A SUNITHA Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Wife of the deceased, a remand prisoner, who died in the prison, where he was confined following an order of the learned Magistrate to detain him in custody, in relation to Crime No. 234 of 1996, on the file of the Eranial Police Station, Kanyakumari District, as pre-trial prisoner No. 1141/96, has filed the writ petition seeking compensation of a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- for her husband's death, on 22.05.1996, due to fall of a wall of the kitchen inside the jail.

(2.) According to her, on 22.05.1996, at 20.00 hours, a tree fell inside the jail on the wall and due to the defective structure, the wall collapsed and fell on her husband and that he was crushed to death. The deceased was neither negligent nor was the cause for the accident. According to her, the accident had occurred due to the improper maintenance of the Prison, including the wall, which collapsed due to fall of a tree and the petitioner, who lost her husband ought to have been adequately compensated. According to her, though the Government have paid an Exgratia of Rs. 15,000/- from the Hon'Ble Chief Minster Public Relief Fund, the said amount is inadequate, considering the dependency, and unable to maintain her two minor school going children. It is also her contention that due to premature death of her husband at the age of 36 years, she is in inexplicable agony and financial constraint. Though, the petitioner has sent a legal notice dated 22.12.2005, to the respondents to pay a just and reasonable compensation, the same has not been responded and therefore, the petitioner is constrained to prefer this present writ petition for the relief stated supra.

(3.) Taking this Court through the contents of the First Information Report in Crime No. 111 of 1996, dated 22.5.1996, the telegrams addressed to the petitioner by the Superintendent of Central Prison, the Postmortem Certificate and the Government Order in G.O. Ms. No. 910/Public L&O E/97, dated 28.07.1997, by which an Exgratia amount of Rs. 15,000/- was paid under the Hon'ble Chief Minister Public Relief Fund, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that when the death of the petitioner's husband due to the fall of a tree, inside the prison has been admitted by the respondents, they have a duty to pay a just and reasonable compensation to the victim. Placing reliance on the decisions in Central Institute of Fisheries Education v. Janavadi Gen. Kamgar Mazdoor Union and Ors.,2000 AIR(SCW) 491502 , and Tmt. Chellammal alias chellam and Anr. v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors.,2000 2 TLNJ 364, learned Counsel for the petitioner attempted to project a case, as if it was a custodial death and prayed for a direction to the respondents to pay adequate compensation.