service law, discipline, administration
0  04 Nov, 2022
Listen in 01:59 mins | Read in 34:00 mins
EN
HI

Shakeel Ahmed Vs. Union of India & Ors.

  Supreme Court Of India Writ Petition Civil /182/2001
Link copied!

Case Background

As per the case facts, Mumbai experienced severe mob violence, communal tension, riots, and serial bomb blasts, resulting in significant loss of life and property. A Commission of Inquiry was ...

Bench

Applied Acts & Sections

No Acts & Articles mentioned in this case

Hello! How can I help you? 😊
Disclaimer: We do not store your data.
Document Text Version

REPORTABLE 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.182 OF 2001

Shakeel Ahmed                        … Petitioner

v.

Union of India & Ors.                      ... Respondents

J  U  D  G  M  E  N  T

ABHAY S. OKA, J.

FACTUAL ASPECTS

1.The city of Mumbai had a torrid time from 6

th

 December 1992

till 12

th

  March 1993. Mumbai witnessed perhaps the worst mob

frenzy, violence, communal tension and riots from 6

th

  December

1992 to 10

th

  December 1992 and from 6

th

  January 1993 to 20

th

January 1993. There were many incidents of arson and violence

resulting in a large­scale loss of lives and damage to properties.

The Police resorted to firing at many places.  Ultimately, Army was

1

called to aid the civil administration. Thereafter, the situation was

gradually brought under control. When the citizens of Mumbai

were about to breathe a sigh of relief, there were serial bomb blasts

in various parts of the city on 12

th

 March 1993. In December 1992

and January 1993, there were about 900 deaths, 168 persons were

reported missing and about 2036 persons suffered injuries. As a

result of the serial bomb blasts of 12

th

 March 1993, there were 257

deaths and 1400 people were injured.

2.The Government of Maharashtra by a notification dated 25

th

January 1993 constituted a Commission under the Commissions

of Inquiry Act, 1952 (for short, ‘the 1952 Act’) headed by Hon’ble

Shri Justice B.N. Srikrishna, the then sitting Judge of the High

Court of Judicature at Bombay, who subsequently retired as a

Judge of this Court. The Terms of Reference of the Commission

were as under: 

“(i)The   circumstances,   events   and   immediate

causes of the incidents which occurred in the

Bombay   Police   Commissionerate   area   in

December 1992 on or after the 6

th

 December

1992 and, again in January 1993, on or after

the 6

th

 January 1993;

(ii)Whether   any   individual   or   group   of

individuals or any other organizations, were

2

responsible   for   such   events   and

circumstances; 

(iii)The   adequacy   or   otherwise   of   the

precautionary and preventive measures, taken

by   the   Police   preceding   the   aforesaid

incidents;

(iv)Whether   the   steps   taken   by   the   Police   in

controlling the riots were adequate and proper

and   whether   the   Police   firing   resulting   in

deaths was justified or not; and

(v)The measures, long and short term, which are

required to be taken by the administration to

avoid recurrence of such incidents, to secure

communal   harmony   and   also   to   suggest

improvements in law and order machinery.”

3.Subsequently, the Terms of Reference of the Commission

were   expanded   by   the   State   Government   and   the   following

additional terms were incorporated: 

“(vi)The circumstances and the immediate cause of

the  incidents  commonly  known   as the  serial

bomb­blasts   of   the   12

th

  March   1993,   which

occurred   in   the   Bombay   Police

Commissionerate area;

(vii)Whether the incidents referred to in term (i),

have   any   common   link   with   the   incidents

referred to in term (vi) above; and

(viii)Whether the incidents referred to in term (i) and

in term (vi) were part of a common design.”

By a notification dated 23

rd

 January 1996, the State Government

disbanded the Commission on a very strange ground that there

was   an   inordinate   delay   on   the   part   of   the   Commission   in

3

submitting its report. As noted in the report of the Commission,

the then Hon’ble Prime Minister requested the Chief Minister of

Maharashtra to revive the Commission and that is how it was

revived by the notification dated 28

th

 May 1996. The Commission

submitted its report on 16

th

  February 1998 which consisted of

two   volumes.   Volume­I   contained   the   conclusions   and

recommendations   of   the   Commission.   Volume   II   contained   a

summary of the evidence recorded and analysis of the evidence.

