MOHANA Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, the Petitioner seeks the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to pay her a compensation amount of Rs. 50,000.00 for the death of her husband on account of the negligence of the staff of the Central Prison at Vellore wherein her husband was detained.

(2.) The Petitioner's husband, late Babu, had been convicted for an offence of murder and was undergoing imprisonment for life in the Central Prison at Vellore. He had a heart attack on 16th March, 1984. The prison authorities sent the Petitioner two telegrams on the same day. Under the first telegram she was informed about the illness of her husband and his hospitalisation. The second telegram informed her of his death. The Petitioner went to Vellore and brought the dead body to Madras and performed the funeral. The Petitioner would say in her affidavit, that on making enquiries subsequently, she came to know from a fellow prison mate of her husband by name Jayakumar (Convict No. 5455) that at about midnight on the night of March 15/16, 1984, Babu complained of severe chest pain and called for assistance from the prison officials, that there was no response from the officials, that seeing the plight of Babu, the fellow prisoners also cried out for help, that even then there was no response and that about two hours later the prison officials came and took him away, but by then he was dead. The Petitioner would then say that the prison officials took the dead body in a taxi to the hospital, that subsequently, an enquiry was conducted by the Revenue Divisional Officer regarding the cause of death of Babu and the matter was covered up. The Petitioner, therefore, charges the prison officials with gross negligence and would allege that but for their wanton negligence her husband would not have died. The Petitioner then goes on to say that by the untimely death of her husband she has become widow at a young age and she and her one year old son are left with no means of livelihood. The Petitioner has calculated the loss of monetary benefit to her on account of the death of her husband at Rs. 50,000.00. It would appear that Babu was a lorry driver earning about Rs. 800.00 a month before his conviction. She has further stated that while in prison Babu had worked in the workshops there and earned some money, but even that amount has not been paid to her. Therefore, the Petitioner wants the court to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the authorities to pay her a compensation of Rs. 50,000.00 besides the amounts earned by her husband for the work done by him while in prison. The claim for compensation is made on the basis that, by allowing her husband to die, the prison officials have violated her right to life guaranteed under Art. 21 of the Constitution.

(3.) When the petition came up for admission, learned Counsel Mr. K.V. Sankaran was told that the proper course of action for the Petitioner is to file a suit in the civil court, and not to file a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution. Mr. Sankaran argued that the remedy by way of a suit is an antiquated measure and that the Petitioner is entitled to seek relief by filing a writ petition under Art. 226. In support of his contention Mr. Sankaran cited two decisions of the Supreme Court in Rudul San Vs. State of Bihar, AIR 1983 SC 1086 and Bandhus Mukti Morcha Vs. Union of India, (1984) 3 SCC 161