SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Gau) 873

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH, KOHIMA BENCH
YARENJUNGLA LONGKUMER, J.
Tsufuchu And Ors. S/o T. Yeteli - Appellant
Vs.
The Union Of India And Ors. - Respondent
W.P.(Crl.) No.3 of 2024
Decided On : 19-05-2026

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Ms. Neiteo Koza
For the Respondent: Mr. Yangerwati, CGC, Mr. L.T. Sangtam Addl. AG

The High Court may award monetary compensation under Article 226 for fundamental rights violations. This public law relief, based on strict liability, is distinct from private tort litigation, and neither sovereign immunity nor prior administrative ex gratia payments bar judicial intervention for ensuring compensatory justice to victims.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14, 15, 19, 21, and 226 - Violation of fundamental rights - Right to life and personal liberty - Compensation in public law jurisdiction - Principles of strict liability.

(B) Public law remedies for fundamental rights violations - Claim for compensation for tortious acts by state agents - Sovereign immunity not applicable as a defense - Administrative ex gratia payments or recommendations by quasi-judicial bodies do not preclude the Court from granting just and fair compensation in writ jurisdiction - (Paras 15, 17, 19).

Facts of the case:
Victim families sought compensation for the killing of two minors and permanent injury to another survivor caused by the indiscriminate firing of security personnel. A judicial inquiry established that the firing was unjustified and resulted from the failure of command and control by the personnel involved.

Findings of Court:
The Court determined that the incident constituted a clear infringement of the fundamental right to life. Highlighting the state's vicarious liability and strict liability for violations of constitutional guarantees, the Court held that the victims were entitled to relief.

Issues: Whether the High Court is empowered to award compensation for fundamental rights violations in a writ petition and if such relief is barred by the existence of alternative civil remedies or previous ex gratia payments.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that compensation under public law is an essential constitutional remedy to protect the right to life. The state is accountable for the actions of its agents, and this specialized jurisdiction cannot be restricted by parallel remedies, nor does the doctrine of sovereign immunity shield against constitutional accountability.

Result: Petition disposed of with a direction for payment of compensation to the victims.

Table of Content
1. procedural context and factual background of the incident. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. parties' contentions regarding incident details, compensation, and procedural objections. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
3. court's findings on the facts and the responsibility of state actors. (Para 13 , 14)
4. public law doctrine of strict liability for fundamental rights violations. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)
5. final order granting compensation for constitutional violations. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)

JUDGEMENT AND ORDER :

YARENJUNGLA LONGKUMER, J.

The instant writ petition has been filed by the 3 (three) petitioners with the following prayers:-

i) to direct the Respondents that 1(one) family member of each petitioner no. 1,2 and 3 be given employment in the government service within the State or Central Department.

ii) Pass an order of monetary amends as a mode of redressal by ordering the Respondents to pay compensation amount of Rs.50 lakhs (Rupees fifty lakhs) each in favour of petitioner No. 1 and 2 who are the biological brothers of deceased Aso and Tüzali for flagrant infringement of Article 21, 14 and 15 of the Constitution; for depriving them of their right to life and for failing to secure their rights by the Respondents keeping in mind the mental trauma and irreparable loss incurred to the family consequent upon their unjustified killing.

iii) Pass an order of monetary amends as a mode of redressal by ordering the Respondents to pay compensation amount of Rs.50 lakhs (Rupees fifty lakhs) in favour of petitioner No.3 for the permanent injury inflicted upon her and for preventing her from enjoying her fundamental rights under Article 14, 15, 19 and 21 guaranteed by the Constitution due to the act of omission and commission by the Respondents.

2. The facts of the instant case is that on 15.07.2015, a patrolling unit of 12 Para Commandoes (SF) and 46 Assam Rifles was engaged in a shootout with NSCN (K), one of the insurgency groups in Nagaland. This incident took place in Avangkhu Village, Meluri Sub-Division, Phek District. In the shootout two (2) cadres of the NSCN-(K) were killed one of them being from Wuzu village. On the next date i.e., 16.07.2015 the villagers of Wuzu village gathered at Wuzu village to request Major Surinder Singh of the 46 Assam Rifles to handover the mortal remains of one of the slain NSCN (K) cadre who hailed from their village in order to give him a proper burial as per the customary practices of the Nagas.

3. While the villagers were pleading with Major Surinder Singh, a blank fire was fired by the occupant of the Gypsy vehicle of the Army convoy which was immediately followed by indiscriminate firing upon the innocent villagers by the occupants of the fourth and fifth vehicles in the Convoy of the 46 Assam Rifles /12 Para Commandos(SF). The spot where the firing took place was outside the residence of one Shri Yichuli. The firing lasted for 20 minutes and the convoy fled away thereafter towards their camp at Akhegwo.

4. In the indiscriminate firing by the 46 Assam Rifles and 12 Para Commandos (SF), under the Respondent Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6 and 8, Miss Aso, aged 13 years, and Mr. Tüzali, aged 14 years were killed and the petitioner No. 3 was injured in her right arm.

5. The petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are the brothers of the two (2) children, Ms Aso, aged 13 years, and Mr. Tüzali, aged 14 years who were killed and the petitioner No. 3 is a survivor of the incident who has been permanently disabled for life as the injuries sustained from the bullets caused permanent injury.

6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners Ms. Neiteo Koza, Mr. Yangerwati, learned CGC for respondents 1, 2, 5, 6 & 8 and Mr. L.T. Sangtam learned Addl AG for the respondents 3, 4, and 7.

7. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the 2 (two) Children who were killed, were outstanding students, and obedient and sincere children. However, their lives have been cut short by the arbitrary firing and unjustified

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top