9 Year Old Drowned Pit Delhi High Court Compensation Rs 30 78 Lakh

The Delhi High Court recently enhanced the compensation payable to the family of a nine-year-old boy, who allegedly drowned after falling into an uncovered water-filled pit on a vacant plot, from Rs 22 lakh to Rs 30.78 lakh.

Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia held that courts are “duty-bound” to award just compensation when fundamental rights are violated due to the “acts or omissions” of state authorities.

“The learned single judge failed to appreciate that where fundamental rights are violated by the acts or omissions of State functionaries, the Court is duty-bound, in the exercise of its public law jurisdiction, to award just compensation so as to ensure that citizens live under a legal regime in which their rights and interests are duly protected and preserved,” the May 29 order read.

The high court was hearing an appeal filed by the child’s parents seeking enhancement of the Rs 22 lakh compensation awarded by a single judge on November 18, 2024.

It was placed on record that the nine-year-old boy allegedly fell into an uncovered pit located on a vacant plot under the possession of the Delhi Jal Board and drowned in July 2016.

The child’s father alleged that officials had dug the pit but failed to barricade, secure or monitor the area, despite it posing a danger to local residents and children. He contended that the child’s death occurred due to the negligence of the concerned authorities.

The post-mortem examination revealed the presence of dirty water in the child’s chest, and the cause of death was determined to be ante-mortem drowning.

The parents further submitted that their son was academically bright and had secured a CGPA of 9.5 while studying in Class III.

The Single Judge had awarded Rs 22 lakh compensation along with simple interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from July 20, 2016, the date of the incident.

However, the parents argued that the child’s notional income would have increased over time owing to inflation and future career progression, and that the compensation had been calculated without considering these future prospects.

Appearing for the parents, Advocates Aruna Mehta and Lakshay Mehta argued that the vacant plot had broken boundary walls and contained an uncovered pit that was neither barricaded nor otherwise secured, despite children frequently playing in the area.

On behalf of the Delhi Jal Board, Advocate Tushar Sannu opposed the plea for enhancement, contending that the compensation awarded by the Single Judge was fair and that adding a further component towards future prospects would amount to granting an unwarranted benefit.

Richa Sahay is a Legal Correspondent for The Indian Express, where she focuses on simplifying the complexities of the Indian judicial system. A law postgraduate, she leverages her advanced legal education to bridge the gap between technical court rulings and public understanding, ensuring that readers stay informed about the rapidly evolving legal landscape. Expertise Advanced Legal Education: As a law postgraduate, Richa possesses the academic depth required to interpret intricate statutes and constitutional nuances. Her background allows her to provide more than just summaries; she offers context-driven analysis of how legal changes impact the average citizen. Specialized Beat: She operates at the intersection of law and public policy, focusing on: Judicial Updates: Providing timely reports on orders from the Supreme Court of India and various High Courts. Legal Simplification: Translating dense "legalese" into accessible, engaging narratives without sacrificing factual accuracy. Legislative Changes: Monitoring new bills, amendments, and regulatory shifts that shape Indian society. ... Read More