4.The present petition invokes the jurisdiction of this Court

under  Article 32  of  the  Constitution  of  India.  There  are  five

substantive prayers made in the petition, which read thus: 

“i.Declare that an enquiry conducted under the

Commission   of   Enquiry   Act,   1952,   would

tantamount to an Inquiry within the meaning

of Article 311 [2] of the Constitution of India;

ii.Declare   that   a   public   servant   found

guilty/indicted   under   the   Commission   of

Enquiry Act, 1952 be liable to be summarily

dismissed; and

iii.Issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature

of Mandamus and/or like nature directing the

Respondent­State   to   accept   and   act   on   the

finding   of   the   Sri   Krishna   Commission   of

Enquiry; and

iv.Issue a Writ, Direction or Order in the nature

of Mandamus and or like nature directing the

4

Respondent­State   of   Maharashtra   that

SUMMARY   cases   be   re­opened   and   action

taken   in   accordance   with   the

recommendations   of   the   Sri   Krishna

Commission Report;

v.Direct Respondents to pay compensation to the

persons identified as MISSING and the cases

concerning them to be closed;”

The   Recommendations   of   Justice

B.   N.   Srikrishna   Commission   and

the   Response   of   the   State

Government 

5.The   entire   petition   revolves   around   the   issue   of

implementation of the recommendations of the Commission. The

recommendations which are relevant for deciding this petition

can be summarized as under:

i.Based   on   the   study   conducted   by   a   committee   of

experts of Tata Institute of Social Sciences appointed

by the Commission which dealt with the immediate

causes of the riots, the Commission opined that the

causes   were   political,   socio­economic   and

demographic;

ii.The precautionary and preventive measures taken by

the   Police   preceding   the   incidents   of   riots   were

inadequate. The intelligence machinery of the Police did

not give information in good time about the possible

5

damage to the Babri Maszid. Moreover, there was no

effort made to make an accurate assessment of the

situation, which could arise due to possible damage to

the Babri Maszid. The Intelligence Department failed to

gather   crucial   information   about   the   closed   door

meetings  held   by   the  two different   religious   groups,

which were found responsible for the riots;

iii.The Police machinery proved to be inadequate to deal

with   the   situation.   Moreover,   the   Police   were

hopelessly outnumbered as the strength of the Police

staff   was   inadequate   even   to   handle   day­to­day

problems;

iv.The  Commission  found  that  there was  a failure to

register crimes by the Police.   There was a delay in

registering crimes.  The investigation was carried out

in an arbitrary and casual manner;

v.There was a delay in the disposal of criminal cases

concerning riot­related offences;

vi.There   was   a   lot   of   political   interference   in   the

functioning of the Police machinery; 

6

vii.The   commission   concluded   that   the   Police   officials

named in paragraph 1.30 of Volume­I of its report,

were found actively participating in riots, communal

incidents   and   incidents   of   looting,   arson,   etc.   The

Commission recommended the initiation of disciplinary

action against the said Police officials;

viii.The Commission noted that the members of the police

force were lacking physical fitness. The Commission

recorded that long and arduous working hours leave

them no time for physical exercises. The Commission

recommended that strict standards of physical fitness

be enforced; and

ix.The   Commission   recommended   improvement   of

conditions of work of the Police and also recommended

that proper housing facilities be provided to the police. 

6.The State Government issued a Memorandum of action to

be taken by the Government on the report of the Commission (for

short, ‘the Memorandum’).   Most of the recommendations were

accepted by the State Government. The action proposed by the

State Government was incorporated in the Memorandum. The

7

response   of   the   State   Government   to   some   of   the   relevant

recommendations reads thus:

i.The   State   Government   noted   that   the   Police   have

classified a large number of offences relating to riots in

‘A’ Summary (true but undetected). The Government

decided to appoint a committee comprising Officers

from Home Department, Law Department and senior

Police Officers to scrutinize all ‘A’ Summary cases and

carry out reinvestigation, wherever warranted;

ii.Instructions would be issued to the Police Department

to   ensure   effective   and   speedy   trials   in   offences

relating to riots;

iii.       The   State   Government   has   decided   to   pay

compensation to the victims of the riots and violence;

iv.The   State   Government   has   decided   to   initiate

disciplinary   proceedings   against   the   erring   police

officials; and 

v.The   State   Government   assured   to   improve   the

conditions in which the police force was working.

8

             The State Government did not agree with some of the

conclusions drawn by the Commission especially its findings on

the causes of the riots/violence. But, the Government agreed to

act upon majority of recommendations.

7.There are affidavits filed by both sides. The affidavits filed

on the side of the petitioner make a grievance about the failure of

the State Government to implement the recommendations of the

Commission and also the failure to bring the offenders to book.

Rival Submissions

8.Shri   Colin   Gonsalves,   the   learned   senior   counsel

representing the petitioner, submitted that as can be seen from

the   affidavits   on   record,   the   action   taken   by   the   State

Government   on   the   recommendations   of   the   Commission   is

merely an eyewash. He pointed out that the Police Officials who

were found guilty of serious misconduct by the Commission were

let off either by exonerating them or by imposing very minor

penalties. He pointed out that almost all the prosecutions ended

either in discharge of the accused or in acquittal. He made a

grievance that the Legal Services Authorities constituted at the

State and the District levels, failed to render assistance to the

9

victims of the offence and/or to the legal heirs of the victims of

the   offence,   as   the   case   may   be.   Legal   assistance   was   not

provided to the victims or legal heirs of the victims for challenging

the orders of discharge or acquittal and for filing proceedings for

recovery of compensation. As a result, the victims got no relief

from the State machinery and even from the judiciary. He also

submitted that meagre compensation of Rs.2 lakhs was paid to

the legal heirs of those who lost lives in the riots. Moreover, there

was inordinate delay in making the payment of compensation.

