Mamta vs Union of India - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 3064

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(P&H) 3064

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ
Mamta – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Rishav Jain, Advocate with Mr. Kanish Jindal, Advocate; For the Petitioner
Mr. Sudhir Nar, Senior Panel Counsel for Respondent No.1-Union of India.
Mr. Birinder Pal, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
Mr. Simran Bhardwaj, Advocate for Mr. Aman Kashyap, Advocate for Respondents No.3 and 4.
Mr. Sarthak Soni, Advocate for Mr. Sanjeev Soni, Advocate for Respondent No.

Table of Content
1. death caused by negligence due to unsafe road conditions. (Para 1 , 2)
2. contentions regarding safety responsibilities of the executing agency. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
3. court emphasizes state liability for public safety lapses. (Para 8 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
4. compensation awarded based on established violation of rights under article 21. (Para 9)
5. order to pay interim compensation due to negligence. (Para 19)

JUDGMENT

Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J. (Oral)

The petitioner prays for issuance of direction to the respondents to grant compensation to the tune of Rs. 50 lakhs on account of death of her son-Himanshu Gupta.

2. Briefly summarized the facts of the present case are that Himanshu Gupta (since deceased son of the petitioner) aged about 26 years died of falling in a pit dug by respondents No.4 along laning project, on the intervening night of 11.06.2016 at about 9: 30 p.m. while going to Rajpura on his motorcycle bearing registration No.PB-24-B-5370 in connection with some domestic work. The said accident occurred within the jurisdiction of Police Station, Gandiyan, District Patiala and DDR No. 015 dated 12.06.2016 was registered in this regard.