Dano Bai and Others vs Punjab State and Another

M.L. Singhal, J.—Smt. Dano Bai and others are defendants/legal heirs of Munsha Singh. Munsha Singh was electrocuted by contract with the live-wire which was passing over the roof of the house of one Purshottam Lal, s/o Jagannath. Munsha Singh was 35 years old at the time of his death. He was well built and in good health. He was the sole bread-winner of family consisting of his wife, mother, one son and two daughters.

Sudden and untimely death of Mansha Singh has exposed his legal dependents to starvation. Munsha Singh was there in the neighbourhood of the house of Purshottam Lal when the mishap took place. Purshottam Lal fell unconscious due to the touch of electric wire while he was bringing the cot down the roof of his house. Over the roof of his house, 66 K.V. Powerline was passing. Purshottam Lal received the electric shock when the cot, he was bringing down the roof, struck the power line and he fell on the roof of his house. Munsha Singh and one, Buta Ram went upstairs to bring Purshottam Lal down the roof. Munsha Singh went a little forward. With the striking of the cot, the electric wire had gone low and began touching the roof. Munsha Singh came in contact with the electric wire through which the electric current was passing and his clothes caught fire and he died at the spot.

Buta Ram reported the matter to the police. Annexure P/1 is the translated version of the FIR lodged by Buta Ram. As per the rules of Electricity Board, 66 K.V. live-wire should be at a height of 24 feet from the ground level. Its height from the level of the roof of Purshottam Lal''s house was 3-4 feet. Mishap took place because of the violation of the rules laid down by the Punjab Slate Electricity Board. Sixty-six K.V. live-wire was loose and it touched the parapet of the roof. Post-mortem examination of the dead body of Munsha Singh revealed that death occurred due to electrocution.

On these allegations, Smt. Dano Bai and others have knocked the door of this Court through this writ petition, seeking mandamus directing the respondents to pay them compensation to the tune of Rs. eight lakhs with interest at the rate of 18 % per annum on account of the tragic death of Munsha Singh, the sole bread-winner of the family.

Respondent contested this writ petition urging that Purshottam Lal had constructed his house under live-line without obtaining prior permission of the competent authorities. If the mishap took place, it took place not on account of any fault of the Punjab State Electricity Board. Notice was issued to Purshottam Lal dated 11.4.1994 (Annexure R/1) by the Punjab State Electricity Board reminding him that if any loss of life or financial loss resulted due to the unauthorised construction under Tower No. 207 to 208 of 66 K.V. Jalalabad-Fazilka line, he would be personally responsible and the Punjab State Electricity Board would not be responsible for any such loss. SHO, PS Jalalabad was requested to register a case against Purshottam Lal for construction of the house without the permission of Chief Electrical Inspector, Patiala, under rule 82 of the Electricity Rules, 1956. It was urged that Punjab State Electricity Board is not liable to pay compensation to the defendant/heirs of Munsha Singh.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties. In C.W.P. No. 5115 of 1995, Prabhu Dayal v. Union Territory of Chandigarh, through the Administration, Union Territory, Chandigarh and others, a sum of Rs. 50,000/- was awarded as compensation to Prabhu Dayal s/o Tikam Singh because of loss of his only son due to electrocution from broken hanging electric live-wire. In this case, Munsha Singh lost his life because of contact with a hanging loose electric wire. On the parity of reasoning given by the Division Bench of this Court in Prabhu Dayal''s case (supra), the dependants/heirs of Munsha Singh deserve to be compensated. We deem it just and proper to compensate the dependant/legal heirs of Munsha Singh.

Faced with this position, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that Munsha Singh went of his own to the roof of the house of Purshottam Lal and question of compensation to the dependants/heirs of Munsha Singh could have arisen only if Munsha Singh had died due to electrocution by touching of live-wire on the roof of his own house due to the negligence of the Punjab State Electricity Board. In our opinion, this submission made by the learned counsel for the respondents is fallacious. Munsha Singh went to the roof of Purshottam Lal to save him from the jaws" of death due to contact with live electric wire. It was human tings in him which roused" him to rush to the roof of Purshottam Lal to save him from the monster of death.

The Punjab State Electricity Board is a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. Article 12 of the Constitution assures right to life and personal liberty to everyone. Article 21 says that no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to the due procedure established by law. In this case, Munsha Singh was deprived of his life due to the negligence of the Punjab State Electricity Board which allowed 66 K.V. live-wire to pass at a little height from the ground level. In our opinion, Munsha Singh was deprived of his life due to the negligence of the Punjab State Electricity Board and there is infringement of the constitutional guarantee to him. We accordingly allow this writ petition with costs and direct the respondents to pay a sum of Rs. one lakh to the petitioners as compensation. The amount of compensation shall be shared by the petitioners as follows:-

Dano Bai = Rs. 20,000/- Gurmit Singh = Rs. 20,000/- (minor son) Manjit Kaur = Rs. 25,000/- (minor daughter) Kulwant Kaur = Rs. 25,000/- (minor daughter) Krishno Bai = Rs. 10,000/- (mother of the deceased)

The amount of compensation shall be deposited by the Punjab State Electricity Board in the Court of District Judge, Ferozepur. Money pertaining to the share of minors shall be deposited by the District Judge, Ferozepur in some nationalized bank in fixed deposit till they attain majority. Interest accrued on the amount pertaining to the shares of minors shall be disbursed by the District Judge to the minors'' mother if the District Judge feels that disbursement of this amount is necessary for the upkeep and welfare of the minors.

We award Rs. 2000/- as costs to the petitioners.