Karnataka High Court Holds Apartment Association Office-Bearers Liable for Negligence in Swimming Pool Death

Karnataka High Court Holds Apartment Association Office-Bearers Liable for Negligence in Swimming Pool Death

In a landmark judgment, the Karnataka High Court has ruled that office bearers of apartment owners' associations can be prosecuted for criminal negligence in the event of a death in a swimming pool that lacks proper safety measures, including the presence of a lifeguard. This decision marks a significant precedent for residents of apartment complexes across the state.

The court's ruling came in response to a case involving the tragic death of nine-year-old Manya Dameria, who drowned in a decorative pool adjacent to a swimming pool in the Prestige Lakeside Habitat complex near Varthur, Bengaluru, on December 28, 2023. The court upheld the criminal prosecution of six office bearers of the Prestige Lakeside Habitat Home Owners Association: Debashish Sinha, S.T. Suresh Babu, Santosh Maharana, Gobinda Mandal, Bikashkumar Paridh, and Bhakta Charan Pradhan.

Justice M. Nagaprasanna, presiding over the case, emphasized the responsibility of apartment associations to safeguard the lives of all residents, particularly children. The court noted that leaving a swimming pool unguarded without a lifeguard or necessary safety precautions is a serious oversight that can lead to tragic consequences.

"If any apartment complex has a swimming pool and it is left unguarded without any lifeguard or without any safety measures taken, those apartment complexes would be doing so at their own peril," the court observed.

The court highlighted the importance of implementing safety measures to prevent accidents and underscored that associations are accountable for the maintenance and safety of common areas, including swimming pools. In this case, the absence of a lifeguard and other safety measures was deemed a failure of responsibility on the part of the association's office bearers.

While the High Court quashed the initial charge sheet filed under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which pertains to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, it invoked Section 304A of the IPC, which addresses causing death by negligence. The court clarified that the office bearers could not be charged with an intention to kill, but their actions—or lack thereof—constituted criminal negligence.

The petitioners argued that it is common for apartment swimming pools to lack guards due to privacy concerns. However, the court rejected this argument, stating that prioritizing privacy over safety could have "disastrous effects" on the well-being of residents, particularly children.

The court directed that the case proceed to trial under Section 304A of the IPC. The office bearers will be required to defend their actions in a full trial, where the focus will be on their alleged negligence in maintaining safety standards in the swimming pool area.

This ruling sends a strong message to apartment associations across Karnataka, emphasizing the legal obligations they hold in ensuring the safety of their residents. The decision could lead to stricter enforcement of safety measures in residential complexes, particularly those with swimming pools, to prevent similar tragedies in the future.