Zarifa Begum vs State Of J&K And Others

Puneet Gupta, J

The petition is taken up for consideration at the admission stage with the consent of learned counsel for the parties.

Nasir Ahmed Malik, son of the petitioner, was stated to be student of 12th standard and was studying in Government Higher Secondary School, Ukhral Banihal. The said child was representing the school team as well as the District team in the discipline of Volleyball and was participating in the inter district tournament at Rajouri. The child died of drowning and the petitioner was informed of the death of the child. The petitioner apprehends that the death of the child was not natural one and suspects some foul play in view of the injuries received by the child as per the postmortem report. The further case of the petitioner is that even assuming that the death of the son of the petitioner was accidental one still the duty was cast upon the department of Education and department of Youth Services and Sports to take care of the child and further that the respondents are liable to pay compensation to the petitioner.

The objections stand filed by the respondents wherein the respondents have denied that there was any foul play in the death of said child. It is submitted that three teachers of the sports department accompanied the team and adequate measures were taken for the safety of the child and other students who participated in the tournament. There was no negligence on the part of the respondents and the death was purely an accident. It is also submitted that the petitioner was provided financial assistance to the tune of Rs.1,13,000/-.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

The argument raised on behalf of the petitioner by the learned counsel is that the post mortem report indicates the foul play in the death of the child. The deceased child was a bright student and outstanding sports person. In any case, the negligence of the respondents led to the death of the child for which the petitioner is required to be compensated. The respondents cannot escape from their liability as the child was officially participating in the tournament when the purported accident took place.

The learned Government Advocate has argued that there was no negligence on the part of the respondents and the death of the child was purely an accidental one for which the respondents cannot be held liable.

There is no denial of the fact that Nasir Ahmed Malik had gone to Rajouri for participation in Volleyball tournament on behalf of school and during the tournament the said child died. As per the postmortem report, the cause of death of the child is asphyxia due to drowning. The report of the police also does not point out any finger against any individual in the cause of the death of the child. Apparently, no circumstance is brought on record by the petitioner to convince the court that the death of the child has taken place in suspicious circumstances. The objections filed by the respondents could not be countered by the petitioner. The respondent No.3 in his objections has stated that the deceased along with other friends had gone to nallah for bath and when the child started drowning one Sandeep Singh tried to save him but could not succeed. The death of the child is result of drowning is what is made out of record.

The court appreciates that the family of the deceased child had been given financial relief by the respondents to the tune of Rs.1,13,000/-which may be by way of donation or contribution. The court does not agree with the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that any liability as such should be fastened upon the respondents to pay the compensation on account of the unfortunate death of the child as the death has taken place due to the negligence of the respondents.

However, the court is of the view that the fact that the child was officially participating in the tournament at Rajouri the respondents as a welfare State can be directed to compensate the petitioner for the life lost. No doubt some financial assistance has been provided to the family of the petitioner but as per the respondents that is by way of contribution from the employees and students of the respondent No.3. The life lost cannot be brought back. However, some sort of financial assistance can bring some relief to the family of the petitioner as that is the only way the respondents can take care of the tragedy which has struck the family of the deceased child.

The court, in the facts and circumstances of the case, is of the view that the interest of justice shall be met in case the respondents are directed to pay the petitioner sum of Rs.1,50,000/- on account of the death of child Nisar Ahmed Malik within a period of two months from the date the direction is passed by the court. It is again reiterated that the court while awarding the amount has not otherwise in any way held the respondents liable on account of negligence on the basis of the record which is before the court.

Disposed of in above terms.