Delhi High Court Denies Bail in Electric Fence Fatality Case
The Delhi High Court has firmly denied the bail application of a man implicated in the tragic death of a 12-year-old child, who was electrocuted by an illegally installed electric fence on a plot of land. This decision was articulated in the case titled Karan Singh Vs State NCT of Delhi.
The ruling, issued on September 14 by Justice Girish Kathpalia, emphasized the serious nature of the act. The court noted that the electric fence was energized without any formal authorization from the relevant electricity authorities. Justice Kathpalia remarked, “This act was per se so imminently dangerous that the accused/applicant cannot claim lack of knowledge that it was likely to cause death of anyone coming in contact with the fence.”
The prosecution argued that Karan Singh had erected the electrified barrier, charged with 220 to 225 volts, without installing essential safety components such as a regulator, insulator, or circuit breaker. A trial court has already charged him under Section 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for causing culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
In his defense, the accused claimed that the fence was intended to deter wild animals from encroaching on his land from an adjoining forest. Singh also contended that he neither owned the land nor held the electricity connection in his name. However, the Court highlighted that satellite imagery contradicted his defense, showing that the fence did not separate his land from the forest but from neighboring plots.
Further investigation by law enforcement revealed that local children frequently played in the vicinity of Singh’s land. Notably, there were no warning signs alerting the public to the danger of the electrified fence, underscoring a significant lapse in safety measures.
More Read
Addressing the issue of land ownership, the Court concluded that Singh was actively cultivating and managing the land, reinforcing his responsibility for the hazardous installation. Consequently, the Court dismissed the bail application.
Legal representation for the accused was provided by Advocate Nitin Vats, while Additional Public Prosecutor Amit Ahlawat represented the State in the proceedings. [Read Order]
