<^^P111!^ !^^!nr Kaffii5SHE®IGH CQURT OE JUDCtCATURE ArF..BIIASPUR(CHHATTISGARH) WRI-E PETITIQN N0. EErmER.saRTIClE OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PETITIGNER DongargarK District Rajnaridgaon (Chhattisgarh) Harvinciar Budhawari Donga.rhgarl-i District Raj nandgaon Chhattisgarh ChhattisgarS RESPONDENTS Secretary Depa.c.tment Chhattisgarh SeG'reta.cy Departinent PARTICUIARS PETITIONERS detailed PflRTICUIARS RESPONDENTS cause title above A l:^!;";!?lT'i?'!n XI-HC—78 31^1 ^I Rl-il'* "^? STT^T Eft^iqt -/^ l-...;'^ 'a>,; *n*»ni %aNit8» 'ysEf •<ii<(i<3q, s>Ti1y'i6, fqcil'yy __..^..t..j9..a;..6........ ^FI.200 ^_ 311^1 traq? C^fg^l) wwit ^if^i sn^i 01.5.2002 Shri Alok Bakshi, C( Shri Sanjay K. Agr^.wal, Depuly Advocate Qeneral for the State/Respondents.' Heard. ' By tfals writ petitloi) Constitution 6f Indla, appropi-iate wrif, order pr coinpensatlon as awarde< Writ Petition No. 1429/9^ Delhl AdimnistTation the death of each viGfiml 1984 with uiterest '1*---- -----'/ The petitioners further p <<>wf<'l'(t;l ^iIWlf 4 ft^t t(<nt$i< ^siRrasii^r )unsel for-fhe petitioners. filed under Article 226/227 of tfae t»etitioners pray for issuance of |direction to the respondents to pay by the Delhi High Gourt in CivU tn case of Sriit.Bfaajan Kaiir Vs. in 1996 fflAD (Delhl) 333 for lin anti-Sikh Riots ocGurred in the repcjrted Ithereon from fhe date of incident. i|ay to direct the respondents to give compassionate appouitm^nt to fhe family members of the petltioners, ® XI-HC—78 ^il h-V4l 's^t -^WM^, enly'Ko, [si<niyy Ml^dl WW^"""""""" """"""""""^1.200 —^.' sn^riRq? (ici(a'!«v?) waRiR ^lfBB ail^il (2) Leamed counsel f4r incident took place tn th^ where Shri Harmlt Sui^h aged about 25 yea] petitioner no.l and thc| second one was S^ Stagh, aged about 58 ye^rs, who was husbari no.2. It is submitted Rs.20,000/- was given oi\ the fanulies aad in fhel Thereafter a sum of Rs.5( So far the petitioners Rs.l,00,000/-esagh m.aS.\ Leamed counsel fo( State of Madhya Pradestj that if any of the relativ^ family wants to make to the Pollce and pursu^nt made a report to the poUi <tti*i?<n<<1'l *ff^i?ti "^ 'fe'st ^f ^sfflmsn^i the petitioners Sutj town of Dongargarh that on 15.11.198 Ilave repjsrt (he spot as immedia1|| year 1998 Rs.3000| ),000/- was given. received the coi on account of death ^- the petitioners sutJ in 1998 published d or fainily inemiber o^ ;, then he/she raayj thereto, son of { fce vide Amiexiire P-1 5'7 lits that the ihhattis^irh) i, son of the dar Santosh of petttioner a sum of relief to both '- was pald. pensation of " each victim. lits that the lotice saytng fae aggricved lake areport tltkaier no.l nd annexi.u'e XI-HC—'; sn^iv h-»* ^S^^Pil 75EI ^|<1|CT<4, ^Tlly'IS, [slfll'My *11*ICTI 8»HI^» -A- 3n^lTi^? (yit3«i<i4) WI. 200 P-2 in case of petitio4 petitioners submlts fhat several representationsj enhancement of amourl T no.2. Leamed cd though the petition^ before various ei t of compensation. submitted that petitio|iers have ffled rep^ compassionate appointn|ient vide Annexure| Collector Rajnandgaon h^ (Annexure P-4). (3) Leamed counsel foi| Writ Petition No. 1429 Adminlstration) reported Court directed payment made a general directioti fhat fhis should | similar cases. He has dr Judgment which reads as "Article 21 is the N individual or group of pei nation belongs to Dienibe i!M<lfcWtTt *ii^^t ^? fs^ ^J •^ sito aii^n s refused vlde letter ^K insel for the s had made thorities for It is further sentation for P-3 and the a.ted 6.2.2001 the petitioner submi' of 1996 (Bhajan ^ in 1996 AIHC 5644, tf Rs.2 lakhs with m1 |wn attentlon to par^ iinder: |ati^a's comimtment ^ons withui its prote^ hs of aU. the comiaunl i that in Civil