The state is strictly liable for the violation of the fundamental right to life when it fails in its duty of care toward individuals in its custody. In the absence of specific statutory frameworks, courts may apply established judicial formulae to determine just and reasonable monetary compensation for survivors.

Judgment (Per Manish Pitale, J.) :

. A widow and two children of a deceased are petitioners in this petition, seeking compensation from the respondents i.e. the State and its officers, as the deceased, being the husband of the petitioner No.1 died while in the care and custody of the Yerwada Mental Hospital (a State Government run facility), due to a violent attack launched by another patient in the said hospital. According to the petitioners, the State is liable to pay monetary compensation to them as the aforesaid incident would not have occurred, but for the gross negligence exhibited by the State and its officers, while the deceased was in their custody as an inpatient in the Yerwada Mental Hospital.

2. The deceased husband of petitioner No.1 was a real estate agent and he was running his business from an establishment, which was duly licensed under the Shops and Establishment Act, 1948. He was suffering from bouts of schizophrenia, due to which he was undergoing treatment at a hospital in Pune. Thereafter, he was admitted at the Yerwada Mental Hospital, as per medical advice. The petitioner No.1 was informed that her husband would be completely cured within a reasonable period, after treatment at the Yerwada Mental Hospital. Accordingly, the husband of petitioner No.1 was admitted to Yerwada Mental Hospital on 19.11.2013 for treatment.

3. On 21.11.2013, the petitioner No.1 was informed by the respondents that her husband was killed by another inmate in the hospital in the previous night. She was shocked to receive the said news. Further information revealed that during the previous night, another patient in the hospital named Deepak Suravase became violent and assaulted the husband of petitioner No.1, as also another patient. It is an admitted position that the duty attendant found that the said Deepak Suravase was violently hitting the husband of the petitioner No.1 in the observation ward and he was also throttling him. As a consequence of the said violent attack, the husband of petitioner No.1 died. The postmortem report of the said deceased revealed serious injuries to his head and face and the cause of death was recorded as death due to head injury and throttling. The other patient assaulted by the accused Deepak Suravase also died due to head injuries.

4. In this backdrop, the petitioner No.1 was constrained to approach the respondents for further information and details regarding the said incident and the number of attendants and staff on duty when the incident took place. The response of the Public Information Officer of the Yerwada Mental Hospital revealed that sufficient staff was not on duty. It was one of the reasons why the incident took place. The petitioner No.1 also found that there was delay in informing the Police about the incident and that earlier also such incidents had taken place in the Yerwada Mental Hospital. The incident was widely reported in newspapers.

5. In this backdrop, the petitioners filed this writ petition alleging negligence on the part of the respondents and praying for payment of monetary compensation to the tune of Rs.29,30,000/-, terming the death of husband of petitioner No.1 as custodial death, as he was in the care and custody of the respondents-State Authorities.

6. On 03.05.2018, a Division Bench of