The Bombay High Court has quashed a 2016 FIR alleging criminal negligence against trustees, management members and staff of Pune’s Abeda Inamdar Senior College in connection with the drowning deaths of 14 students during a college picnic at Murud beach in Maharashtra.
Justice Milind N. Jadhav held that the material on record did not establish a direct or proximate connection between any specific negligent act by the accused and the deaths. The Court observed that the students who entered the sea were adults, and criminal liability under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code could not be imposed merely because the accused were associated with the college or accompanied students on the trip.
The incident occurred on February 1, 2016, when 41 third-year students ventured into the sea. Several were swept away by strong currents; despite rescue efforts, 14 students died. An FIR was registered at Murud Police Station against 17 persons, including college trustees, the in-charge principal and employees, under Sections 304A and 34 of the IPC.
The complainant alleged that the college authorities had failed to ensure adequate safety arrangements, students were not warned about the dangerous currents, and teachers accompanying the third-year students were not present at the beach when the incident occurred. The State also argued that the college was responsible for student safety during the picnic.
Rejecting the prosecution against the applicants, the Court distinguished between the responsibility to exercise care and the criminal negligence required to attract Section 304A. It noted that the trustees and certain teachers were not directly involved in supervising the third-year students, while the record did not establish the necessary proximate link between the alleged omissions of the accompanying staff and the deaths.
The Court also emphasised the need for stronger safety measures at public beaches, including warning signs, high-tide alerts, lifeguards, rescue facilities and clearly demarcated swimming zones. The Court remarked:
“
“These beaches should have regulatory mechanism for adequately warning all such visitors about the dangers of entering into the sea water by signages and warnings and also should employ safety measures, rescue measures in order to avoid unfortunate accidents leading to loss of life. It is a normal and given human tendency that when a human being visits a beach front or sea front the human being ventures into the sea water for some fun and frolic which cannot be curbed or prevented, but certainly, if safety measures are employed as suggested above, it will not lead to a loss of human life as visitors will exercise a greater degree of caution while venturing into the sea water.”
Observing that public authorities also have a responsibility to protect beachgoers, the Court directed the Maharashtra Government, through its Ministry of Tourism, to prepare a blueprint for safety measures at popular beachfronts and implement a uniform policy for warnings and rescue arrangements. It also requested the State Chief Secretary to consider strengthening the measures discussed in the judgment.
The Court accordingly allowed all four criminal applications and quashed the FIR registered at Murud Police Station.
