- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
Abhishek v. State Of M.P.
Summary of Opinion — S.R. Waghmare, J.
Factual and Procedural Background
The petitioner, Abhishek Gilke, filed a Public Interest Litigation based on a newspaper cutting dated 4-4-2015 reporting the death of Vishal Mandloi, an engineer who allegedly died after being caught in a traffic jam while being taken to the hospital. The petition sought directions to ban processions that cause traffic jams, compensation of Rs. 25 lakhs to the widow, issuance of writs including mandamus, and registration of criminal offences against responsible officials. An application under Order 1, Rule 10 to add the deceased's wife, Smt. Richa Mandloi, as a party was allowed and she was added as respondent No. 4.
The State filed a reply opposing maintainability, asserting the petition was based on a newspaper clipping without verification and denying negligence by authorities. Statements of the wife and father-in-law were recorded by the police. The wife of the deceased filed a reply supporting the petition, produced documents including a letter from the Chief Minister (Annexure R/2), and sought compensation; she stated the deceased drew a salary of Rs. 18,000 per month and was caught in traffic for approximately one hour (the record also contains a statement indicating 10–15 minutes).
The Court considered the submissions and record, found that a just cause had been raised by the petitioner, and issued directions including strict adherence to guidelines dated 19-8-2014 issued by the Additional District Magistrate, Indore. The Collector was directed to look into awarding proper compensation to the widow in terms of Annexure R-1 and as recommended by the Chief Minister, with relief to be afforded within three months. The petition was partly allowed.
Legal Issues Presented
- Whether the State authorities were negligent or otherwise liable for the death of Vishal Mandloi allegedly caused or contributed to by obstruction of road traffic (procession) that delayed his reaching the hospital.
- Whether the widow is entitled to compensation and other reliefs (including criminal proceedings) as prayed by the petitioner and/or respondent No. 4.
- Whether processions that cause road blockage should be regulated, banned on busy routes, or otherwise subjected to enforceable guidelines to prevent similar occurrences.
Arguments of the Parties
Petitioner (Abhishek Gilke)
- Relied on a newspaper cutting reporting that Vishal Mandloi, aged in the record variously as 30 and 39, suffered heart pain on 29-3-2015, was taken by auto-rickshaw to Cloth Market Hospital but got caught in a traffic jam caused by a procession near Gangwal Bus-stand; despite requests, no assistance was given, and after about an hour he was declared brought dead at the hospital.
- Sought directions to ban processions that cause traffic jams, compensation of Rs. 25 lakhs for the widow, issuance of writ of mandamus, and registration of criminal proceedings against responsible officials.
- Relied on the decision Chambara Soy v. State Of Orissa & Ors., 2009 ACJ 1837 about protection of movement and life under Articles 19(1)(d) and 21, and the State's potential liability where death is due to delay reaching hospital because of road blockage.
Respondent-State
- Opposed the petition as not maintainable because it was filed on the basis of a newspaper cutting without verification.
- Denied negligence on the part of the respondent authorities and asserted that permission for processions is controlled under a resolution dated 19-8-2014, requiring special permissions and applications one month prior; processions are banned from certain important routes.
- Relied on police records and statements indicating that the petitioners were stuck for only 10–15 minutes at Bombay Bazar Chouki due to parked school buses and that by the time they reached the hospital it was too late; hospital records showed the patient was in hospital for one hour and no heart specialists attended within that period.
- Submitted that the respondent authorities were not responsible for the death.
Respondent No. 4 (Smt. Richa Mandloi, wife of the deceased)
- Maintained that the husband died because he was caught in a traffic jam and that almost one hour was spent in traffic.
- Provided documents asserting the deceased was 39 years old, working as a Hardware Engineer drawing Rs. 18,000 per month, and claimed compensation as a direct result of alleged mismanagement of traffic by government officers.
- Filed Annexure R/2, a letter from the Chief Minister directing the administration and public to prevent recurrence and directing Collector, Indore to grant assistance.
