Whether reporters of the Local Papers are allowed to see the judgment? IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA. Regular Second Appeal No. 622 of 2008. Decided on: July 22, 2010. Jaiso Ram and others. …… Appellants. Versus Mrs. Guro and others. …….Respondents. Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, J. Whether approved for reporting? For the appellants : Mr. Neel Kamal Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Rakesh Jaswal, Advocate, for respondents No.1 to 4. Mr.J.S. Rana, Asstt.A.G., for respondents No.5 and 9. Mr. Trilok Jamwal, Advocate, for respondents No.6 to 8. Mr. Praneet Gupta, Advocate, for respondent No.10. Surinder Singh, J (oral). Having failed in both the courts below, the defendants-appellants have filed the instant appeal. 2. Heard and gone through the record for the purpose of admission. 3. Precisely, the facts can be stated thus. Deceased Sant Ram, husband of the respondent Smt. Guro was a village Chowkidar and having licence for - 2 - fishing through cast-net. He was also involved in the business of fishing in a particular area near his village. From this avocation, he was earning Rs.4,000/- per month and in addition to that he was also getting money from the Gram Panchayat being Chowkidar and besides that he was also doing the agricultural work. Thus, his income was Rs.6,000/- per month from all the sources. 4. On 21.5.2001, during day time around 1.30 p.m., he went for fishing in Sangera Nullah. At that time, respondents Lal Chand and Binder were also fishing in the said Nullah nearby. Appellant Jaiso Ram, Deso, Sobhia and Mohammed Guljar were also found present by the side of the Nullah. They had put live electric current wire in the water of the Nullah for fishing from an electric pole near the house of Kasam Gujjar. This fact was not known to Sant Ram aforesaid, but he continued to fishing in the said Nullah while Lal Chand and Binder were on the other side of the water. It is alleged that Sant Ram went on putting the cast-net in the water. He got electrocuted in the water and died on the spot. On hearing his screams, Lal Chand and Binder came out of the water from the other side and found Sant Ram was dead. Jaiso Ram, - 3 - Deso, Sobhia and Mohammed Guljar made an escape from the spot. 5. The matter was reported to the police, pursuant to which FIR was registered on the same day under Section 336 and 304 of the Indian Penal Code. Post- mortem of the dead body was got conducted and it was opined that he was died due to sudden cardio- respiratory arrest due to electrocution. It is alleged that the Electricity Department was found to be negligent in checking the service lines against theft, as such, the Electricity Department was also made a party. Thus, a suit was filed to claim the damages to the tune of Rs.3,50,000/- by his widow Smt. Guro and his sons. 6. The defendants-respondents denied the allegations and also the earning of the deceased, as alleged. 7. The parties were at issue. Learned trial Court found the complicity of the said defendants and decreed the suit for Rs.1,72,800/- against Jaiso Ram, Deso, Sobhia and Mohammed Guljar jointly and severely, whereas it was dismissed against the other defendants. 8. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied against the impugned judgment and decree passed by the learned - 4 - trial Court, they filed an appeal before the learned District Judge. On reappraising the evidence, the first appellate Court held that there was enough evidence to establish that the death of Sant Ram was due to electric shock on account of putting the live electric wire into the water for fishing by the appellants, as such, finding the damages awarded by the learned trial Court to be reasonable, dismissed the appeal, against which the present appeal has been filed by Jaiso Ram, Sobhia, Mohammed Guljar and also the legal representatives of Deso, who had died during the pendency of the appeal. 9. There are concurrent findings of facts against the appellants. Though the defendants-appellants were acquitted from the criminal charge, yet statement of the eye witnesses PW6 Lal Chand and PW7 Binder, are unequivocal and unassailable. They have testified that the live electric wire was hooked with the electric pole besides the house of one Meer Hassan. They categorically stated that the said defendants were fishing illegally in the water of Sangera Nullah by means of live electric current. The defendants aforesaid were also found present and on seeing the incident, they fled away and the live wire was disconnected by PW6 Lal Chand. - 5 - The earning of the deceased stood proved by the statement of the witnesses. The damages were rightly assessed. I do not find that the concurrent findings arrived at by the courts below dehors the evidence on record. Therefore, no substantial question of law is involved in the instant case, which requires determination in appeal, as such, the appeal is dismissed in liminie. 10. All pending applications, if any, are also dismissed. (Surinder Singh ) Judge July 22, 2010. (Pds) - 6 -