Very few families of missing persons were paid compensation,

though, by legal fiction, the persons missing for more than seven

years are treated as dead. He would, therefore, submit that the

compensation   deserves   to   be   enhanced   substantially   and   a

direction   be   issued   to   the   State   Government   to   ensure   that

compensation is paid to every eligible victim/ his or her heirs. He

submitted that victims be provided interest to compensate them

for the delayed payment. 

9.Shri Rahul Chitnis, the learned counsel representing the

State Government urged that there is no default on the part of

the State Government. He submitted that all efforts were made to

trace the family members of missing persons and compensation

10

was   promptly   paid   to   them.   He   submitted   that   disciplinary

proceedings were initiated against the Police Officers named by

the Commission and were taken to the logical end. He submitted

that it is too late in the day now for this Court to interfere and

issue directions to challenge the orders of acquittal or discharge.

He   submitted   that   some   such   orders   were   unsuccessfully

challenged before the higher forum. His submission is that with

the passage of time, no directions are warranted in this petition.

Consideration of Submissions

10.We have given careful consideration to the submissions.

During the course of the submissions, the first two prayers were

not   seriously   pressed   by   the   learned   senior   counsel   for   the

petitioner.   The   recommendations   of   a   Commission   appointed

under the 1952 Act cannot bind the Government.   The Courts

cannot compel the Government to act upon the report.  But, once

the Government accepts the recommendations, a Writ Court can

issue   a  mandamus  for   the   implementation   of   the

recommendations as it becomes an obligation of the Government

to implement the recommendations. A perusal of the affidavits

filed in this petition as well as connected petitions which were

disposed of by the order dated 30

th

  August 2022, shows that

11

while the State Government disputed most of the conclusions

drawn by the Commission regarding the causes of the riots, most

of the recommendations regarding taking corrective measures

were accepted as can be seen from the Memorandum filed by the

State   Government.   We   are   conscious   of   the   fact   that   the

recommendations of the Commission were submitted more than

24 years back and most of the trials and disciplinary inquiries

have been concluded more than 20 years back. Nevertheless, we

are dealing with submissions canvassed across the Bar.

Action Against Erring Police Officials

11.Firstly,   we   will   deal   with   the   conduct   of   disciplinary

proceedings against the erring police officials as recommended by

the Commission. The details thereof are found in the Affidavit

dated 13

th

  March 2020 of Shri Amitabh Gupta, the Principal

Secretary, Home Department, Government of Maharashtra. In

terms of the recommendations of the Commission, FIRs were

registered   against   nine   police   officials.   Two   of   them   were

discharged and seven were acquitted. The complainants/victims

filed revision applications against orders of discharge dated 16

th

April   2003   of   two   officials.   The   revision   applications   were

dismissed. The matters were carried to this Court by way of

12

Special Leave Petitions, which were dismissed on 4

th

 July 2011.

In the case of six police officials, orders of acquittal were passed

on 18

th

  November 2005, and one officer was acquitted by an

order dated 9

th

 September 2014. These orders of acquittal were

not challenged. Out of nine police officials, seven have already

been superannuated. The State Government has not stated the

reasons for not questioning the orders of acquittal. The State

should have been vigilant and proactive in these cases.  Now it is

too late in the day to direct the State to examine whether the

orders of acquittal deserve to be challenged. 

12.Now, coming to the disciplinary inquiry initiated against

various police officials, we find that one official was dismissed

from service. One official was made to compulsorily retire by way

of punishment. On nine other police officials, minor penalties

have been imposed. Out of the said nine police officials, against

whom minor penalties were imposed, eight officials have already

retired from service. Eight other police officials were exonerated.

Out of them, five officials have since retired. Inquiry against one

police official was dropped as he died during the pendency of the

inquiry. In view of long passage of time, as far as the disciplinary

action is concerned, now in the year 2022, it will be inappropriate

13

to go into the question of the validity of the orders passed by the

disciplinary   authorities   and   the   adequacy   of   the   penalties

imposed. In any case, in a writ petition in the nature of a Public

Interest Litigation, a Writ Court should not normally interfere

with disciplinary proceedings.

Riot Related Criminal Cases

13.The affidavit discloses the details of the fate of 253 riot

related   criminal   cases.   The   outcome   of   these   cases   can   be

summarized as under:

ConvictedAcquittedAbated

Cases

found

unrelated

to riots

Pending

Cases in

Sessions

Court 

Cases on

dormant

files.

6 114 1 34 1 97

It is noted in the affidavit that the High Court of Judicature at

Bombay had nominated two learned Sessions Judges and two

learned   Metropolitan   Magistrates   as   the   Special   Courts   for

dealing with criminal cases relating to the violence in December

1992 and January 1993. The affidavit discloses that one case is

still pending in the Sessions Court. We propose to direct the

14

Sessions Court to dispose of the pending case at the earliest.

