Dear All,
This is a serious issue in connection with a fatal accident (4 workers died) in a fire accident that happened in the solvent preparation area at TVS Srichakra Tyres Ltd, Madurai, Tamil Nadu. In this incident, the safety officer of the unit has been arrested and charged under 304A (Negligence in act causing death).
This is highly ridiculous because the safety officer has only an advisory role and not enforcing authority (as mentioned in the Tamil Nadu Factories Rules and Factories Act).
Hence, we request all safety professionals to support this issue to prevent the recurrence of such incidents in the future. Please raise this issue.
Thanks & Regards
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
73This is a serious issue in connection with a fatal accident (4 workers died) in a fire accident that happened in the solvent preparation area at TVS Srichakra Tyres Ltd, Madurai, Tamil Nadu. In this incident, the safety officer of the unit has been arrested and charged under 304A (Negligence in act causing death).
This is highly ridiculous because the safety officer has only an advisory role and not enforcing authority (as mentioned in the Tamil Nadu Factories Rules and Factories Act).
Hence, we request all safety professionals to support this issue to prevent the recurrence of such incidents in the future. Please raise this issue.
Thanks & Regards
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear all,
This is a very serious issue, but arresting the safety officer is not fair. Police should investigate the case clearly to determine the backlog from management regarding safety issues and identify the individuals connected with this accident who have to be arrested.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
This is a very serious issue, but arresting the safety officer is not fair. Police should investigate the case clearly to determine the backlog from management regarding safety issues and identify the individuals connected with this accident who have to be arrested.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Manish,
As a matter of fact, the Safety Officer has to insist on the implementation of the observations raised by him regarding safety hazards. If an accident occurs due to negligence, then obviously everyone will be held responsible.
Neglecting and avoiding to perform an act that needs to be done, and performing an act that should not be done, is also considered an offense. The Safety Officer has the responsibility to identify safety hazards and provide necessary instructions to the executing team to rectify any defects. If the execution team is not complying, the Safety Officer has the right to stop the work. In this case, the Safety Officer failed to identify the safety hazard, give instructions for rectification, or ensure its rectification. Hence, the arrest.
Normally, any accident site should be barricaded, and work must be stopped until an inspection is carried out by the Factories Inspector. Only if the Factories Inspector is satisfied with the rectification work, will they permit the work to resume at the accident site.
In the event of a fatal accident, the Police team also visits the accident site to inspect the cause of death. If the Investigating Officer determines that the accident resulted from mere negligence, then Section 304-A of the IPC will apply, and the Factory Manager will have to be arrested. However, if the Investigating Officer concludes that the fatality was due to an accident without negligence, and there are no complaints from the deceased's relatives, then the investigation will proceed under Section 174 of the Cr.P.C.
From India, Kumbakonam
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
As a matter of fact, the Safety Officer has to insist on the implementation of the observations raised by him regarding safety hazards. If an accident occurs due to negligence, then obviously everyone will be held responsible.
Neglecting and avoiding to perform an act that needs to be done, and performing an act that should not be done, is also considered an offense. The Safety Officer has the responsibility to identify safety hazards and provide necessary instructions to the executing team to rectify any defects. If the execution team is not complying, the Safety Officer has the right to stop the work. In this case, the Safety Officer failed to identify the safety hazard, give instructions for rectification, or ensure its rectification. Hence, the arrest.
Normally, any accident site should be barricaded, and work must be stopped until an inspection is carried out by the Factories Inspector. Only if the Factories Inspector is satisfied with the rectification work, will they permit the work to resume at the accident site.
In the event of a fatal accident, the Police team also visits the accident site to inspect the cause of death. If the Investigating Officer determines that the accident resulted from mere negligence, then Section 304-A of the IPC will apply, and the Factory Manager will have to be arrested. However, if the Investigating Officer concludes that the fatality was due to an accident without negligence, and there are no complaints from the deceased's relatives, then the investigation will proceed under Section 174 of the Cr.P.C.
From India, Kumbakonam
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Manish Anand,
It is shocking to hear that a Safety Officer has been arrested for the loss of lives of four workmen in a tyre company in the State of TN. Firstly, the police have acted in haste and should have delved into details and investigated who the occupier of the factory is under the Factories Act, 1948. Section 2(n) of the Factories Act, 1948, as introduced by the Amending Act of 1987, defines the occupier of a factory as the person who has ultimate control over the affairs of the factory. The Act enumerates that one of the directors is to be the occupier; therefore, any director declared as the "occupier" shall be prosecuted and punished under this Chapter for any offense.
