IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
C.V. BHASKAR REDDY, J.
Smt. Karolla Jayamma - Petitioner
Versus
Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Chief Secretary, Secretariat at Hyderabad & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 30961 of 2012
Decided On : 12-03-2024
Compensation - Prisoner's Rights - Telangana State Prison Rules, 1979 Rule No. 576(1), Article 21 of the Constitution of India - Summary of Acts and Sections: Telangana State Prison Rules, 1979 Rule No. 576(1), Article 21 of the Constitution of India - The court discussed the responsibility of jail authorities to ensure the safety of prisoners, the fundamental rights of prisoners, and the liability of the State to pay compensation for the death of an inmate. The court referred to various judgments including D. Bhuvan Mohan Patnaik v. State of A.P., AIR 1974 SC 2092, Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration, (1979) 1 SCR 302, State of Andhra Pradesh and others vs. Suramalla Ramulu and others, 1996 (2) ALT 504 = 1996 CriLJ 2854, Challa Ramkonda Reddy v. State of A.P. Rep. by District Collector, Kurnool, AIR 1989 AP 235, Kewal Pati vs. State of U.P. and others, (1995) 3 SCC 600, Sanjay Gupta and others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2022) 7 SCC 203, Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, AIR 2009 SC 3104, National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and others, (2017) 6 SCC 680.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought compensation for the death of her husband in prison due to an attack by a co-prisoner. The prison authorities were accused of negligence, and the petitioner claimed violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prison authorities were responsible for ensuring the safety of prisoners and that the State was liable to pay compensation for the death of an inmate. The court referred to various judgments and principles to support its decision.
Issues: The issues involved the responsibility of the prison authorities, the fundamental rights of prisoners, and the liability of the State to pay compensation for the death of an inmate.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that prisoners are entitled to fundamental rights, including the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The court also emphasized the responsibility of prison authorities to ensure the safety of inmates and the liability of the State to pay compensation for the death of a prisoner.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to pay compensation of Rs.6,20,000 with interest at the rate of 6% per annum to the petitioner within three months.
ORDER :
This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner, seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in denying the claim of compensation to the Petitioner on account of death of her husband by name Karolla Venkaiah (Prisoner No.6917) in Central Prison at Cherlapally, Rangareddy District, as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and without jurisdiction and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently, prayed this Court to direct the Respondents to award Compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- (Ten Lakhs only) to the Petitioner on account of death of her husband Karolla Venkaiah in Central Prison at Cherlapally, Rangareddy District and for other reliefs.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that she is the wife of Karolla Venkaiah, who was convicted in S.C.No.119 of 2010 by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC), at Medak and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302 r/w 34 IPC. The said Karolla Venkaiah, was admitted in Central Prison, Cherlapally, Ranga Reddy District on 11.05.2012 and was assigned Convict Prisoner No.6917. It is further case of the petitioner that questioning the conviction and sentence awarded in S.C.No.119 of 2010, her husband Karolla Venkaiah preferred Criminal Appeal No.506 of 2012 on the file of this Court. While the said Karolla Venkaiah was undergoing sentence of imprisonment in the prison, on 04.07.2012, the Co-prisoner i.e, Dasari Narsimulu S/o. Ramulu, Convict Prisoner No.9772 attacked the Karolla Venkaiah and other inmates with a sharp object, due to which Karolla Venkaiah, succumbed to injuries while undergoing treatment in Gandhi Hospital at 6:30PM. It is further case of the petitioner that her husband-Karolla Venkaiah died due to the injuries inflicted by the Co-prisoner No.9772 and the incident occurred due to gross negligence of the Jail authorities, who failed to prevent the assailant from possessing the sharp weapon while in custody and due to possession of such object, the Co-prisoner could attack the deceased and other innocent persons resulting in death of her husband-Karolla Venkaiah. It is further case of the petitioner that her husband was an agriculturist and on account of his untimely death, she was put to hardship suffering mentally and financially and that the State is liable to pay compensation under public law remedy for deprivation of life and liberty of the deceased. Therefore, the petitioner prayed this Court to direct the respondents to pay compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- to her on account of death of her husband-Karolla Venkaiah in Central Prison at Cherlapally, Ranga Reddy District.
3. The Respondent No.4, who is working as Superintendent, Central Prison, Cherlapally, has filed counter affidavit on behalf of respondents and stated that the petitioner’s husband-Karolla Venkaiah S/o. Pardesh, (Convict Prisoner No.6917), aged about 55 years, R/o. Kusangi Village, Tekmal Mandal, Medak District, was convicted for the offence under Section 302 r/w 34 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life in S.C.No.119 of 2010 on the file of III Additional District Judge, Medak at Sangareddy on 10.05.2012 and he was admitted in Central Prison, Cherlapally on 11.05.2012 and undergoing the sentence of imprisonment. It is further stated that the Convict Prisoner No.9772 Dasari Narsimulu S/o. Ramulu was shifted to Central Prison, Cherlapally on transfer from District Jail, Nizamabad on 08.07.2012 and he was undergoing sentence of imprisonment for the offences under Sections 307, 498A, 420 IPC and Section 20(B)(1) of NDPS Act. It is further stated that on the morning of 02.07.2012, said Dasari Narsimulu, stolen broken scissors from barber prisoner and secretly kept them in the bushes near his barrack and on 03.07.2012 during the lockup time he took the broken scissors from the hidden place and kept them out
State of Andhra Pradesh and others vs. Suramalla Ramulu and others
Kewal Pati vs. State of U.P. and others
Sanjay Gupta and others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
D. Bhuvan Mohan Patnaik v. State of A.P.
Challa Ramkonda Reddy v. State of A.P. Rep. by District Collector, Kurnool
Prisoners are entitled to fundamental rights, including the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and the State is liable to pay compensation for the death of an inmate.
State authorities are vicariously liable for negligence leading to custodial death, with victims entitled to compensation under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The court affirmed that custodial deaths necessitate compensation reflecting rights violations, applying Motor Vehicle Act standards for calculating damages.
The state is strictly liable for unnatural deaths in custody, necessitating compensation for the victim's family under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the principle of strict liability for the negligence of the police in cases of custodial deaths, emphasizing the fundamental rights of prisoners an....
The State is responsible for tortuous acts of its employees, and the award of compensation against the State is an appropriate remedy for the infringement of fundamental rights under Article 21 of th....
The right to life under Article 21 includes the right to adequate medical treatment for prisoners, and failure to provide such treatment can lead to state liability for compensation.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.