"If the sole bread winner dies in a terror attack, how will his/her family survive on a mere Rs 3 lakh paid as compensation? How long will that money last?" asked the Bombay high court on Wednesday, questioning the Union govt awarding a mere Rs 3 lakh compensation to the families of terror victims. The division bench of justices Abhay Oka and AS Chandurkar was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) that sought forming of a policy for awarding compensation to such families.
On Wednesday, senior advocate SR Nargolkar was appointed amicus curie (friend of court) to assist in the matter. The judges asked Nargolkar to go through the existing Union and state govt policies in awarding compensation. "Go through the policies and see why such a meagre amount is being awarded," said justice Oka.
Additional solicitor general Anil Singh argued that the govt could not award more than Rs 3 lakh. A recent Union govt circular had announced an ex-gratia payment of Rs 4 lakh to families of those killed in bomb blasts. Of this, Centre would provide Rs 3 lakh; the respective state govt would contribute the rest.
The judges expressed dissatisfaction about awarding a standard compensation to such families and suggested the govt come up with a workable policy to determine the quantum of compensation.
"Everyone has a right to life under the Constitution of India. How will a mere Rs 3 lakh as compensation be enough for the family of a victim,"? Asked justice Oka.
The court remarked that the amendment to the Motor Vehicles Act in 1994 had suggested awarding a compensation of Rs 50,000 to families of accident victims. "Over the years, the amount has not been revised. In the present day, the compensation amount should be higher than Rs 50,000," remarked justice Oka.
The PIL, filed by advocate Rajeshwar Panchal, has demanded that families of those killed in terror blasts should be given a just and fair amount as compensation. The income of the deceased, family's social status and number of dependents should be taken into account while deciding the compensation.
The advocate pointed out that Motor Vehicles Act and Workmen's Compensation Act has laid out a formula to work out such a compensation.
In June, the high court had observed that giving suitable compensation to victims of terror attacks or blasts is the state's liability and that such reliefs cannot be ex-gratia.
A tiny sum as ex-gratia!
Panchal's PIL claims that 724 people had died in terror blasts in Mumbai from 1993 till the Zaveri Bazaar blasts on July 13, 2011. It says the victims and their families had not received 'just compensation'. "After every attack, ministers concerned make empty promises on preventing such incidents, and eventually declare some amount as ex-gratia, which is always a tiny sum as far the victims and their families are concerned, and it's given as if they (the govt) are obliging the victims," the PIL states. It also urges the HC to declare that Right to Life and Liberty, under Article 21 of the Constitution, includes the right to a secure life, or the right to live in safety.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}