These three writ petitions involving the common questions of fact and law were jointly heard for disposal by a common judgment and order. [2] Heard Mr.FA Khalid, learned counsel for the petitioners of the three writ petitions and Mr.Th.Ibohal, learned GA for the State respondents as well as Mr.K.Kumar, learned CGSC for respondent nos.3, 4, 6 and 7 respectively. [3] Writ Petition (C) no.876 of 2001 is filed by the wife and minor daughter of late Mohd Leihajuddin (handyman of Bus bearing registration No.MNP 8842) who was killed in the incident at Tonsen Lamkhai, Thoubal District, Manipur on 3.10.1999 for claiming compensation at the tune of Rs.15 lacs for killing and depriving the valuable life of the petitioner no.1's husband i.e. Mohd Laihajuddin. Writ Petition (C) no.878 of 2001 is filed by the wife and minor children of Mohd Nawab Ali (Driver of the Bus bearing registration No.MNP 8842) who was killed in the incident at Tonsen Lamkhai, Thoubal District on 3.10.1999 for claiming compensation to the tune of Rs.15 lacs for killing and depriving the valuable life of petitioner no.1's husband, i.e. Mohd Nawab Ali in that incident. And, Writ petition © No.892 of 2001 is filed by the wife and minor children of late Mohd Bashir Ahmad (owner of the Bus bearing registration No.MNP 8842) who was killed in an incident at Tonsen Lamkhai, Thoubal District on 3.10.1999 for claiming compensation to the tune of Rs.20 lacs for killing and depriving the valuable life of the petitioner no.1's husband Md.Bashir Ahmad in that incident. [4] The succinct fact, which gives rise to the filing of these three writ petitions are that: The Bus bearing registration No.MNP 8842, of which, late Mohd Bashir Ahmad is the registered owner and the said late Mohd Nawab Ali and late Mohd Leihajuddin are the Driver and Handyman respectively, was requisitioned by the Government of Manipur along with its Driver under Section 160 of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 for the conduct of election to the 13th Lok Sabha Election, 1999 in respect of Thoubal District till the poll was over vide order dated 20.9.1999 of the District Magistrate, Thoubal, Manipur, copy of which is available at Annexure-A/1 to the writ petitions. [5] The Bus bearing registration No.MNP 8842 while on election duty on 3.10.1999 for escorting officials and election materials, the said late owner of the Bus followed the same in order to take care of it as it was the only means of earning livelihood of his family. The owner, driver and the handyman of the said Bus bearing reg. No.MNP 8842 were the only non officials in the Bus which was used for election purposes. The bus was proceeding towards Sugnu for election purpose and when reached at Tonsen Lamkhai at about 1.25 p.m. a group of CRPF personnel of 35 Bn signaled the Driver to stop the vehicle and accordingly stopped the vehicle. Then the said CRPF personnel ordered the Driver, Handyman and the owner and another to get down from the Bus. As soon as the Handyman and the other got down from the Bus, the CRPF personnel who were heavily armed with modern sophisticated weapons opened discriminate firing thereby causing death of the owner, driver, handyman and the other official who were on the election duty. It is said that no inquiry was made or no opportunity was afforded to the deceased to explain how and why they came in the bus. The deceased persons sustained several bullet injuries in their persons. [6] It is said that later on it came to the knowledge of the petitioner that on the same date i.e. 3.10.1999 at about 1 p.m. the patrol party of CRPF personnel were attacked by some unknown armed persons killing some of the CRPF personnel at Tonsen Lamkhai and in retaliation thereof, the CRPF personnel shot the innocent Driver, Handyman, Owner and other official of the said Bus bearing Reg.No.MNP 8842 at Tonsen Lamkhai. [7] That on 5.10.1999 a Joint Action Committee was constituted for holding inquiry and complaint against the massacre of innocent persons i.e. the owner, driver and handyman of the said Bus having reg.no.MNP 8842. The Joint Action Committee presented a memorandum to the Hon'ble Chief Minister, Manipur to take up immediate action against the CRPF for their mass killing and also for payment of ex-gratia and also to hold judicial inquiry into the incident. The Joint Action Committee presented a memorandum to the Hon'ble Chief Minister, Manipur to take up immediate action against the CRPF for their mass killing and also for payment of ex-gratia and also to hold judicial inquiry into the incident. It is also said that the Commanding Officer of the 30 Bn CRPF camping at Haotabi, Thoubal District lodged a written report on 3.10.1999 with the officer-in-charge of Sugnu Police Station stating that the patrol party of the CRPF had been attacked by the militants at Tonsen Lamkhai on 3.10.1999 at about 1 p.m. killing CRPF personnel. In pursuance of the said written report the officer-in-charge of the Sugnu P.S registered a regular case being FIR No.19(10)1999 Sugnu P.S under Section 121-A, 427/326/307/302 IPC, 25 (1-B) A Act.13 U.A.