IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.622 of 2006
Nathun Ram Son of Late Bodhi Ram, resident of village- Karpi Dih,
P.S. Karpi, District Arbal ......... Petitioner
Versus
1. The Bihar State Electricity Board through its Chairman, Vidyut
Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna
2. The Chairman, Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan,
Bailey Road, Patna
3. The Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan,
Bailey Road, Patna
4. The Executive Engineer, Electric Supply Office, Kako Road,
Jahanabad ............. Respondents
For the petitioner :M/s Arun Kumar & Sanjay Kumar Sharma,
Advocates
For the BSEB :M/s Vinay Kirti Singh & Vijay Kr. Verma,
Advocates
02/ 18.01.2011
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Bihar
State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as the
“Board”), who prays for time to seek instruction in the
matter, but considering the nature of the order, which this
Court is proposing to pass, such prayer is refused.
2. Petitioner is the father of Mithilesh Mochi, who
died of electrocution on 6.8.2001 between 4.30- 5.30 A.M.,
which is evident from the First Information Report of U.D.
Case No. 4 of 2001 dated 6.8.2001, Annexure-1 to this
application. After completing the investigation, final report
was submitted in the aforesaid U.D. case, which is dated
15.3.2002 and is contained in Annexure-5 to this
-2-
application. Perusal of Annexure-5 indicates that son of the
petitioner died of electrocution and such finding has been
recorded in the final report on the basis of the findings
noticed in the inquest, post-mortem report of the deceased.
After the incident of electrocution, petitioner requested the
local authorities of the Board to grant him compensation,
but such request was not adhered to, whereafter he
submitted a representation before the Chairman/ Secretary
of the Board, which is dated 20.7.2004 and is contained in
Annexure-7 to this application. Perusal of Annexure-7
indicates that the same has been received by the authorities
of the Board on 20.7.2004. Petitioner has also produced
postal certificate dated 2.8.2004 showing dispatch of the
representation dated 20.7.2004 to the Chairman, Secretary
of the Board.
3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that
when the superior authorities of the Board also did not
consider the request of the petitioner for grant of
compensation in lieu of electrocution of his son, he filed the
present writ petition on 16.1.2006 praying, inter alia, to
direct the authorities of the Board to pay compensation for
-3-
the act of negligence in permitting the live wire to remain on
the road which led to electrocution of the son of the
petitioner.
4. Counsel for the Board opposed the aforesaid
prayer. He states, with reference to the judgment of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of SDO, Grid
Corporation of Orissa Ltd. and others versus Timudu Oram,
reported in (2005) 6 Supreme Court Cases 156, that High
Court should not commit error of entertaining writ petition
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for grant of
compensation even in the case of the victim dying on
account of electrocution by coming in contact with live wire
of the electric transmission. The High Court should direct
the relative of the victim to approach the Civil Court of
competent jurisdiction for claiming damages.
5. In rejoinder, counsel for the petitioner submitted
that electrocution of the son of the petitioner took place on
account of negligence of the authorities of the Board on
6.8.2001 when the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 (hereinafter
referred to as the Act) was in operation and in terms of
Section 33 of the Act, the Electrical Inspector is authorized
-4-
to enquire into the causes of death on account of
electrocution and in case the Electrical Inspector is of the
opinion that the death of the son of the petitioner has been
caused on account of negligence of the authorities of the
Board, appropriate orders for payment of damages may be
passed by the Chairman of the Board.
6. Having heard counsel for the parties, I grant
liberty to the petitioner to file representation before the
Electrical Inspector, Bihar annexing copy of the First
Information Report dated 6.8.2001 and the final report dated
15.3.2002. With reference to the contents of the aforesaid
documents, the Electrical Inspector should enquire into the
cause of death of the son of the petitioner and submit report
to the Chairman of the Board. If a finding of negligence on
the part of the authorities is recorded by the Electrical
Inspector, the Chairman of the Board should pay adequate
compensation to the petitioner.
7. Appropriate finding be recorded by the Electrical
Inspector with a copy to the Chairman of the Board, as early
as possible, in any case within two months from the date of
receipt of the representation annexing the order of this
-5-
Court, the First Information Report dated 6.8.2001 and the
final form dated 15.3.2002. The Chairman should pass
appropriate order on the report of the Electrical Inspector, as
early as possible, in any case within one month from the
date of its receipt.
8. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
Arjun/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)