It is now well settled that violation of fundamental right of any citizen by the State agency could be a cause for award of compensation to the aggrieved person as the State has the obligation to ensure safety of the life and limb of the citizen which is guaranteed under Art. 21 of the Constitution.
In the present case, the limb of the petitioner was grievously injured affecting his peaceful enjoyment of life without any contributory negligence on his part and the State respondents have already admitted that the said injury was caused by firing of the police personnel. It may be also observed that even if it is accidental firing as held by the authorities, it was the responsibility of the police personnel to handle such a deadly weapon in public place with utmost care so as not to cause any injury to any civilian without any just cause.
Writ Petition(C) No. 130/2009
Print Page
In the present case, the limb of the petitioner was grievously injured affecting his peaceful enjoyment of life without any contributory negligence on his part and the State respondents have already admitted that the said injury was caused by firing of the police personnel. It may be also observed that even if it is accidental firing as held by the authorities, it was the responsibility of the police personnel to handle such a deadly weapon in public place with utmost care so as not to cause any injury to any civilian without any just cause.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL
Decided On: 31.07.2014
Appellants: Thokchom Ranjit Singh
Vs.
Respondent: The State of Manipur
Vs.
Respondent: The State of Manipur
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:N. Kotiswar Singh , J.
Citation;AIR 2015(NOC)382 Manipur
1. Heard Mr. M. Rakesh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Shyam Sharma, learned GA for the State respondents.
2. By this writ petition, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking for a direction to the respondents to pay compensation and also for prosecution of the Manipur Police Commando personnel who were responsible for causing bullet injury to the petitioner by fire arm on his right thigh on 14.5.2008.
3. According to the petitioner, the petitioner who was a student of M.Sc. (Chemistry), Second Semester of Manipur University, Canchipur while travelling along with a friend on a scooter at Imphal-Kongba Road, on 14.5.2008 came across a Manipur Police Commando team near Standard College gate at about 4:30 p.m. As they passed by the police team, they were asked to stop and they were subjected to body search. However, at the time of body search there were heated arguments and thereafter the petitioner and his friend were assaulted by the police. Thereafter, the petitioner and his friend were asked to proceed to the Maruti Gypsy of the said police team and while they were trying to get inside the vehicle, one Commando personnel fired one bullet from his service AK 47 Rifle on the right thigh of the petitioner. As he was grievously injured, he was evacuated to the Jawaharlal Nehru Hospital, Porompat for treatment, and considering the seriousness of the injury received by the petitioner, he was referred to the Shija Hospital and Research Institute, Langol for further treatment. He was accordingly treated in the said hospital. In the process he spent more than 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) at the said hospital. Thereafter, he underwent further treatment at Raj Polyclinic, where he had to incur further expenses. According to the petitioner, the said bullet injury had caused not only physical trauma but also mental trauma to the petitioner and has prevented him from undertaking any strenuous work.
4. It has been submitted that subsequently the petitioner came to know that a case being FIR 54(5) 08 IBG P.S. U/S. 307/326/353 IPC and 27 A. Act was registered against unknown persons. The petitioner also came to know subsequently that on 17.05.2008 one Police Commando personnel namely Khumukcham Oken Singh who had fired from his AK 47 Rifle to the petitioner was arrested and was remanded to the police custody and thereafter to judicial custody in connection with the said case.
5. Mr. M. Rakesh, learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the learned CJM, Imphal had made an observation in the remand order dated 19.05.2008 that it could not have been an accidental fire as a rifle can not be fired without unlocking the safety case lock. Since the occurrence took after a heated argument, the learned CJM did not consider it to be a case of accidental fire and accordingly remanded the said commando personnel to judicial custody.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner had incurred more than 2 (two) lakhs of rupees in the process of undergoing treatment and accordingly has approached this Court seeking a compensation amount of Rs. 2 lakhs and for appropriate action against the police personnel.
7. The State respondents have filed their affidavit-in-opposition. Though the firing accident which occurred on 14.5.2008 causing injury to the body of the petitioner had not been denied, it has been stated that the same was an accidental fire and was not intentional.
8. Learned GA has submitted at the time of hearing that the investigation of the aforesaid FIR Case No. 54(5) 08 IBG P.S. has now been closed and final report was submitted to the concerned Court which had been accepted, in which it has been stated that the fire was due to accident without any intention on the part of the Police personnel to shoot. Be that as it may, this Court is not concerned with the criminal liability of the individual but with the constitutional liability of the State, in as much as it had already been admitted by the concerned authority that the firing had occurred on 14.5.2008 at the instance of the police personnel which had caused injury to the petitioner. It is now well settled that violation of fundamental right of any citizen by the State agency could be a cause for award of compensation to the aggrieved person as the State has the obligation to ensure safety of the life and limb of the citizen which is guaranteed under Art. 21 of the Constitution.
9. In the present case, the limb of the petitioner was grievously injured affecting his peaceful enjoyment of life without any contributory negligence on his part and the State respondents have already admitted that the said injury was caused by firing of the police personnel. It may be also observed that even if it is accidental firing as held by the authorities, it was the responsibility of the police personnel to handle such a deadly weapon in public place with utmost care so as not to cause any injury to any civilian without any just cause.
10. Accordingly, having heard the learned counsel for the parties, and also on perusal of the materials on record, this Court is of the view that it would be just and fair that an amount of Rs. 50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand) be imposed on the State respondents to be paid to the petitioner for the injury received by the petitioner and for causing bodily injury which caused physical and mental trauma as a palliative measure. It is for the petitioner to approach the competent Civil Court, if interested in claiming higher compensation amount, as this amount is being awarded to the petitioner on the basis of Public Law remedy.
11. The aforesaid amount of Rs. 50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand) only shall be paid to the petitioner by the State respondents within a period of 4 (four) months from today.
12. As it has been submitted that the gun fire was accidental, this Court does not deem it fit to pass any other order as regards the second relief claimed in the writ petition.
13. With the above observation and direction, the present writ petition stands allowed.
No comments:
Post a Comment