Table of Precedents Cited
| Precedent | Rule or Principle Cited For | Application by the Court |
|---|---|---|
| Chambara Soy v. State Of Orissa & Ors., 2009 ACJ 1837 | Used to invoke protection of the right to move freely and the right to life and personal liberty under Articles 19(1)(d) and 21; held that where death was due to delay in reaching hospital due to road blockage, State could be liable to pay compensation and could recover from those who blocked the highway. | The petitioner relied on this decision and prayed for similar directions. The Court considered the matter and, while finding lack of definitive proof that death occurred directly as a result of the procession, proceeded in the interest of justice to direct compliance with local guidelines and to direct the Collector to look into and award compensation to the widow in terms of Annexure R-1 and as recommended by the Chief Minister. |
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The Court noted that the petition raised a just cause and observed that traffic jams in growing cities are a continuing concern. However, the Court found that it had not been established on the available record that the death occurred directly as a result of the procession, as no sufficient details were produced to establish the direct causal link.
Balancing these findings with the interests of justice, the Court took the following approach:
- Directed strict adherence to the guidelines issued by order dated 19-8-2014 of the Additional District Magistrate, Indore, in relation to any procession on busy routes, and warned that future deviations would be viewed seriously.
- Directed the Collector to immediately examine the matter concerning respondent No. 4 and to award proper compensation to the widow in terms of Annexure R-1 and as recommended by the Chief Minister, to be provided within three months from the date of the order.
- Directed the police department to remain alert and requested public sensitivity to provide priority to critically ill persons in traffic situations.
- Allowed a cost of Rs. 3,000 to the petitioner if certified by the respondent-State.
In short, the Court declined to find conclusive proof of State culpability on the record before it but nonetheless provided remedial directions and administrative measures in the interest of justice and public safety.
Holding and Implications
Petition partly allowed.
Immediate consequences and directives ordered by the Court:
- The respondents-State authorities are directed to ensure strict compliance with the guidelines dated 19-8-2014 issued by the Additional District Magistrate, Indore, concerning processions on busy routes; future deviations will be viewed seriously.
- The Collector is directed to look into the claim of respondent No. 4 and award appropriate compensation to the widow in terms of Annexure R-1 and as recommended by the Chief Minister, with relief to be afforded within three months from the date of the order.
- The police department is directed to remain alert and the public is requested to be sensitive to critical cases and give priority to such patients in traffic.
- Costs of Rs. 3,000 may be paid to the petitioner if certified by the respondent-State.
Broader implications: The Court did not pronounce a definitive legal finding of State liability on the facts of this case, but it emphasized enforcement of administrative guidelines and remedial administrative relief. No new legal precedent was expressly announced in the opinion beyond the directions and expectations communicated to the authorities.
S.R Waghmare, J.:— The petitioner Abhishek Gilke has filed the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) on the basis of the newspaper cutting dated 4-4-2015, whereby deceased Vishal Mandloi, aged 30 years old Engineer being caught in a Traffic jam had to lose his life.
2. It has been alleged that the respondent Administrative Officers of the State Government of M.P did not take appropriate corrective measures and the appropriate directions be issued. Respondent Authorities be directed to ban processions which resulted in Traffic Jam and appropriate compensation be paid to the widow of Late Shri Mandloi. The petitioner has prayed for a compensation of sum of Rs. 25 lakhs. Petitioner has also prayed for writ of mandamus to be issued; besides registering a criminal offence against the erring officials for causing death of Shri Mandloi.
3. The Petitioner (present in person) has vehemently urged the fact that on 29-3-2015 Shri Vishal Mandloi residing at Snehlata Ganj suffered serious heart pain and wanted to be taken to the Cloth Market Hospital and engaged an Auto Rickshaw. When the Auto Rickshaw reached on Jawahar Marg, there was a procession coming from near the Gangwal Bus-stand and the Auto Rickshaw got caught in the Traffic Jam and there were thousands of people in the procession and despite request, nobody aided the wife to tackle the problem and for almost one hour the victim was battling for his life and when they reached the Hospital, he was declared brought dead. Reading the news paper dated 4-4-2015, the petitioner who is 21 years old, student has raised an important public issue and hence has filed the present petition. There is also an application under Order 1, Rule 10 filed by the wife of the deceased Smt. Richa Mandloi to be added as a party respondent which has been allowed.
4. Petitioner has vehemently urged the fact that the statements of the wife and the father-in-law have been recorded by the police authorities. The wife has also been added as respondent No. 4 and Petitioner prayed that the appropriate relief be granted to the respondent No. 4 and appropriate directions and the writ be issued to the respondent Government officials.
