The court upheld the trial court's finding of negligence by defendants for the electrocution death, emphasizing that civil liability is distinct from criminal acquittal.

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput)

The parties herein would be referred to as per their status before the trial Court.

2.This is the first appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short “CPC”) filed by the appellants/defendants No. 1 to 3 being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 29.04.2011 passed by the Additional District Judge, Gariyaband, District Raipur CG in Civil Suit No. 2-B/2010.

3.Facts of the case in brief are that a civil suit was filed by the respondents/plaintiffs seeking compensation of Rs. 10,00,000/- for the death of one Roop Narayan Sahu (hereinafter referred to as the “deceased”) which took place due to his coming into contact of barbed fencing wire in which electric current was flowing, as a result of which he got electrocuted as the defendants 1 to 3 had taken illegal electric connection from the electric pole of defendant Nos. 4 to 6. The admitted facts are that on report being lodged in the Police Station, Rajim, an offence under Section 304-A IPC and Section 135 of the Electricity Act was registered against defendant Nos. 1 to 3 and the case was presented in the Court of Additional District Judge.

4.As per the pleadings, the plaintiff No.1 is the widow of the deceased, whereas plaintiff Nos. 2 to 4 are his sons. On 24.06.2009 while returning from the field after answering the call of nature by crossing the fencing, he came into contact with the fencing wire in which electric current was passing through. On hearing the cries of the deceased, the people working nearby rushed to the spot and while they tried to shut his eyes, they felt the electric current flowing in his body and then his body was separated from the fencing wire with the help of a plastic pipe, but after some time he breathed his last. It is pleaded that on account of death of Roop Narayan Sahu, there was a great crisis of livelihood before the plaintiffs. It is pleaded that as the defendant Nos. 1 to 3 had taken an illegal electricity connection from the pole owned by defendant Nos. 4 to 6 for testing the motor, the current flowed in the fencing wire and while crossing the fencing the deceased came into contact therewith and died, for which all the defendants are jointly and severely responsible. It is further pleaded that deceased at the relevant time was aged about 30 years and that from the agriculture and paddy thrashing work being done from the thrasher he used to earn Rs. 1,00,000 – 1,50,000/- yearly. Keeping in mind all this, compensation of Rs. 10,00,000/- was claimed by the plaintiffs by filing the suit.

5. Defendant Nos. 1 to 3, barring the admitted facts, have denied all other plaint averments by filing a written statement. It has been pleaded by them, that on account of negligence on the part of defendant Nos. 4 to 6 in erecting the electric pole, and similarly because of the negligence on the part of the plaintiffs and the deceased in taking the electric connection from the pole up to their bore well, the incident involving the death of Roop Narayan Sahu has taken place. It is further pleaded that for this, defendant Nos. 4 to 6 and the plaintiffs themselves are responsible. Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 are stated not to have ever taken the illegal connection for testing their motor, nor were they negligent in any manner whatsoever. According to defendant Nos. 1 to 3, a false case has been foisted on them by the police, and similarly the deceased’s income has also been exaggerated.

6.Defendant Nos. 4 to 6, barring admitted facts, have denied the other plaint averments by filing their written statement. It has been stated by them that no electricity connection was given to defendant Nos. 1 to 3, and if defendant Nos. 1 to 3 had taken connection clandestinely, they would be responsible for that. It is stated that brother of the deceased namely Sandeep Kumar Sahu had given an application to the Junior Engineer on 01.07.2009 for taking action against the people involved in electricity pilferage