Ninety­seven cases are on dormant files. The reason must be that

either the accused therein are not traceable or are absconding.

The   High   Court,   on   the   administrative   side,   must   issue

appropriate directions to the concerned Courts in which these

cases   are   pending.   The   High   Court   must   ensure   that   the

concerned Courts take appropriate steps for tracing the accused.

The State Government will have to set up a special cell for tracing

the accused. 

Failure To Provide Legal Aid To The Victims

14.Shri Colin Gonsalves, the learned senior counsel made a

grievance that the victims of the offences ought to have been

provided legal aid by the State and the District Legal Services

Authorities established under the Legal Services Authorities Act,

1987 (for short, ‘the 1987 Act’) for challenging the orders of

acquittal. His grievance was that the Legal Services Authorities

have not performed their duty.   Though no directions can be

issued   at   this   stage   to   grant   legal   aid,   nevertheless,   we   are

examining the legal contentions.

15.Section 12 of the 1987 Act lays down the criteria for giving

legal services which reads thus: 

15

“12. Criteria for giving legal services — Every

person who has to file or defend a case shall be

entitled to legal services under this Act if that

person is— 

(a) a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled

Tribe; 

(b)   a   victim   of   trafficking   in   human   beings   or

begar   as   referred   to   in   article   23   of   the

Constitution; 

(c) a woman or a child; 

(d) a person with disability as defined in clause (i)

of section 2 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal

Opportunities,   Protection   of   Rights   and   Full

Participation) Act, 1995 (1 of 1996);

(e)   a   person   under   circumstances   of

underserved want such as being a victim of a

mass disaster, ethnic, violence, caste atrocity,

flood,   drought,   earthquake   or   industrial

disaster; or 

(f) an industrial workman; or 

(g) in custody, including custody in a protective

home within the meaning of clause (g) of section 2

of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (104

of 1956), or in a juvenile home within the meaning

of clause (j) of section 2 of the Juvenile Justice

Act, 1986 (53 of 1986), or in a psychiatric hospital

or psychiatric nursing home within the meaning

of clause (g) of section 2 of the Mental Health Act,

1987 (14 of 1987); or

(h) in receipt of annual income less than rupees

nine thousand or such other higher amount as

may be prescribed by the State Government, if the

case is before a court other than the Supreme

Court, and less than rupees twelve thousand or

16

such other higher amount as may be prescribed

by the Central Government, if the case is before

the Supreme Court.”

(emphasis added)

16.Under Clause (e) of Section 12 of the 1987 Act, a person

who is subjected to ethnic violence, is entitled to legal services

under   the   1987   Act.  The   meaning   of   the   adjective   “ethnic”

according to Merriam­Webster dictionary is “of   or   relating  to

large   groups   of   people   classed   according   to   common   racial,

national,   tribal,   religious,   linguistic,   or   cultural   origin   or

background”.  The term “ethnic” can be narrowly construed as

including solely “linguistic” or “racial” groups.   If it is given a

broad meaning, it will include religion, tribe and caste in group

distinction.  Looking   at   the   conclusions   in   the   report   of   the

Commission and the response to the recommendations of the

State Government in the form of the Memorandum, there is no

manner   of   doubt   that   communal   disharmony   between   two

religious groups was one of the main causes of the riots and

violence. There are enough indications in both documents that

there was tension between the two religious groups which is one

of the major causes of the incidents of violence. Considering the

object of the 1987 Act, a broad meaning will have to be assigned

17

to   the   word   “ethnic”   for   the   purposes   of   considering   the

entitlement to grant of legal aid. Therefore, these incidents of

December 1992 and January 1993 are the incidents of ethnic

violence within the meaning of clause (e) of Sub­section (1) of

Section 12 of the 1987 Act. Hence, on an application being made

by the victims of the offence or their legal heirs, legal services

could have been provided to them by appointing advocates, who

could have assisted the Criminal Courts in terms of sub­Section

(2) of Section 301 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for

short, ‘Cr.P.C.’) during the course of trials. Legal services could

have been provided to the victims to challenge the orders of

acquittal. But we must remember that those were the early days

of the Legal Services Authorities. With the passage of time, the

Legal Services Authorities right from the Taluka level to national

level, have expanded their activities for effectively rendering legal

services. Now multiple activities are being conducted by the Legal

Services Authorities at various levels. The scope of legal services

has   been   considerably   widened   during   the   last   few   decades.

During the pandemic of COVID 19, these authorities reached the

poor and needy by providing assistance to them. We hope and

trust that after 75 years of independence, riot­like situations will

18

never arise. Unfortunately, if such situations arise, we are sure

that the Legal Services Authorities at various levels will come to

the rescue of the victims of violence and render legal services to

them, keeping in mind the spirit of Section 12 of the 1987 Act.