UT -v- Delhi ic DeUu High rest and also ypty to ofher 10 of the said 3 bring every ivefbld. This ics. They are XI-HC—'; an^rw R.ficii i^T S^^I'ti 7=[ •<<i<<i<'i^, a-al-M'is, (°«ti'Mli,< -4- sn^i'q^? cyf^^ti) ^ *~-.l equal members of the equal protection of law^ the Constitution to tl) discredited. The condu< Inidian has to be controlled lt>y the State for the enshnned in Article 21 the State to create a d[Umate where fhe cle^ members ofthesociety b| creed are eradicated. TIke State m.ust act ia tii precious Uves of the pec|ple are not destroyed Otherwise, article 21 wi^ remain a paper guar. long overdue for adoptu|ig measures that hav hortatory effect m eufo]} The State cannot adopt prevention, the State in^ist take every precaij and initiative to preven) represented by 1984 riotj riot it must act swiffly precious time to slip by part can result in los uidivlduals aoiounting of the Consfitution. Tbe State has to enfd staadards of civilized bel ctti^<'1*i1l *ii*i?1! "^f 'fe1^ Tf| ^sifinsii^r Society, Equalityl is ensured to them N em. None is to N t of anv person or gr( f the Constitution. H longing to different fa) ;ing Article 21 of th^ ^ "do nothing attidue^ terrorem populi of and in the event of to curb the same as any inaction or p of precious Itfe arj J3 violation and negati<] liaviour of its citizens ^. efore law and Article 14 of favoured or ip of persons pfty purpose s the diity of rage befrween hs, casteand ic so that fhe r threatened. itee. Time is morc than a Constitution. LUce disease lon, measure |e magnitude out-break of id not allow ssiyity on its [ Uberty of LbfArticle21 ce muum.um that fhe life, ® XI-HC—78 w Ks'ti* sii^i •anw ^sf "41'i(l<yi4, efliy'ie, [sKiK-iy *<!*<CTI WNIth -5- 31I^t'q??T C^f3^P; •^ Uberty, dignity and worthj preserved and is not jeop4rdized or endangere able to do all that then ifl adequate compensation td diirfng riots as his or her [Itfe has been extinguj violation of artlcle 21 of the Constitution whfl that life cannot be take procedure establlshed by aw.' (4) The matter came for Court in case of S.S. Ahlu reported in AIR 2001 S. C. iinder: "In the wake of assas October 31, 1984 there wa and other parts of the November 1984 which uivc committee was constituted this Court whlch made ar kUled in those riots were +i<if<')4l-i •imaf 4^S ^RsffiR 311^1 1 of an iiidividual is | cannot escape the U| the family of the {j 1 away except acco| (Emphasi consideration before ualia -v- Union ofSi i?K 309 wheretn it has t| otected and If it is not oUity to pay rsons kiUed hed to clear 1 mandates iing to the supplied) he Supreme i and others sn noted as s|sinatk>n of Smt. Indi| ^e several kiUings of S Coutitry betwreen Octobe^ ipved arson, kioting ajj [headed by Justice I^ inqulry and report^ ^874 in Delhi, 127 ul L Gandhl on fchs tn DeUu 31, 1984 tiU t uiUTder. A 4. Mishra of that Sikhs Kanpiir aad XI-HC—78 '^ST '*ii*ti<-i<<, ©•al'M'Ko,faoi'Hy *1!*<CTI WtNieft •^ sn^fsrfriN; WS^^ 3I1^[ 'tR^r ('yi-l'f'i?) 6- D^Uii killed Coilrt 69 m Bokaro. CivUWi)i Kaur -v- Delfai Admini^ the High Court of dependents of those of Sint. Indira Gandhi Itfe of ;its citizens and thereof. The High 1996 held that in the e^ 21 of the Constitution climate where memberf falths, cast and creed has a duty to protect fh^ individual which should in any circumstance cannot escape the liab4 of the person killed extingulshed in cleat Constitution. The High) a sum of Rs.2 lakhs direction that thls diri) also. Thereafter, thls w( extend the benefit of th) Admiiustration (supra) <:dl'4id4t;4 'W^lf ^f 'fe1^ "^ri ^ sifipr sn^ii ^t Petition No. 142S/199^| ^tratton (1996 AIHC 56^| ^Uii for paying compei| in fhe riots after fhdl ^s fhe State had a