Karnataka High Court allows probe in Ola Electric employee suicide case to continue

The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday allowed police to continue their investigation into the alleged suicide of Ola Electric employee Aravind Kannan, rejecting the company’s plea to quash the FIR registered against its senior executives.The FIR, filed under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), names Ola Electric’s CEO Bhavish Aggarwal, co-founder, and a senior executive. The case stems from the death of Aravind Kannan, a software engineer with the company, who was found dead at his Bengaluru residence in September, this year. Police had initially registered an Unnatural Death Report (UDR) under Section 174 of the CrPC before later converting it into a case under Section 108 of the BNS following a complaint from his family alleging workplace harassment.Appearing for the petitioners, Senior Advocate M.S. Shyamsundar argued that once a UDR had been registered and an investigation was underway, a second FIR on the same incident was not maintainable.“An employee of a conglomerate commits suicide, it is not a homicidal death. After the suicide, a UDR case was registered, and the company has remitted all dues to the deceased,” he submitted.He contended that the company, a publicly listed entity, was facing reputational and financial damage due to the FIR and the complainant’s statements in the media.“My share prices are dropping. There’s so much on social media, everyone is saying there’s a toxic culture at Ola, and my employees are leaving,” Shyamsundar told the court.Advocate Prasanna Kumar, representing the complainant, said that the complaint warrants a full investigation. He alleged that the company’s internal culture had created pressure that contributed to the tragedy, remarking that “the company is worse than the East India Company.”The Bench questioned whether a second FIR could be filed while a UDR was still pending. “Show me any judgment which says that if there is a UDR, another FIR cannot be registered,” the court asked.Explaining the distinction, the judge noted that a UDR is filed when the cause of death is initially unclear. However, if fresh evidence, such as a death note or allegations suggesting abetment, emerges, the police are empowered to register a new FIR for further investigation.“Because of the death note, police have to conduct an investigation, otherwise,” the court observed.The High Court has directed Ola Electric and its executives to cooperate with the ongoing investigation, making it clear that the police could continue probing the case under Section 108 BNS. The matter has been listed for further hearing on November 17.According to the complaint filed by Aravind’s brother, the 38-year-old engineer had faced sustained workplace pressure and mental stress while employed in Ola Electric’s Homologation and Regulation Division. After his death, police reportedly recovered a 28-page handwritten note allegedly describing professional humiliation, withheld dues, and distress caused by senior officials.Following the FIR, the company’s senior leadership, including Bhavish Aggarwal, moved the High Court seeking to quash the case and protect the petitioners from police harassment. Earlier, the court granted a protective order, directing Bengaluru Police not to harass or arrest the executives during the investigation. The court, however, made it clear that the probe itself would continue.

Source link