Now,   it   is   too   late   in   the   day   to   direct   the   Legal   Services

Authorities to render legal aid to the victims of the 1992 and

1993 riots for challenging the orders of acquittal. 

Failure To Make Proper Investigation 

17.One of the grievances of the petitioner was that in large

number of riots related offences, a proper investigation was not

carried   out   and   therefore,   about   1371   cases   were   closed   by

classifying as ‘A’ Summary (true but undetected). The affidavit of

Shri   Amitabh   Gupta   notes   that   the   State   Government   had

appointed a Committee under the chairmanship of the Director

General of Police to scrutinize all cases which were classified as

‘A’   Summary.   In   terms   of   the   directions   of   the   Committee,

reinvestigation   was   carried   out   in   112   cases   under   the

supervision of the Officers of the rank of Deputy Commissioner of

Police. Out of the 112 cases, 104 were again classified as ‘A’

Summary. In the remaining eight cases, charge sheets were filed.

Out of the eight cases, seven cases resulted in acquittal, and in

19

one case, where the offence was compoundable, the case was

compounded.

Recommendation on Police Reforms

18.The Commission in its report has made several suggestions

for reinforcing and improving Police Force. The recommendations

are   very   wide   and   cover   many   aspects.   The   Commission

recommended that professionalism needs to be introduced in the

Police Force. The Commission has laid emphasis on the training

and physical fitness of the members of the Police Force. The

Commission suggested improvements in the weaponry held by

the   Police   Force.   The   Commission   also   suggested   vast

improvements in the communication systems of the Police. There

is also a recommendation made to stop political interference in

the day­to­day functioning of the police. We may note here that

with   the   passage   of   time   and   with   the   advancement   of

technology, there has been a considerable improvement in the

communication systems used by the Police. The Commission’s

suggestion   of   setting   up   Rapid   Action   Squads   has   been

implemented.   The   Commission   suggested   that   various   steps

should be taken to boost the morale of the Police Force, such as

providing proper housing facilities to them, reducing political

20

interference in the day­to­day functioning of the Police Force, etc.

The Memorandum of the Government records that most of these

recommendations have been accepted by the State Government.

But   what   remains   is   the   implementation   part.   The   State

Government cannot ignore the recommendations made by the

Commission for the improvement and modernization of the Police

Force and the recommendations shall continue to guide the State

Government. 

Compensation to Victims

19.That   takes   us   to   the   crucial   issue   of   payment   of

compensation to the victims of the riots. We have already noted

that whether due to the violence or police firing, 900 people lost

their lives and 2036 people got injured in December 1992 and

January 1993. 

20.Article 21 of the Constitution of India confers a right on

every citizen to live with human dignity. Article 21 encompasses

into itself the right to live a meaningful and dignified life. All the

aspects of life which make a person live with human dignity, are

covered by the word ‘life’ used in Article 21 of the Constitution of

India.   If   the   citizens   are   forced   to   live   in   an   atmosphere   of

21

communal tension, it affects their right to life guaranteed by

Article 21. The violence witnessed by Mumbai in December 1992

and January 1993 adversely affected the right of the residents of

the affected areas to lead dignified and meaningful life. It cannot

be disputed that certain groups were responsible for the large­

scale violence in December 1992 and January 1993. There was a

failure on the part of the State Government to maintain law and

order and to protect the rights of the people guaranteed under

Article 21 of the Constitution of India. As noted earlier, 900

persons died and more than 2000 persons were injured. The

houses, places of business and properties of the citizens were

destroyed.  These  are  all   violations  of   their  rights  guaranteed

under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. One of the root

causes of their suffering was the failure of the State Government

to maintain law and order. Therefore, the affected persons had a

right to seek compensation from the State Government. Though

belatedly, by a Government Resolution dated 8

th

 July 1993 (the

first   Government   Resolution),   a   decision   was   taken   to   give

financial   assistance   to   the   persons   affected   due   to   riots   in

December 1992 and January 1993 as well as due to the serial

bomb blasts in the city of Mumbai. Nearly five and a half years

22

after the incidents of riots, the Government Resolution dated 22

nd

July   1998   (the   second   Government   Resolution)   was   issued,

providing for giving compensation of Rs.2 Lakhs to the legal heirs

of the missing persons. The eligibility criteria and procedure for

disbursement   were   laid   down   in   the   second   Government

Resolution.

21.The affidavit of Shri Amitabh Gupta dated 13

th

 March 2020

notes that 900 persons died in the riots and 168 persons were

reported missing.  He claimed that compensation has been paid

to the legal heirs of all 900 dead persons and family members of

60 missing persons. A direction was issued by this Court on 30

th

August 2022, directing the State Government to disclose the

details of the compensation paid to the victims. It is necessary to

quote the aforesaid order dated 30

th

 August 2022 of this Court,

which reads thus:

“….We have heard learned counsel for parties. 