duty|| |the State oi^ht to pay| of DeUil by its ordeifl tqianded meaning attrit| it is the duty of the S^i •^ of thfi Society belongil pve together and, fherej i^ir life, liberty, dignity a| (|l npt be jeopardized or ^ State is iiot able to | to pay coiapensatio^! riots as hls or he^i vkilation of ArticM Coiirt, therefore, direcll tnterest and also iij| ^ctk)n should apply to| (rit petitton has been f^ Judgmeat in Bhajan | |to the entire country q tBie liab41ty du|4ng wttfh Utled Bhajan ) was filed in ation to fhe issasstnation o protect the ompensation lated July 5, ted to Article te to create a g to difTerent ire, fhe State d worth of an idangered. If o so, then it to the faiuily Ufe has been 21 of the d payment of ide a general iunUar cases ;d seekuig to aiu- V. Delhl d fbr certain -HC—78 'TSEI '^i<(i<'i<<, ®Tily'ie,fercry *<IHCTI %We|» •WI.200 7 sil^iira^ (li°lf-t«<<ti; ^I (<;•<!<* an^rg^iw other reUefs. It is brought t^ persons kUled ui each ofthe Nos. Kmed 3874 1 3 106 2 120 98 260 9 4473 our notkse that the | .unber of 3tate is as under: State Delhi Rajasthan Orissa Haryana WIule noting the aforesaid co^itents, the Supreme held as under: "Certain claims have beeh peUtion setting out certain f. <M<(^fl<<ll M^??S ^f 1^1E3t Tf ^siRnsii^i ?TC Himachall Bihar M.P. Uttar F'rad Maharashl radesh sh a ^. made in para 13.3 <\ (cts whlch need to bl ourt has this writ verified. -HC—78 31)^1 ^ilWW ^TO ®n^nsi?^t^ -^ST ^|*<H^, ^•dlyid, ^CTi'My *(1*1<11 «>*<iq» "^200 3n^T'q^qi'(' ^teisn^i s- +l<llfl<R;I iWTBf 'il fS<S T\ ^sffinsii^r 5TC After this petition was fil^d notices were issujl Govemment of different Stajtes and they ffled res each one of those cases st^ting the steps that taken by fhem in cases wher^ there had been deatjl kinds ofviolence resiiltmg ui|inji.iries or loss ofpro^l in the nature of the circun^stances of the case, (Ufficult fqr us to extend the|decision of fhek Hig| DeUu in Bhajaa Kaur (supra) ^o all the States withoj a detaUed examuiation of thel circumstances arisiil case. Such exainination canjiot be done by us. Tlt would be appropriate for us to Rajasthan, Orissa, Punjab an direct the High Courtf ^ Haryana, Hunacha} Patna, Madhya Pradesh AUah^bad and Bombay in of Delhi, Rajasthaa, Orissa,] Haryana, Himachal| Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar|Pradesh, MaharashtrJ to deal with the matter in r^spect of the allegatic] herein in respect of the Stat^ faUing in its juris^l treating this writ petition as| a petition filed in Court. These proceedings, th^refore, shall stand to the respective High Coiirts). A copy of the peti) Annexures and response ofthe|respective State Gov^ shall be sent to the High Courtj for appropnate actic^ 1 to the onses in a.ve been or ofher ;rty. But t is very Court of tmaking in each Srefore it ofDeltu, 3radesh, e States "radesh, andGoa is made ;tion by at High isferred on with nmentk T ^ 75ET •<<|-41<yt*l, ®Tlly-i|S,fs|<'ll<H^< <(PICTI a>*iitn WI.200 sn^r 'qsR? (icit3<«i«i) <Hi4<i ^ift'fi* 'TOTOfl^?! »*fiq) Court passed in case ofBhajan (supra) has noted down that tljie order dated July 5th 1996 held ttiat attributed to Article 21 of the (t KOIW ^ftdSII^iI (5) A plam readuig of the Supreme Courtwhile consideru|i the State to create a climate w belonging to different faiths, c |and therefore the State has tljie duty to protect| |liberty, dlgnlty and worth of an| indivldual which t>e jeopardized or endangered s|nd if in such circi)| |fche State is unable to do so, thei|i it cannot escape tl |to pay compensation to the f^mUies of the victj puring riots as his or her life h^s been extingulsh^ Iriolation ofArticle 21 ofthe Cor pourt dlrected payment of a suiji of Rs.2 lakhs wl(| (Vhile noting so, the Supreme <ftt<|I<?f'tit'l ^ITH<?)11 '^3TRpT3TI^i said order showsl ^R?TC g the judgment of Caiir -v- DeUii Adml High Court of D[ In the expande) Sonstitution, it is tl here members of t] iste and creed livt stitution. Therefort Court has directedl that the elhi High dstration Uri by its meantng s duty of s Sociely together heu- life, lould not [istances iliabUity is killed tn clear the High tnterest. [he High GRPRJ—FS/'®.J;/200<.