It is the duty of the occupier under the act to ensure the health, safety, and welfare of all the workers while they are at work.
Making the safety officer responsible for the mishap and the resultant death of four workmen is totally unprofessional and unethical. In fact, hundreds of thousands of companies in India do not simply adhere to basic safety norms/guidelines as enumerated in the Factories Act, 1948. Adhering to safety guidelines calls for investments, which factory owners consider as a wastage of money. For such people, money is more important than human lives. What they fail to realize is that the loss of life cannot be compensated by paying a few lakhs of Rupees. After the death of an earning member, the life of his family is thrown into peril forever.
Legislation in India is very effective in holding occupiers responsible for the safety, health, and welfare of the workers, but enforcing agencies lack the "will" to prosecute those responsible for such accidents for reasons best known to all of us. We should have fast-track courts to handle at least such cases where fatal/serious permanent total injuries occur due to unsafe working conditions. Once prosecutions are awarded by fast-track courts, it will instill a sense of fear among the occupiers and encourage the implementation of safety norms in the plant to make lives safe and secure.
In addition to this, safety training/awareness should also be made core fundamental values of every institution, and safety personnel should play a proactive role. I believe safety awareness is crucial, and small measures can make a significant difference.
Regards,
Rakesh Pd Srivastav
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
It is shocking to hear that a Safety Officer has been arrested for the loss of lives of four workmen in a tyre company in the State of TN. Firstly, the police have acted in haste and should have delved into details and investigated who the occupier of the factory is under the Factories Act, 1948. Section 2(n) of the Factories Act, 1948, as introduced by the Amending Act of 1987, defines the occupier of a factory as the person who has ultimate control over the affairs of the factory. The Act enumerates that one of the directors is to be the occupier; therefore, any director declared as the "occupier" shall be prosecuted and punished under this Chapter for any offense.
It is the duty of the occupier under the act to ensure the health, safety, and welfare of all the workers while they are at work.
Making the safety officer responsible for the mishap and the resultant death of four workmen is totally unprofessional and unethical. In fact, hundreds of thousands of companies in India do not simply adhere to basic safety norms/guidelines as enumerated in the Factories Act, 1948. Adhering to safety guidelines calls for investments, which factory owners consider as a wastage of money. For such people, money is more important than human lives. What they fail to realize is that the loss of life cannot be compensated by paying a few lakhs of Rupees. After the death of an earning member, the life of his family is thrown into peril forever.
Legislation in India is very effective in holding occupiers responsible for the safety, health, and welfare of the workers, but enforcing agencies lack the "will" to prosecute those responsible for such accidents for reasons best known to all of us. We should have fast-track courts to handle at least such cases where fatal/serious permanent total injuries occur due to unsafe working conditions. Once prosecutions are awarded by fast-track courts, it will instill a sense of fear among the occupiers and encourage the implementation of safety norms in the plant to make lives safe and secure.
In addition to this, safety training/awareness should also be made core fundamental values of every institution, and safety personnel should play a proactive role. I believe safety awareness is crucial, and small measures can make a significant difference.
Regards,
Rakesh Pd Srivastav
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear All,
If someone should be arrested for this incident, then it has to be the Factory Manager/Occupier because the safety of employees is the prime responsibility of the occupier.
As it is truly said, the Safety Officer is only an advisory body and cannot be arrested and charged. This is really ridiculous, and we all must oppose this.
Regards,
Hansa
From India, Udaipur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If someone should be arrested for this incident, then it has to be the Factory Manager/Occupier because the safety of employees is the prime responsibility of the occupier.
As it is truly said, the Safety Officer is only an advisory body and cannot be arrested and charged. This is really ridiculous, and we all must oppose this.
Regards,
Hansa
From India, Udaipur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Hansa,
I am not in agreement with you because if the advice given by the safety officer is not followed by the execution team, the Safety Officer has to raise the issue to the management level. Even if the management is not following the advice given by the safety officer, then he must continuously remind the safety hazards to the execution team, with an additional line stating that it may endanger the lives of the workers/employees. Even after the reminder, if the execution team/management does not respond, then he can present the same to the police officials and even the court to safeguard himself.