In order to deal with all the aspects raised by

learned   counsel   for   the   petitioner,   more

specifically the aspect of compensation, we require

a better explanation of exhibit­B at page 26 of the

affidavit filed by the State of Maharashtra dated

13.3.2020.   We   would   require   information   as

under:­ 

23

(i) Whether the figure of 168 persons who are

stated   to   be   missing   form   a   part   of   the   900

number of victims identified; 

(ii)Whether any compensation has been paid to

the   legal   heirs   of   the   persons   who   have   been

found missing; 

(iii) What is the reference to the compensation

paid to heirs of victims; 

(iv) Whether any compensation has been paid for

loss of property; 

(v) When was these compensations paid i.e. the

time lag between the date of the incident and

the compensation being made. 

An affidavit be filed in terms aforesaid within two

weeks. 

Arguments concluded. 

Judgment reserved.”

(emphasis added)

The   State   Government   by   the   affidavit   of   Shri   Mangesh

Manjabhau   Shinde,  Joint   Secretary   of  the   Home  Department

purported to comply with the above directions. The response of

the   State   Government   in   the   affidavit   of   Shri   Mangesh

Manjabhau Shinde reads thus:

“(i) Whether the figure of 168 persons who are

stated   to   be   missing   form   a   part   of   the   900

number of victims identified.

24

Reply – The total number of missing persons is

168 which is not the part of total 900 victims.

(ii) Whether any compensation has been paid to

the   legal   heirs   of   the   persons   who   have   been

found missing;

Reply­The total compensation Rs.1,19,00,000/­

paid   to   the   legal   heirs   of   the   60   missing

persons. The compensation to the legal heirs

of the remaining missing persons has not yet

been given for the reasons that the legal heirs

were not found, residential addresses were not

found, undertaking not submitted by the legal

heirs,   police   case   is   registered   against   the

missing person, etc.

(iii) What is the reference to the compensation

paid to heirs of victims; 

Reply – The compensation to legal heirs of victims

and the compensation for the loss of property is

given   with   reference   to   the   Government

Resolution, dated 08.07.1993. A true copy of the

Government   Resolution   dated   08.07.1993   is

annexed herewith and marked as Annexure­R­2.

The   compensation   paid   to   the   legal   heirs   of

missing  persons   is   given  with   reference   to   the

Government Resolution, dated 22.07.1998. A true

copy   of   the   Government   Resolution   dated

22.07.1998 is annexed herewith and marked as

Annexure­R­3. 

(iv) Whether any compensation has been paid for

loss of property;

Reply – Compensation for Rs.3,31,92,658/­ has

been paid for loss of property. The bifurcation is

as below :­

25

Sr.

No.

Subject

Cases in 

which

compensa

tion paid

Total

Compensation

1.

Houses/

Stalls/ Huts

1575 Rs.73,50,000/­

2.

Houses

found

damaged

2502 Rs.95,75,000/­

3.

Stalls found

damaged

3699 Rs.1,41,29,458/­

4.Others 538 Rs.21,38,200/­

5.Total 8314 Rs.3,31,92,658/­

(v) When was these compensations paid i.e. the

time lag between the date of the incident and the

compensation being made.

Reply – After the guidelines issued by GR dated

08/07/1993 and GR dated  22/07/1998, the

compensation   was   paid   for   over   the   period

from   year   1992   to   2010   after   thorough

scrutiny of the cases of compensation as per

the GR norms, from time to time.”

(emphasis added)

22.Under Section 108 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, there

is a presumption that if a person has not been heard of for seven

years or more by those who would naturally have heard of him if

he had been alive, such a person is presumed to be dead unless

the contrary is proved by the person who affirms it. It is in view of

the statutory presumption that the State Government has come

out with the scheme to pay compensation of Rs.2 lakhs to the

26

legal heirs/family members of the missing persons. Now, coming

to the missing persons, the family members of only 60 missing

persons have been paid compensation. As regards the family

members of remaining 108 missing persons, compensation was

not paid for various reasons, such as, the persons concerned

were   not   found,   their   residential   addresses   were   not   found,

undertakings   were   not   submitted   by   them   etc.   The   State

Government has not set out the efforts made to trace the family

members of the missing persons and to make sure that they

make compliance, such as the execution of the undertakings. We

propose   to   constitute   a   Committee   headed   by   the   Member

Secretary of the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority (for

short, ‘MSLSA’), to look into the records relating to the remaining

108 missing persons. We propose to direct the State Government

to nominate a Revenue Officer, not below the rank of Deputy

Collector and a police officer not below the rank of Assistant

Commissioner   of   Police   as   the   other   two   members   of   the

Committee. The Committee shall monitor the efforts made by the

State   Government   to   trace   the   family   members   of   missing

persons, whose addresses are not available and also to ensure

that   those   eligible   persons   who   have   not   made   procedural

27

compliances are assisted to make necessary compliance. The

Committee   will   have   to   also   monitor   compliance   with   the

directions   issued   by   this   Court   as   regards   payment   of

compensation to all categories of victims.  

23.In the affidavit of the State Government, a stand has been

taken   that   compensation   has   been   paid   to   those   whose

houses/stalls/huts   were   damaged   or   destroyed.   Reliance   is

placed   on   the   first   Government   Resolution.   The   Resolution

provided for giving following assistance: 

“Financial relief to the victims of bomb blasts in

Mumbai city and Mumbai suburbs on and after 12

th

March 1993.

1. Distress relief: ­ Every destitute person Rs. 250/­.

2. Grant for reconstruction of hut: ­ For each house

of destroyed hut: According to the extent of damage

caused to the hut Rs.5000/­ whichever is less, grant

should be given.

3.   Renovation   of   houses:   ­   For   renovation   of

residential house, along with subsidy of Rs.5,000/­

and loan of Rs.10,000/­, a maximum of Rs.15,000/­

financial support.

4. Repair of Houses: ­ for the sake of house repairs,

Rs.6000/­ and Loan of Rs.5000/­, it means, grant of

up to Rs.11000/­ maximum.

5. For destroyed stall and shops: ­ for Destroyed

stalls, amount should be given as subsidy equal to

the cost of damage or a maximum of Rs.5000/­.

28

6. Assistance for ‘burnt carts’: ­ to the hand cart

owners, whose carts have been destroyed by fire

should be given a subsidy of Rs.2500/­ each.

7. Compensation Amount  of Rs.2 lakhs grant  to

relatives of deceased persons:

8.   A   grant   of   Rs.25,000/­   to   a   person   with

permanent disability.

9. To give subsidy of Rs.10,000/­to a person with

temporary physical disability.

10. Assistance of Rs.5000/­ for admitted more than

24 hours in any private Hospital.

11.   Medical   aid   for   less   than   24   hours

hospitalization   will   be   Rs.1000/­   or   the   exact

expresses of the hospital which will less, will be

given as assistance.

12.   Rs.25,000/­   financial   assistance   to   the   Taxi

owners whose vehicle is totally burnt.

13. To the surviving Rickshaw owners, Rs.13,000/­

whose rickshaw is totally burnt.”

24.In the earlier affidavit of compliance of Shri Amitabh Gupta,

the State Government has not taken a stand that compensation

in terms of the first Government Resolution was paid to all the

victims of the 1992 and 1993 riots who were eligible to receive

the same. The State Government was under an obligation to pay

compensation to the eligible victims within a reasonable period

which can be taken as period of six months from the dates of the

respective Government Resolutions.   Therefore, the Committee

29

will   have   to   peruse   the   records   to   ascertain   whether

compensation was paid to all eligible persons. The Committee

shall ensure that compensation is paid in terms of the first

Government Resolution to various categories of victims of the

1992 and 1993 riots. After examining records, if it is revealed

that some of the victims have not been paid compensation, the

Committee   formed   as   above,   will   have   to   ensure   that

compensation   is   paid   to   the   victims   in   terms   of   the   first

Government Resolution by the State Government. The interest

will have to be paid to such victims who have not been paid

compensation at the rate of 9% from the expiry of the period of

six months from the date of the first Government Resolution till

the date of payment of the compensation amount.

25.Even as regards the payment of compensation of Rs.2 lakhs

to the legal heirs of 108 missing persons, the State Government

will have to pay interest at the rate of 9% from the expiry of the

period of six months from 22nd July 1998 when the second

Government Resolution was issued.

26.Though as per the order dated 30

th

 August 2022, the State

Government   was   expected   to  give   details   about  the   time   lag

30

between the date of the incident and the date of payment of

compensation, the State Government has avoided to furnish the

material particulars and only a vague statement has been made

that compensation was paid in terms of both the Government

Resolutions between 1992 and 2010.  This statement shows that

there was considerable delay in disbursing the compensation

amount.   The State Government will have to provide all the

details expected to be furnished in terms of the order dated 30th

August 2022 to the Committee. The Committee will find out the

cases where there has been a delay of more than six months in

making payment of compensation in terms of the first or the

second Government Resolutions, as the case may be. Interest at

the rate of 9% from the date of expiry of the period of six months

from the dates of the relevant applicable Government Resolution

till the date of actual payment will have to be paid by the State

Government.   The Committee will have to decide the issue of

entitlement to interest in terms of these directions.  We cannot

allow the victims to suffer only because there was a delay in the

disposal of this writ petition. The Committee can always take the

help of the Para Legal Volunteers to reach the persons who have

31

been deprived of compensation and to render assistance to them

to comply with the formalities. 

27.Shri Colin Gonsalves, the learned senior counsel made a

fervent plea for enhancing the quantum of compensation on the

ground   that   the   same   was   inadequate.   The   quantum   of

compensation has been fixed way back in the years 1993 in the

context of the then prevailing situation. There is no prayer made

for enhancement of compensation in this writ petition of the year

2001.   Therefore, it may not be appropriate to accede to the

prayer for grant enhancement after such a long passage of time.

28.Hence, we dispose of the petition by passing the following

order.

i.There shall  be a Committee headed by the  Member

Secretary of MSLSA to monitor the implementation of

the   directions   issued   by   this   Judgment.   The   State

Government shall appoint a Revenue Officer, not below

the rank of Deputy Collector, and a Police Officer, not

below the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police, who

shall be the other two members of the Committee;

32

ii.The State Government shall submit to the Committee a

report   containing   details   of   168   missing   persons

including   their   names   and   addresses.   The   State

Government will also place material regarding efforts

made to trace family members of 108 missing persons

who have been deprived of compensation in terms of the

second Government Resolution. The State Government

shall   make   all   possible   efforts   to   trace   the   legal

heirs/family   members   of   the   missing   persons.   The

Committee shall monitor this exercise. The Committee

shall   assist   the   legal   representatives   of   the   missing

persons to complete the procedural formalities;

iii.The   State   Government   shall   also   submit   to   the

Committee the record relating to compensation paid in

terms   of   the   Annexure   to   the   First   Government

Resolution   as   well   as   in   terms   of   the   second

Government   Resolution   by   incorporating   the   specific

dates on which the compensation was actually paid to

the persons entitled to it. The State Government shall

also provide a list of victims who have not been paid

33

compensation   in   terms   of   both   the   Government

Resolutions;

iv.The State Government shall pay compensation of Rs.2

lakhs to the legal heirs of the missing persons traced

out hereafter, with interest at the rate of 9% per annum

from 22

nd 

January 1999 i.e. from the expiry of the period

of six months from the date of the second Government

Resolution, till actual payment;

v.The Committee consisting of the Secretary of MSLSA

and the other two Government Officers appointed under

this   order,   shall   monitor   the   efforts   of   the   State

Government to trace other victims who were entitled to

compensation   in   terms   of   the   Annexure   to   the   first

Government Resolution but compensation was not paid

to them. The victims identified hereafter shall also be

paid the compensation with interest at the rate of 9%

per annum from 8

th

 January 1994 i.e. from the expiry of

the period of six months from the date of the First

Government Resolution, till actual payment;

34

vi.To those who were paid compensation after the expiry of

the period of six months from the date of the applicable

Government Resolution, the State Government shall pay

interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the amount of

the compensation payable from the expiry of the period

of   six   months   from   the   date   of   the   applicable

Government Resolution till the date of payment. This

direction   will   apply   to   those   who   have   received

compensation before the date of this Judgment.   The

Committee, after examining the record, shall furnish to

the State Government the details of the victims who are

entitled to receive interest as above;

vii.The   State   Government   shall   comply   with   the

requirement   of   submitting   necessary   details   as

aforesaid   to   the   Committee   within   a   period   of   two

months from today. Appointment of the two officers, as

directed above, shall be made within a period of one

month from today. Both the Government Officers shall

coordinate   with   concerned   Departments   and   ensure

that necessary details, as directed by the Committee,

35

are furnished to the Committee within the specified time

of two months;

viii.The entire exercise of payment of compensation and/or

interest shall be completed by the State Government

within a period of nine months from today. The State

Government shall report compliance made from time to

time   to   the   Committee.   A   detailed   report   containing

details of the compliance of the directions as aforesaid

shall be filed by the Secretary of MSLSA with this Court

within a period of ten months from today;

ix.The Committee shall seek necessary guidance from the

Executive Chairperson of MSLSA for implementation of

the directions issued by this order. The Committee shall

be   entitled   to   seek   the   assistance   of   Para   Legal

volunteers; 

x.The State Government shall provide details of the only

pending riot related criminal case before the Sessions

Court   at   Mumbai   to   the   Registrar   General   of   the

Bombay High Court who shall bring it to the notice of

36

the concerned Court that the case needs to be disposed

of at the earliest; 

xi.The State Government shall provide details of 97 cases

on dormant files to the Registrar General of the Bombay

High Court within one month from today. On receipt of

the details, the High Court on the Administrative side

shall issue necessary communication to the concerned

Courts in which the cases are pending to take necessary

steps to trace the accused. The State Government shall

immediately   constitute   a   Special   Cell   to   trace   the

absconding  /missing   accused  in  these   cases  and   to

assist   the   concerned   Courts   so   that   the   Trial   can

proceed against them; and 

xii.The State Government shall expeditiously implement all

the recommendations made by the Commission on the

issue of reforms in the police force which were accepted

by it. 

37

29.Writ Petition is disposed of with the above directions. A copy

of this judgment shall be forwarded to the Member Secretary of

MSLSA. 

…....…………………J.

    (Sanjay Kishan Kaul)

…….…………………J.

    (Abhay S. Oka)

…….…………………J.

     (Vikram Nath)

New Delhi;

November 4, 2022. 

38

Reference cases

Description

Legal Notes

Add a Note....