—50,000. .->' T ^ST '<<i<Lii<n<<, «Ti1y'i<s, fqyi'yy *<I*ICTI (B»(ra» •TFI.200 sn^i 'qs^ ('jcii3»<<itt) sii^i ^a ft-ii'* W 4(1^1 9ti<i^> '.\.. ?WP<R tll^fl •afl^W Courts concemed to deal with) the matter in respecj allegations made therein, in re^pect of the State falli| 7 writ jurisdiction by treating that that High Court and thos transferred to the respectiive Hi (6) At this stage, leamed ^t petition as a petitioij ! je proceedmgs sl feh CouTts." counsel for the pej submits that fhe State of M^dhya Pradesh has I organised and on dafe of decifsion of Supreme Cou| 16.3.2001 rendered In case df S.S Ahluwalia (sup| State of Chhattisgarh was alre^dy formed and so f^ victims of the present case 1s ccjncemed, they were re^ State of Chhattisgarh, the^efore, petitioners p| extending the benefit to fhe State of Chhattisgarh as| (7) From the documents on Suigh and Santosh Singh bot]|i had died tn Anti-SU of the ju^gment and certain amoiint was paid t<j) their dependents. ct>l^l^t'ift'1 'ETR?Tf ^f 'feT^ Tt ^ siRin sii^i ^ ofthg g in its Bled in stand tioners en re- dated a), the as fhe Itngtn ly for in Bhajan Kauil supra) it is a welfare Stete. Irecord, it is clear tha GRPRJ—FS/%- y/200(—50,000. iarmit i Riots + J ~3^'<<i<iiM'4, »iily<is,fsicii'yy WHMI fl»*11<t> -II- s^\ TR^ (•jcil3'«»'!?) WI.200 dllSW ^il ft"fi<li wr ^II^T it**ffq> TSIIW TSlftB SII^I (8) Havtng considered the fa|;ts aad ctrcumstanc case and inaterial available consideration the Judgment o^ case of Bhajan Kaur (supra) Court in case of S.S. AhluwaUa dnd opmlon of this Court, it is ju| Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation incident with interest @ 9% p amoiint ah-eady paid to the |from. the date of receipt/prc(duction of a copy tjudgment. |(8) So far as the other n |appointment and other claims bntiUed to make a represen1]ation jAuthority and in case such shaU coi^slder "*s J^M^'7 ^ <M<iifl<il^ 'tfftT?ff "^f 'fyst ^sifin sii^i on record and taU DeUii High Court {| fhe decision of R5R -v- Unlon (supra)| •t and proper that s, be awarded froin thl ^r month after adju| de|pendents, withtn on|i ;liefs regarding cori a|re concemed, petiticj before fhe Cd ^. representation is ^ the same/aiuj •iy , ofthe ig into ssed in Lipreiue m the sum of date of aig the month of this )ensate iers are ipetent ed, the pass a GRPRJ—FS/%— 0/200(—50,000. ^^ '*<WW<i, VSnS\W , ^viWy *ii*«'iia»*iici»""""""""""""""""""""""""'"TR^ZOO - (!/- • • - ' . S^Sl TWT ('j^f^'l'i't) ai^iwfiFita? WT <*Tf<^I 3**fl* TOIIW atei an^r i>i«i(ci<fliwrcif 4 fest <R<I<^I< ^?3ifwi3ii^r (.. ~-).'. \(^j reasoned order within 3 monf^is froin the date of receipt of representation. (8) _ It is made clear that ta respondcats are adverse to fhen they are at Ilberty to appl (9) The State would also victuns, whether any FIR was were brought to. the book in effeGt shall be ffled within 3 ;ase the order passed by the tt^e intcrest of the petitioncrs, afresh. sut(mit rei»rtthat after death of pled and whether any ciilprits tl^is tocident. The report to that months before the Registrar General fpr penjisal tn chambe^-. This petitlon is partly all^wed with the Uberty/dtrection aforesaid. Gertified Photocopy. /" -A Sd/- Fakhruddin Judge !GRPRJ—FS/%-J:./200<.—50,000. i ^ ^ \*)