(P) Act & 5 Explo-Sub-Act & 5 Explo-Sub-Act against the militants. [8] The State Government issued order dated 29.3.2000 for allocating a sum of Rs.4 lacs 50 thousand only for payment of ex-gratia to the next kin of those civilian victims killed while on election duty in the said firing incident on 3.10.1999 at Tonsen Lamkhai, Thoubal District. For killing the Driver, owner and handyman of the sad vehicle in the said incident on 3.10.1999 at Tonsen Lamkhai, the State Government had already paid 1 lac 50 thousand each to the wives of the owner, handyman and the driver of the said Bus bearing reg.no.MNP 8842. [9] The post mortem examination of the death bodies of the deceased Bus owner, driver and handyman of the said bus were performed at the Regional Institute of Medical Sciences (RIMS) on 4.10.1999 by the concerned medical officer and gave his opinion that the death were due to firing injuries which was homicidal in nature. Hence these writ petitions against the No.1. The Union of India; 2.The Commissioner/Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, North Block, New Delhi. 3. The Director General of CRPF, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi; 4. The Commandant, 35 Bn CRPF, Camp Haotabi, Thoubal District, Manipur; 5. The State of Manipur; 6. The Chief Secretary, Government of Manipur, Imphal; 7.The Commissioner/ Secretary (Home), Government of Manipur, Imphal for payment of compensation for killing and depriving the valuable lives of the bus owner, driver and handyman of the said bus having Reg.no.MNP 8842. [10] The respondents, i.e. No.1. The State of Manipur; 6. The Chief Secretary, Government of Manipur, Imphal; 7.The Commissioner/ Secretary (Home), Government of Manipur, Imphal for payment of compensation for killing and depriving the valuable lives of the bus owner, driver and handyman of the said bus having Reg.no.MNP 8842. [10] The respondents, i.e. No.1. The Union of India; 2.The Commissioner/Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, North Block, New Delhi. 3. The Director General of CRPF, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi; 4. The Commandant, 35 Bn CRPF, Camp Haotabi, Thoubal District, Manipur filed their joint Affidavit-in-opposition. In their joint Affidavit-in-opposition, the said respondents are not denying that the bus owner, driver and handyman of the said bus bearing reg.no.MNP 8842 was killed in the incident at Tonsen Lamkhai, Thoubal District on 3.10.1999. The only case of the respondents in their Affidavit-in-opposition is that on 3.10.1999 at Tonsen Lamkhai, Thoubal District, a column of vehicles carrying CRPF personnel were ambushed by the militants and several CRPF officers and men were killed and injures as a result of the militant firing. The CRPF personnel also retaliated to the firing from the militants and in the ensuing cross firing some civilians were also killed. Since the CRPF personnel were acting in self defence, against the ambush laid by the militants, the action of the CRPF personnel were fully justified and any injury/killing of the civilians were beyond no one's control. [11] This court passed an order dated 27.11.2002 in the present three writ petitions that: “On perusal of the pleading of the parties including the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it goes to show that the basic facts necessary to enable this court to adjudicate on the entitlement of the writ petitioner are in dispute. The case relates to fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. As agreed by the learned counsel for the parties the leaned Addl.District & Sessions Judge, Manipur West is directed to conduct an inquiry into the matter and submit the report within three months.” In pursuance of the order of this court dated 27.11.2002 the learned Addl.District & Sessions Judge, Manipur West hold an inquiry by giving ample opportunity to all the parties to submit their case and also to produce witnesses in support of their cases. The learned Addl.District & Sessions Judge, Manipur West, after careful perusal of the averments of the petitioners in the writ petitions and averments of the respondents in their Affidavit-in-opposition framed the following issues: “(i) Whether Md.Bashir Ahmad, Md.Nawab Ali and Md.Leihajuddin, the owner, driver and handyman respectively of the bus bearing Regn.No.MNP-8842 were deliberately shot death by the CRPF personnel on 3.10.1999 at about 1305 hrs at Tonsen Lamkhai along the Waikhong-Sugnu Road? Or Whether the said Md.Bashir Ahmad, Md.Nawab Ali and Md.Leihajuddin were hit by the stray bullets during the encounter between the underground outfits and the combine force of the 35th Battalion CRPF and 81st Battalion CRPF at Tonsen Lamkhai along the Waikhong-Sugnu Road on 3.10.99 at about 1305 hrs? (ii) What are the circumstances leading to the death of the said Md.Bashir Ahmad, Md.Nawab Ali and Md.Leihajuddin at Tonsen Lamkhai, along the Waikhong-Sugnu Road on 3.10.1999 at about 1305 hrs? [12] The petitioners of the present three writ petitions examined as many as 9 (nine) witnesses in order to prove their averments that Mohd Bashir Ahmad (owner of the Bus), Md.Nawab Ali, (Driver of the Bus) and Mohd Leihajuddin (handyman of the Bus) were killed by the CRPF personnel on 3.10.1999 at about 1305 hrs at Tonsen Lamkhai. The respondents also examined 5 (five) witnesses to prove their averments that Mohd Bashir Ahmad, Mohd Nawab Ali, and Mohd Leihajuddin died as a result of being caught in the cross fire between the force of CRPF personnel and militants on 3.10.1999 at about 1305 hrs at Tonsen Lamkhai along Waikhong-Sugnu Road. No witnesses were examined by the State respondents. [13] The wives of the bus