The principle of strict liability applies to cases involving hazardous activities such as the transmission of electric energy, placing the onus on the authority to prove that all safety measures were taken to avoid harm to others.

Allowing the respondents Claim of compensation for death of their son Romesh Kumar, aged 12 years, a learned Single Judge of this Court, di­rected the State Government and its functionaries in the Power Develop­ment Department to pay them Rs. 2, 05, 000/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum.

2. Aggrieved by the judgment and order passed on the respondents Writ Petition OWP No. 118/2003, the State has filed this Appeal questioning the judgment and order dated 15.10.2009 of the Writ Court. The respondents Claim for compensation for the death of their son by electrocution was based on the plea that the wooden pole erected by the Power Development De­partment in respondent No. 2s fathers land on which a live electric wire stood tied, tilted reducing the height of the live wire from the ground with which the 12 years old son of the respondents came in contact while he was in the fields along with his maternal grand father. The maternal grand father, who tried to rescue him, too got electro­cuted. The respondents Claim was con­tested by the State Government, inter alia, on the ground that the function­aries of the Power Development Depart­ment, who were prosecuted by the State Government for their negligence in not maintaining the electric wire as a re­sult whereof the respondents son had died, having been acquitted by the Criminal Court, the State Government was not liable to compensate the re­spondents for the death of their son, in that, the death had taken place be­cause of the negligence of the deceased in fiddling with the electric wire. It was additionally urged by the State Govern­ment that the Writ Petition raising dis­puted questions of fact was not main­tainable, in that, the respondents Claim could be considered for its allow­ance only on proof of facts which course was stated impermissible in exercise of jurisdiction of Judicial Review. We have heard learned counsel for the par­ties, considered their submissions and perused the writ records. The appellant's plea that the respondent's son died because of his own negligence, has been dealt with exhaustively by the learned Single Judge giving cogent rea­sons in not accepting the appellant's plea attributing respondent's sons death to his own negligence.

3. The learned Single Judge allowed the Writ Petition relying on the judg­ment delivered by this Court in Mushtaq Ahmed and others v. State of J&K and others reported as AIR 2009 J&K 29, where while dealing with the issue of strict liability, the Court held as follows:-

"14. Any act or omission of the State and its functionaries which takes away the life or otherwise impairs or injures it, would, in my opinion, amount to violation of such persons fundamental right to Life and Liberty flowing from Article 21 of the Consti­tution of India. Engaged in a hazard­ous and inherently dangerous activ­ity of supplying electric energy, which if left uncontrolled would take away life or impair and injure it, the State cannot thus be heard to say that the victim aggrieved by the after effects of such discharge of electric energy, will be disentitled to invoke the writ jurisdiction of the Court to seek com­pensation. Therefore, determination whereof may not require decision on any complicated and disputed ques­tions of fact".

4. The view taken by the learned Single Judge that there was no merit in the appellants plea that the wooden pole had not tilted reducing the height of the live electric wire from the ground level, is well reasoned. Even otherwise, the appellants have not placed any material on records to support their plea that the pole had not tilted reduc­ing the live electric wire tied there­with. Be that as it may, the fact of 12 years old child coming into contact with the electric wire without there being any allegation of his climbing the pole while working in the fields, speaks eloquently of States failure to take req­uisite measures in keeping the elec­tric wire at requisite height so that no human being comes