From India, Kumbakonam
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am not in agreement with you because if the advice given by the safety officer is not followed by the execution team, the Safety Officer has to raise the issue to the management level. Even if the management is not following the advice given by the safety officer, then he must continuously remind the safety hazards to the execution team, with an additional line stating that it may endanger the lives of the workers/employees. Even after the reminder, if the execution team/management does not respond, then he can present the same to the police officials and even the court to safeguard himself.
From India, Kumbakonam
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Safety officers have a major responsibility to identify hazardous situations and rectify them. In fact, safety officers must insist on the implementation of observations regarding hazards. If an accident occurs due to negligence, then everyone involved, including the Safety Officer, Factory Manager, and Occupier, will be held responsible.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear All,
As per the Factory Act Section 117, no suit, prosecutions, or other legal proceedings shall lie against a person for anything that is done in good faith or intended to be done under this act. The Safety Officer has been working in good faith under the Act, so the arrest of the Safety Officer would be illegal. The Safety Officer has the right to file an FIR against the arresting body for defamation.
Regards,
B.K. Mishra
From India, Jaipur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
As per the Factory Act Section 117, no suit, prosecutions, or other legal proceedings shall lie against a person for anything that is done in good faith or intended to be done under this act. The Safety Officer has been working in good faith under the Act, so the arrest of the Safety Officer would be illegal. The Safety Officer has the right to file an FIR against the arresting body for defamation.
Regards,
B.K. Mishra
From India, Jaipur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear All,
I feel that if such practices continue, no one will ever dare to become a safety officer. They work for good reasons, and FIRs are filed against them, making them feel guilty and criminal. A person who has never entered a police station, and who works to prevent accidents, has to face criminal proceedings for a death due to negligence that is not actually his.
One question comes to mind: if one person dies in a road accident (not in a factory), and if proper speed breakers were in place, it could have been prevented. If proper sign boards like "sharp turn ahead" were in place, it could have been prevented. If the person was wearing a safety helmet, he may not have died. Now, who will the police file an FIR against?
1. The government that installed speed breakers after the accident?
2. The government that displayed the signboard after the accident?
3. The traffic police/RTO who did not catch him for not wearing a helmet?
The safety officer reports to the factory manager. His duty is to investigate the accident and advise management on various preventive measures to avoid further accidents or change procedures if necessary. External agencies like the police should not question the safety officer; they should always question the Senior General Manager or any other higher authority persons nominated in the factory and investigate the accident properly. If management holds the safety officer responsible, the safety officer should provide all his records to the police, such as advice given to management that was not followed or was taken lightly.
I strongly believe that strong legal rules should be established to safeguard all safety officers working to prevent accidents who are not considered gods.
Regards,
Aquadefonte
From India, Mormugao
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I feel that if such practices continue, no one will ever dare to become a safety officer. They work for good reasons, and FIRs are filed against them, making them feel guilty and criminal. A person who has never entered a police station, and who works to prevent accidents, has to face criminal proceedings for a death due to negligence that is not actually his.
One question comes to mind: if one person dies in a road accident (not in a factory), and if proper speed breakers were in place, it could have been prevented. If proper sign boards like "sharp turn ahead" were in place, it could have been prevented. If the person was wearing a safety helmet, he may not have died. Now, who will the police file an FIR against?
1. The government that installed speed breakers after the accident?
2. The government that displayed the signboard after the accident?
3. The traffic police/RTO who did not catch him for not wearing a helmet?
The safety officer reports to the factory manager. His duty is to investigate the accident and advise management on various preventive measures to avoid further accidents or change procedures if necessary. External agencies like the police should not question the safety officer; they should always question the Senior General Manager or any other higher authority persons nominated in the factory and investigate the accident properly. If management holds the safety officer responsible, the safety officer should provide all his records to the police, such as advice given to management that was not followed or was taken lightly.
I strongly believe that strong legal rules should be established to safeguard all safety officers working to prevent accidents who are not considered gods.
Regards,
Aquadefonte
From India, Mormugao
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Engage with peers to discuss and resolve work and business challenges collaboratively - share and document your knowledge. Our AI-powered platform, features real-time fact-checking, peer reviews, and an extensive historical knowledge base. - Join & Be Part Of Our Community.
What your Safety Officer wanted.pdf