Case can be filed against you under section 304A IPC
2) In Emperor v. Omkar Rampratap and another -
1902 BLR (IV) 679, in similar circumstances when some workers died while working in the premises of the contractor, which he had hired, due to the alleged rash and negligent act on the part of the accused persons for which they were charged for offences under Section 304 A IPC, it was observed:
"To impose criminal liability on the accused it is necessary that the death should have been the direct result of a rash and negligent act of the accused and that act must have been the proximate and efficient cause without the intervention of another negligence. It must have been the causa causans; it is not enough that it may have been the causa sine qua non."
3) This judgment is being consistently followed by various High Courts.
4) In State of Maharashtra v. V. Govind Salalsure and others - 1991 (2) Cri. LC 623 where workers were doing the work of repairing the well owned by one of the accused persons, the well collapsed and 13 workers were trapped in debris and died on the spot and about 8 workers received injuries in the incident and the owner of the well was not present at the time of the accident and there was no evidence to show that the work was being carried out with the consent or knowledge of the accused, it was held that merely because large number of persons died the accused could not be punished as there is no presumption in favour of the prosecution that accidental death is caused by rash and negligent act.