Sufficient and clear warning is to be issued before ordering fire.

V. Dhanapalan, J.

1. The above Writ Appeal has been directed against the order of a learned single Judge of this Court made in W.P. No. 18219 of 2004 in and by which the learned single Judge has allowed the Writ Petition holding that the petitioner is entitled to a compensation of Rs.3 lakhs in addition to a sum of Rs.50,000 paid already.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to in the manner as they were arrayed in the Writ Petition.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that she is the wife of one Sekar who was killed in the police firing on 12.7.1993 at about 7:15 p.m. within the limits of Mecheri Police Station, Salem District. According to her, her husband was running a tailor shop near the police station in Dharmapuri main Road, Mecheri, Salem District and was earning Rs.3,000 per mensem. He was the only bread winner of the family consisting of the petitioner, his mother and two children. It is her specific case that her husband was killed by indiscriminate firing by the police without resorting to any procedure contemplated and due to the police excess. In such circumstances, she has approached this Court by filing a Writ Petition seeking a direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to pay Rs.3 lakhs towards compensation for the death of her husband.

4. The above said claim has been resisted by the respondents by filing a counter stating that on 12.7.1993, at about 1:30 p.m., one person by name Kannan was murdered in which one Allimuthu was suspected to be an accused and therefore, there was a demand for the arrest of the said Allimuthu by a group of persons numbering 1000 who assembled in front of Meclieri Police Station on the same day at about 5:30 p.m. The said persons who had assembled there were having cycle chain, crow-bar stones and bricks in their hands and shouted slogans against the police and conducted a dharna in front of the police station to arrest the said Allimuthu. In that situation, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mettur (DSP) and the Revenue Divisional Officer, Mettur (RDO) accompanied by other revenue officials, pacified the group of persons and assured them that the said Allimuthu, will be arrested. At that time, the situation was aggravated by a gathering of more crowd numbering 2000 persons who continued their unlawful activities till 7.30 p.m. by causing trouble to the public and the traffic was also obstructed by them by putting stones and other materials in the road. The entire traffic and movement of public were paralysed in the main trunk road to Bavani Town to Dharmapuri Town. The attempt made by the RDO and DSP to pacify the crowd proved futile and the mob started attacking the police personnel and caused damage to the public property in the police station and also attempted to damage the jeep belonging to the police department. The police personnel protected the Revenue Divisional Officer and took him inside the police station and closed the door. In view of the lesser number of police personnel available in the police station, the mob was warned and even then, the mob did not stop its violent activities and started throwing soda bottles and damaged the motor cycle belonging to one of the police officers. Therefore, the RDO ordered police firing.

5. According to the respondents, the deceased was one of the members of the unlawful assembly and he was killed in the police firing and the said firing was ordered only to save the lives of the police personnel and the revenue authorities including the RDO from the hands of the unlawful gathering and by way of self defence. It is also the case of the respondents that there were only very few police personnel available at the time of occurrence and there was no possibility of dispersing the high crowd of 2000 by lathi charge who indulged in vandalism and hence, the firing order was given. In short, the respondents defended the police firing and contended that the petitioner is not entitled to the compensation as claimed by h