Any Person Being A Victim of Terrorists/Communal/Left Wing Extremism Violence and Cross Border Firing and Mine/IED Blasts on Indian Territory Cannot be Denied Benefit of Central Assistance Scheme Only For The Reason That The Scheme Was Made Operative After The Occurrence of Such Incident: J&K&L HC

Date:

Share post:

Any Person Being A Victim of Terrorists/Communal/Left Wing Extremism Violence and Cross Border Firing and Mine/IED Blasts on Indian Territory Cannot be Denied Benefit of Central Assistance Scheme Only For The Reason That The Scheme Was Made Operative After The Occurrence of Such Incident: J&K&L HC

A single Bench of Justice Sindhu Sharma while Allowing a writ petition seeking – compensation for the death of two children who died due to blast caused by unexploded Shell by their Next of Kins in the year 2007 has held that merely for the reason that the Central Finance Reimbursement Scheme was made operative after the occurrence of the said incident, the benefit of the same cannot be denied to the petitioners who were unable to seek any compensation for the death of their children.

The Petitioners before the court were seeking compensation for the loss of their children who died due to blast caused by unexploded shell lying in the forest area and for the negligent act of the respondents. It was further submitted that the area where the two children had died is close to an army camp and artillery practice is being conducted in the said area. The petitioners alleged that the respondents shall be held liable to pay compensation on account of the Strict liability as the respondents were liable to take precautions and safeguards on their part.

The respondents on the other hand denied the liability on the ground that the petitioners were granted ex-gratia relief of Rs 01 lacs each by the concerned Deputy Commissioner for their loss and that they had also furnished a No Objection Certificate to the effect that they have no claim against any individual/Organization. Further a plea was taken by the respondents that the explosion was caused by the ammunition left by anti national elements. It was further submitted that the petitioners have approached the court after a belated period of almost ten years.

The court while taking note of the fact that the Ministry of Home Affairs has framed Revised Guidelines of Central Scheme for Assistance to Civilian victims/Family of Victims of Terrorists/Communal/Left Wing Extremism (LWE) Violence and Cross Border Firing and Mine/IED Blasts on Indian Territory, 2022. As per this scheme dated 30.03.2022, for incidents which have occurred during period 01.04.2008 to 23.08.2016, the finance assistance is Rs. 3 lacs and for incident occurred on or after 24.08.2016, the financial assistance is Rs. 5 lacs. The court observed that as per clause 4(1) off said revised guidelines, the petitioners fulfill the eligibility under the scheme as the death has occurred due to IED blast on Indian territory and families can be granted assistance even if they have received assistance by ex gratia or any other relief. Further the court also held that merely for the reason that the Central Finance Reimbursement Scheme was made operative after the occurrence of the said incident, the benefit of the same cannot be denied to the petitioners who were unable to seek any compensation for the death of their children.

Accordingly, the court allowed the petition and directed the respondents to pay compensation in terms of the guidelines with a period of eight weeks.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Latest Trending

Related articles

Supreme Court Directs High Courts To Issue Directions to Their Respective District Judiciary For Ensuring Disposal of Execution Petitions within Six Months

The Apex Court in its latest pronouncement, while deciding appeals against common judgment and order passed by the Madras High...

Supreme Court Lays Down The Principles Regarding The Permissibility Of Registration Of Second FIR

The Supreme Court while dealing with the question that whether the registration of the subsequent FIR is legally...

High Court Cannot Grant An Interim Order In A Second Appeal, Without Framing Substantial Question Of Law As Required To Be Framed Under Section...

A Bench of Justice J.B.Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan while dealing with an Appeal against an Interim Order...