ADVERTISEMENT
Karnataka HC quashes proceedings against Hebbal MLA Byrathi Suresh  On the other hand, the counsels for the police and the Fire Force argued that the complaint was, in fact, preferred on April 9, 2018, and hence, it was within the limitation period.
DHNS
Last Updated IST
Byrathi Suresh
Byrathi Suresh

Credit: DH Photo

Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court has quashed the proceedings against BS Suresh (Byrathi Suresh), MLA from Hebbal constituency and owner of a commercial complex in Bengaluru, on the ground that there was an inordinate delay in registration of complaint by the Fire Force Department.

The offence is related to non-adherence to preventive measures for high rise buildings.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Indiranagar police had registered the crime under IPC section 285 and section 25 of the Karnataka Fire Force Act, 1964, citing failure to install any safety equipment in the building on behalf of Suresh, who purchased the property in 2014, and another accused, Pradoosh Dhanaraj.

It was argued that the Fire Department had inspected the premises on three occasions — on December 31, 2017; January 5, 2018; and January 31, 2018. The complaint was filed on April 2, 2019.

According to the petitioners, the limitation for filing the complaint is one year from the date of occurrence of the cause of action for an offence punishable under IPC Section 285 and even for offences under the Fire Force Act. The petitioners said the complaint was filed more than a year after the last inspection of the building.

On the other hand, the counsels for the police and the Fire Force argued that the complaint was, in fact, preferred on April 9, 2018, and hence, it was within the limitation period.

Justice M Nagaprasanna noted that the entertaining of the complaint was not maintainable as it was hit by limitation. The court further said that the alleged act of the petitioners does not meet the ingredients of IPC Section 285 as the provision mandates ‘rash or negligent act by any person so as to endanger human life, while dealing with fire or combustible matter knowingly or unknowingly’.

“If further proceedings are permitted to continue, it would become contrary to law and result in miscarriage of justice,” the court said.

ADVERTISEMENT
(Published 10 September 2024, 01:54 IST)