@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
C.S. Karnan, J.@mdashThe petitioner/Accused has filed the above Criminal Original Petition to call for the records in C.C. No. 1487 of 2006 on the file of the XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Saidapet and quash the same.
2. The prosecution case is that one Satish, Son of Chandrasekar had lodged a complaint against 6 accused persons before the respondent police on 12.08.2003. The said complaint reveals that the complainant''s daughter, one Sidhartha, a female child aged about 8 years, while she was using the lift, due to malfunctioning of the lift, fell down and her head was injured. Immediately, the neighbours took the child to the nearest Private Hospital, where she was declared dead. The incident happened due to malfunctioning and non-maintenance of the lift. Hence, the case was registered against the association office bearers and maintenance caretakers of the lift. Hence the criminal case was registered. The complaint was enquired into and investigated and charge sheet also has been filed.
3. In the said case 21 witnesses have been mentioned as prosecution witnesses. At this stage, the petitioner has filed the quash petition on the following grounds.
The petitioners are Secretary and Treasurer of Manjula Flat Association. The defacto complainant''s daughter fell in the lift and sustained head injuries and died. The petitioners allege that the 161 statements do not disclose the commission of any offence by the petitioners. It is also alleged that at the time of the incidence, the petitioners were not on the spot. It is also alleged that negligence cannot be laid on the petitioners for the said incident, because the petitioners are the Secretary and Treasurer of the flat Association. A case has been filed against them, without showing prima facie any other evidence as to their direct or indirect involvement in the said accident.
4. The contents of the Charge sheet and prosecution witnesses statements, death report and petitioners contention and the arguments advanced by the learned Counsels for their respective parties have been perused by this Court as also a citation furnished by the learned petitioners counsel in
5. The Court is of the view that in the said case, due to gross negligence and insufficiency of service of the lift, by the persons involved in the Maintenance of lift, that the incident had happened. Hence, the Criminal Case has to be tried to ascertain the reasons for the incident.
6. Therefore, the Criminal Original Petition No. 24284 of 2007 has got to be dismissed and accordingly dismissed. The connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
