AJMERI KHATOON Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the widow of late Jannat Ansari, who has been killed while he was under Police handcuffs in the Court premises, has filed this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the State and its officials to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000,00/- (ten lacs) by way of compensation and/or damages for failure to protect the life of her husband while her husband was in the Court premises under the police handcuffs. Further prayer of the petitioner in this case is for a direction to the respondents to pay monthly compensation at the rate of Rs. 2,000/- for maintenance of the petitioner and for education and maintenance of her minor daughter.

(2.) Admitted fact of this case is that the deceased Jannat Ansari was in judicial custody as an under-trial prisoner in an offence punishable under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. On 14-10-96 late Jannat Ansari was brought by the police under handcuffs from the Sasaram jail to Sasaram Court for his production in the Court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtas when the petitioner under handcuffs along with police personnel reached near the civil Court premises, he was shot by unidentified person which hit on his head, as a result he died immediately in the hospital. F.I.R. was lodged by the brother of the deceased, which was registered as Sasaram Town P.S. case No. 558/96 under Section 302/307/324/34 of the Indian Penal Code including 27 of the Arms Act against five named accused persons. The post mortem examination conducted on 14-10-96 confirms the death due to fire arm injury on the skull. The age of the deceased at the time of occurrence was assessed at 23 years, who died leaving behind the widow-petitioner and one minor daughter aged 20 and 5 years respectively. It is alleged that before taking into custody in the aforesaid criminal case, the petitioner's husband late Jannat Ansari was working at Bombay in a Textile factory at a monthly salary of Rs. 2,500/-. It is further alleged that the petitioner has no landed property and her father Rustam Ali aged about 60 years is not in a position to maintain the petitioner and her minor daughter. It is further alleged that after killing her husband it has become impossible to maintain herself and her minor daughter. In the premises it is alleged that the petitioner has been deprived of the very essence of her and daughter's life because of sudden demise of her husband and having no bread earner in her family and further having absolutely no source of income, it has become extremely difficult for the petitioner to survive her and her daughter any longer. The entire occurrence and the plight of the petitioner were subsequently highlighted in the various newspapers, which is apparent from Annexure-3 to the writ application.

(3.) In this case, a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 4 and 5, namely, Inspector General of Prison, Patna, the Jail Superintendent, district Jail, Sasaram, wherein the mode and manner of the occurrence has not been denied. However, it is staled that the Prison officials namely Inspector General of Prison and/or Jail Superintendent are not, in any way, concerned with the occurrence as the accused late Jannat Ansari was handed over to Sri Mahendra Singh, Assistant Sub Inspector, Incharge of Court Hazat with 1-4 armed guard for production before the Court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge and, as such, they cannot be held responsible for failure to protect the life of late Jannat Ansari. Another counter affidavit has also been filed on behalf of respondent No. 6 Superintendent of Police, Rohtas, Sasaram, wherein he has also not denied the mode and manner of the occurrence except that the police personnel has neither allowed the killer to reach near the deceased nor failed in their duties in protecting the life of the prisoner. It is, however, stated that since the police personnel along with the deceased entered into the campus of the civil Court and because of the great rush in the campus of the civil Court the killer succeeded, in their attempt. According to him, the police personnel has discharged their duties and, as such, cannot be held liable for murder of late Jannat Ansari.