Petitioner has relied on a decision of the Odisha High Court at Cuttack in the matter of Chambara Soy v. State Of Orissa & Ors., 2009 ACJ 1837 in which the right to move freely and right of protection of life and personal liberty were required to be protected under Articles 19(1)(d) and 21 of the Constitution of India. And when the death was due to delay in reaching the hospital due to road blockage, the Court had held that the State was liable to pay compensation to the family members of the deceased student of I.T.I and the Court had held that it will be open to the State to recover the amount from those who were involved in blocking highway. Petitioner prayed that the same directions be issued in the present petition also.
5. Counsel for the respondent-State per contra has opposed the submissions by filing reply. It has been stated that although the criminal case was being demanded to be registered against the responsible officials, besides payment of compensation of Rs. 25 lakhs to the family members of the deceased Vishal Mandloi, the present petition is not maintainable since it has been filed on the basis of newspaper cutting without verifying the facts. The deceased Vishal Mandloi complained of serious heart pain and was being taken to the Cloth Market Hospital in Auto-rickshaw and was caught in the Traffic jam at Jawahar Marg. The procession coming from Gangawal Bus-stand prevented the patient from reaching the hospital in time and he was declared brought dead. However, on the same day, no permission was granted by the Office of the S.P in terms of the resolution dated 19-8-2014 and special permissions are required to be taken by the Organizers and the application has to be given one month prior to the occasion and thus the processions are banned from certain important routes. Besides the statements recorded by the police of Smt. Richa the wife of deceased and the father-in-law, indicated that when they reached the Bombay Bazar Chouki, certain School buses were parked in the road as a result of the Traffic jam. They were stuck in the Traffic jam only for 10-15 minutes by then it was too late and the husband had succumbed to the heart attack. The hospital record also indicated that the patient was in hospital for one hour and none of the Heart Specialists had come to the Hospital within the same time. Counsel vehemently urged that there was no negligence on the part of the respondent authorities. Counsel for the respondent-State has also submitted that the respondent Authorities are not responsible for the death of Shri Mandloi.
Per Contra Smt. Richa Mandloi the respondent No. 4 by filing reply has however stated that the sad death of respondent husband occurred due to being caught in the Traffic jam and almost one hour was spent in the Traffic and she has reproduced several papers to indicate that her husband deceased Vishal Mandloi was 39 years old, Hardware Engineer working in Cash Construction Company, Pithampur and drawing Rs. 18,000/- per month as salary and she has claimed compensation of her husband death being as a direct result of the mismanagement of the Traffic by the respondent Government Officers. Annexure R/2 is a copy of the letter addressed to her by the Chief Minister and was widely published in the newspapers, whereby the Hon'ble Chief Minister Shri Shivraj Singh Chouhan had directed that the administration and the members of the Public at large not to repeat the mistake in future to prevent reoccurrence of such tragedy and Collector, Indore was directed to grant assistance to her.
7. On considering the above submissions and the record, we find that the just cause has been raised by a student of law. The traffic jams in the growing metropolitan cities are a question of perennial concern and a burden on the communities as in the present case. It has not been established that the death had occurred directly as a result of the procession since no details have been forthcoming.
However in the interest of justice, the petition can be disposed of with a direction to the respondents-State Authorities to see that the guidelines issued by order dated 19-8-2014 by the Additional District Magistrate, Indore shall be strictly adhered in the matter of any procession being taken out in the busy routes of Indore. The Court expects strict compliance of the said order. Any deviation in future shall be viewed seriously. However, in the present case regarding respondent No. 4, it is directed that the respondent Collector to immediately look into the matter and award proper compensation to the widow of deceased Smt. Richa Mandloi in terms of Annexure R-1 filed by respondent No. 4 and as recommended by the Hon'ble the Chief Minister render all assistance in this regard. It is also expected that the appropriate relief shall be afforded to the respondent No. 4 within a period of 3 months from the date of this order. At this stage we also appreciate the valiant effort made by a student of law as a responsible citizen of Indore and also make a request to the General Public that such negligence should not re-occur and it should be more sensitive to the critical cases of such nature and priority should be given to such patients in the Traffic. The police Department is also directed to remain alert in this regard. Cost of Rs. 3,000/- be paid to the petitioner if certified by the respondent-State.
8. With the aforesaid observations and directions the petition is partly allowed to the extent herein above indicated.
Cc as per rules.
Petition partly allowed.
Alert