DT
PT
Subscribe To Print Edition About The Tribune Code Of Ethics Download App Advertise with us Classifieds
Add Tribune As Your Trusted Source
search-icon-img
search-icon-img
Advertisement

HC holds BSF solely liable for compensation due to electrocution near Indo-Pak gate

Punjab State Power Corporation Limited absolved

  • fb
  • twitter
  • whatsapp
  • whatsapp
featured-img featured-img
Photo for representational purpose only.
Advertisement

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held the Border Security Force (BSF) solely liable for compensation for the electrocution of a youngster near the international gate between India and Pakistan. A Division Bench ruled that the accident occurred in an area “exclusively controlled and manned” by BSF personnel round-the-clock.

Advertisement

Setting aside the Single Judge’s direction fastening joint liability on the Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL), the Division Bench concluded that PSPCL had “no role whatsoever” inside the BSF-controlled zone and could not be made to share compensation liability.

Advertisement

The Bench of Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi and Justice Vikas Suri observed that the accident site was fully under BSF’s jurisdiction, leaving no basis to hold PSPCL accountable. “It may be noticed that the said area is controlled and manned by the Officers of the BSF 24 hours without exception. The negligence in allowing a person to reach the area where accident occurred is also upon the BSF.”

Advertisement

PSPCL’s stand that its employees were not permitted inside the restricted BSF area was accepted by the court, particularly as the Union of India did not dispute this fact. The Bench held: “Once the assertion has not been denied, any accident which takes place within the area of the BSF, which is solely controlled by them and even the supply of the electricity is also controlled by them to the exclusion of the PSPCL, the appellant-PSPCL cannot be made jointly liable.”

Accordingly, the order dated February 1, 2023, making PSPCL jointly liable for compensation, was set aside. The Bench rejected the BSF’s attempt to argue that the victim had entered a “cordoned off” area on his own. The Court noted the complete absence of evidence supporting the claim. “Nothing has come on record to show that the area was cordoned off not to be accessed by general public in any manner. The area even if, it is to be cordoned off, has to be cordoned off in a manner that no one crosses the same under any circumstances whereas, in the present case, no such fact has come on record to show that the deceased deliberately tried to cross over such area, which is said to be a cordoned off area by UOI.”

Advertisement

The court upheld the award of approximately Rs 60 lakh compensation and directed that the amount be released within eight weeks along with 6 per cent annual interest from February 1, 2023.  “It is a conceded position that the area of the accident is just next to the International gate between India and Pakistan. It may be noticed that the area is controlled and manned by the officers of the BSF 24 hours without exception hence, even if, somebody was trying to go into a cordoned off area, it becomes the duty of the BSF to stop such person from entering the cordoned off area; the negligence in allowing a person to reach the area where accident occurred is also upon the BSF hence, the amount of compensation, which has been awarded by the Single Judge in favour of the deceased, cannot be treated as arbitrary or illegal or without appreciating the facts on record,” the Bench asserted.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
tlbr_img1 Classifieds tlbr_img2 Videos tlbr_img3 Premium tlbr_img4 E-Paper tlbr_img5 Shorts