentence of 3 years imprisonment reduced to period undergone by appellant considering mental agony suffered by him - 2. it appears that the applicant has been charged with offences under section 287 as well as section 338 of jpc on the basis of charge-sheet filed by majhouli police station in the court of judicial magistrate, first class, sihora. in failing to do so he was culpable within the meaning of section 287 of ipc as well as section 338 thereof.orders.c. pandey, j.1. this is an application under section 482 of the code of criminal procedure whereby the applicant required this court to quash the proceedings in criminal case no. 83/2000, pending in the court of judicial magistrate, first class, sihora.2. it appears that the applicant has been charged with offences under section 287 as well as section 338 of jpc on the basis of charge-sheet filed by majhouli police station in the court of judicial magistrate, first class, sihora. the fir filed along with the charge-sheet shows that the applicant had given a thrasher on hire on 17-3-2000 at about 10.00 to 10.30 p.m. to smt. pramod devi paliwal. there was an accident in which prahlad nai suffered an injury. his left hand got severed from the wrist joint. it appears that the charge against the applicant is that he was required to supervise running of the machinery himself or to appoint some competent person. in failing to do so he was culpable within the meaning of section 287 of ipc as well as section 338 thereof. section 287 of ipc reads as under :--'287. negligent conduct with respect to machinery.-- whoever does, with any machinery, any act so rashly or negligently as to endanger human life or to be likely to cause hurt or injury to any other person. or knowingly or negligently omits to lake such order with any machinery in his possession or under his care as is sufficient to guard against any probable danger to human life from such machinery, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both,' 3. it is apparent from the above section that the applicant cannot be held guilty of the first part of section 287 of ipc as he was not present at the spot when the alleged accident occurred. however, the prosecution in its wisdom thinks that the applicant was bound to take such care as was necessary to guard against any probable danger to human life.....

Full Judgment

ORDER

S.C. Pandey, J.

1. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure whereby the applicant required this Court to quash the proceedings in Criminal Case No. 83/2000, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sihora.

2. It appears that the applicant has been charged with offences under Section 287 as well as Section 338 of JPC on the basis of charge-sheet filed by Majhouli Police Station in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sihora. The FIR filed along with the charge-sheet shows that the applicant had given a thrasher on hire on 17-3-2000 at about 10.00 to 10.30 P.M. to Smt. Pramod Devi Paliwal. There was an accident in which Prahlad Nai suffered an injury. His left hand got severed from the wrist joint. It appears that the charge against the applicant is that he was required to supervise running of the machinery himself or to appoint some competent person. In failing to do so he was culpable within the meaning of Section 287 of IPC as well as Section 338 thereof. Section 287 of IPC reads as under :--

'287. Negligent conduct with respect to machinery.-- Whoever does, with any machinery, any act so rashly or negligently as to endanger human life or to be likely to cause hurt or injury to any other person.

or knowingly or negligently omits to lake such order with any machinery in his possession or under his care as is sufficient to guard against any probable danger to human life from such machinery, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both,'

3. It is apparent from the above section that the applicant cannot be held guilty of the first part of Section 287 of IPC as he was not present at the spot when the alleged accident occurred. However, the prosecution in its wisdom thinks that the applicant was bound to take such care as was necessary to guard against any probable danger to human life from such machinery. However, this care has to be taken, according to second part of Section 287, IPC, by the person who is holding possession or is caretaker thereof.

4. The applicant had given thrasher on hire to Smt. Pramod Devi Paliwal. It was she who was running the thrasher for her own purpose. It washer duty to employ a competent person to see that the possibility of any danger to human life from the use of thrasher diminished. The applicant cannot be held directly responsible for an offence punishable under Section 287 of IPC because he had no role to play. The applicant had already parted with the possession when he gave thrasher on hire and he could not control its use by Smt. Pramod Devi Paliwal.

5. Similarly an offence under Section 338 of IPC is also not made out because the applicant was not involved in any way for causing grievous hurt to Prahlad Nai. He has not done the act punishable with any of the offences for which he was charged.

6. Accordingly, this Court is of the view that the proceedings before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sihora registered as Criminal Case No. 83 of 2000 deserve and are hereby quashed. The application is accordingly allowed. So, M. (Cr.) P. No. 680/2000 is disposed of,

7. Misc. Criminal case allowed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial