[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Patna High Court
Sunita Devi vs The State Of Bihar on 22 December, 2025
Author: Anshuman
Bench: Anshuman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.734 of 2022
======================================================
Sunita Devi Wife of Late Rajkishor Singh Resident of Purani Bazar,
Mahamadpur Balmi, Motipur, P.O. and P.S. Motipur, District- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna.
3. The District Magistrate, Begusarai.
4. The Superintendent of Police, Begusarai.
5. The Circle Officer, Teghra, District- Begusarai.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sheo Shankar Prasad (Sc-8)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 22-12-2025
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for the
following relief/s:-
"I. For issuance of an appropriate
writ in the nature of MANDAMUS,
commanding and directing the
Respondent Authorities to pay the
amount of Rs. 10 Lacs as ex-gratia
Patna High Court CWJC No.734 of 2022 dt.22-12-2025
grant to the petitioner pursuant to the
Finance Department Resolution
contained in memo no.78/2005-1441
dated 10.10.2013 on the ground that
the husband of the petitioner met an
accident on 11.07.2016 during the
course of discharge of his duty and
subsequently he died on 12.07.2016.
(II) For issuance of an appropriate
writ in the nature of MANDAMUS,
commanding and directing the
Respondent Authorities to pay the
interest over the amount of ex-gratia
grant to the petitioner on the ground
that the delay has been occurred due
to latches and inaction on the part of
the Respondents.
(III) For issuance of any other
appropriate writ/writs, order/orders,
direction/directions for which the writ
petitioner would be found entitled
under the facts and circumstances of
Patna High Court CWJC No.734 of 2022 dt.22-12-2025
the case."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the husband of the petitioner was posted as an Assistant Sub-
Inspector of Police in Bachhwara Rail Police Station. He
submits that the husband of the petitioner along with the Station
Head Officer of Bachhwara Rail Police Station and others
proceeded from the police station by a government Bolero
vehicle on 11.07.2016 to Barauni for raid in connection with
Bachhwara Rail P.S Case No. 01 of 2016 registered for the
offence under section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. But, in the
way, the said Bolero vehicle met with an accident with a Maruti
Swift Car bearing Registration No. BR9P-3582. In result, the
petitioner's husband died. Counsel submits that after the death
of the petitioner's husband, the Superintendent of Police
recommended his case for the grant of ex-gratia amont of Rs.
10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs), as the petitioner's husband
died while discharging his duties. Counsel submits that
according to the Circular/Resolution contained in Memo
No.78/2005-1441 dated 10.10.2013 (Annexure-P/4), it is
categorically stated that while discharging duty, if, accident took
place which resulted into death, then the dependent of that
government servant become entitled to receive the ex-gratia
Patna High Court CWJC No.734 of 2022 dt.22-12-2025
amount. He submits that the said ex-gratia amount of Rs.
10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs) has not been granted to the
petitioner till date, and in-spite of the recommendation made by
the Superintendent of Police, the payment has not been made.
Therefore, the present writ petition has been filed for the said
relief.
4. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand
submits that the petitioner is not entitled for ex-gratia amount,
as the petitioner has already received accidental claim. But, the
present case is not covered under the claim which the petitioner
is demanding in the name of grant of ex-gratia during active
performance of duty. He submits that there is distinction
between discharging of duty and active performance of duty. He
further submits that the case of the petitioner does not come
under the active performance of duty and hence, the petitioner is
not entitled for grant of ex-gratia, particularly in the light of
Clause 3 and 4 of the Circular/Resolution contained in Memo
No.78/2005-1441 dated 10.10.2013 (Annexure-P/4).
5. With a view to adjudicate the claim, it is
necessary to quote the said Circular/Resolution contained in
Memo No.78/2005-1441 dated 10.10.2013 (Annexure-P/4)
which is as follows:-
Patna High Court CWJC No.734 of 2022 dt.22-12-2025
6. It transpires to this Court that the subject under
Patna High Court CWJC No.734 of 2022 dt.22-12-2025
which the said Circular/Resolution has been issued is already
quoted above and the subject is very clear i.e. " drZO; vof/k esa
lfØ; drZO; fuoZgu ds Øe esa nq?kZVuk ds dkj.k e`R;q gksus ij ljdkjh
lsodksa ds vkfJrksa dks vuqxzg vuqnku dh Loh--fr."
7. Here in the present case, the husband of the
petitioner admittedly working as an Assistant Sub-Inspector of
Police in Bachhwara Rail Police Station and admittedly being a
member of the raid party relating to Bachhwara Rail P.S Case
No. 01 of 2016 registered for the offence under section 379 of
the Indian Penal Code, the husband of the petitioner along with
other police personnel were going by Bolero vehicle towards
Teghra police station, but in the meantime, the collision takes
place between a Maruti Swift Car bearing Registration No.
BR9P-3582 and the Bolero vehicle, due to which the said
Bolero vehicle in which the petitioner's husband and others
were sitting went into 20 ft. ditch and in result, the petitioner's
husband died.
8. There are three aspects of the matter which is
necessary to be discussed here. Upon a specific query, learned
counsel for the State submits that the insurance of government
vehicle is not required and no government vehicle is used to be
insured. Whether the government has taken effort for realization
Patna High Court CWJC No.734 of 2022 dt.22-12-2025
of the insurance money from the owner of Maruti vehicle whose
number was apparent in the FIR itself, it has been intimated by
both the counsel that they are not aware of this fact that whether
the government has tried or made any effort for realization of
the said amount either from the Insurance Company or from the
owner of said Maruti Car, as under the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988 (Act No. 59 of 1988) the law said so. But after
recommendation of ex-gratia amount of Rs. 10,00,000/-
(Rupees Ten Lakhs) by the Superintendent of Police, the State at
the highest level started opposing the same on the ground that
the said death has not taken place during the active performance
of duty, but it may have taken place during discharging of duty.
9. It is an unfortunate situation that in India, which
is described as a welfare State, no insurance was taken for the
government vehicle, no effort was made by the State to provide
insurance coverage to the petitioner's husband under the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, and ex-gratia assistance has also been
denied, despite the same being governed by Annexure P/4, i.e.,
the Circular/Resolution contained in Memo No. 78/2005-1441
dated 10.10.2013. On the ground that the petitioner's case does
not fall under active performance of duty, this Court does not
agree with the contention of the learned counsel for the State
Patna High Court CWJC No.734 of 2022 dt.22-12-2025
and directs that every circular ought to be interpreted in a
positive manner. Admittedly, from the FIR it transpires that the
petitioner was actively part of the raid team and was proceeding
towards Teghra Police Station, and during his active duty hours,
the accident took place.
10. Hence, this Court is of the firm view that the
petitioner is entitled for grant of ex-gratia amount of Rs.
10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs). It is hereby directed that the
said payment be made to the petitioner within six months from
the date of production of receipt/copy of this order.
11. Accordingly, with the aforesaid observation and
direction, the present writ petition stands allowed.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Divyansh/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 23/12/2025
Transmission Date NA