owner, driver and handyman were also examined as witnesses i.e. PW-1, PW-2and PW-3 by the learned Addl.District & Sessions Judge, Manipur West. In the statements of PWs no.1, 2 and 3 they deposed that their husbands were shot dead by the CRPF personnel when their bus was going on election duty for the 13th Lok Sabha Election, 1999 at Tonsen Lamkhai along Waikhong-Sugnu Road, Thoubal District. [14] PW No.4, Md.Fazur Rahman, s/o late Md.Bashir Rahman of Lilong Haoreibi Lou Manga, PS Lilong, Thoubal District has deposed that he has been serving as Veterinary Attendant in the Veterinary Department, Government of Manipur and he was engaged for election duty in connection with election of Member of Parliament held in the year, 1999. [14] PW No.4, Md.Fazur Rahman, s/o late Md.Bashir Rahman of Lilong Haoreibi Lou Manga, PS Lilong, Thoubal District has deposed that he has been serving as Veterinary Attendant in the Veterinary Department, Government of Manipur and he was engaged for election duty in connection with election of Member of Parliament held in the year, 1999. His duty for the said election was at Sugnu Chajing Polling Station. The officials who were engaged for election duty was gathered at Thoubal Mela Ground from where they proceeded by the bus towards Sugnu Chajing Polling Station. When they reached Tonsen Lamkhai, they heard the sound of firing. Their bus was stopped on hearing the sound of firing. After the firing stopped, some CRPF personnel came to the place where the bus was parked and asked all the persons to get down. Accordingly, they got down from the bus and the CRPF personnel also asked the driver, handyman and owner of the bus to got down. They also got down from the bus. Thereafter the driver, handyman and the owner and another person were taken by the CRPF personnel towards south for a distance of about 200 meters. He also deposed that the driver, handyman and owner of the bus along with 2/3 persons were taken by the CRPF personnel before he and others got down from the bus. After about 15 minutes they heard the sound of firing. On hearing the sound of firing they lied down inside the bus. And thereafter, they were taken towards southern direction. They were asked to go in line. The CRPF personnel also kicked and beaten them with sticks. He and others saw the four persons lying on the ground. Later on they came to know that out of the four persons lying on the ground three persons had died. [15] Moirangthem Nilkamal Singh, S/o M.Kherajao Singh of Khangabok Part III, PS Thoubal District who was examined as PW-5 by the learned Addl.District & Sessions Judge, Manipur West deposed that he has been working as Peon in the Cooperative Department, Government of Manipur. In the year, 1999 he was in the District Cooperative office, Thoubal. On 3.10.1999 he proceeded towards Sugnu for election duty of the 13th Lok Sabha (Outer Manipur) in the bus having reg.no.MNP 8842 along with other persons numbering 15 and other persons proceeded towards Sugnu in the said bus. In the year, 1999 he was in the District Cooperative office, Thoubal. On 3.10.1999 he proceeded towards Sugnu for election duty of the 13th Lok Sabha (Outer Manipur) in the bus having reg.no.MNP 8842 along with other persons numbering 15 and other persons proceeded towards Sugnu in the said bus. On the said Bus a paper written as “Election Duty” was fixed on the front glass of it. When they reached Tonsen Lamkhai some vehicles of the CRPF personnel were also coming from the same direction and 2/3 vehicles took over their bus. The CRPF personnel asked the driver of t heir bus to drive slowly and after a while they heard firing sound. At the material time, at a distance of 2 electric posts i.e. 2 meters. Some CRPF personnel asked to open the door of the bus in which they were traveling by striking the butt of the gun. The CRPF personnel dragged ¾ persons including himself, i.e. the driver, handyman and owner of the bus and himself. The CRPF personnel asked them to proceed towards southern direction and pushed them to proceed to a location at a distance of about 1 electric post from the place where their bus was parking. They found 2/3 death bodies near the bus waiting shed. On seeing the death bodies they started crying. The CRPF personnel asked them to raise their hands and stand in a row. The opened fire towards them, he and other three persons received bullet injuries. He sustained bullet injuries on his left hand, right side of the back near the shoulder on his right lower part of the leg. They all (four persons) who were shot dead by the CRPF personnel fallen on the road, three of them died. After about 2 hours a team of Police Commando arrived there. On seeing them he shouted to save his life. And, thereafter, they came to the place he was lying. PW-5 also deposed that he told the Police Commando that he was on election duty. He was taken to Kakching Hospital for medical treatment. The death bodies of the three persons remained at the said place before he was taken to Kakching Hospital for medical treatment by the Police Commando. And, thereafter, they came to the place he was lying. PW-5 also deposed that he told the Police Commando that he was on election duty. He was taken to Kakching Hospital for medical treatment. The death bodies of the three persons remained at the said place before he was taken to Kakching Hospital for medical treatment by the Police Commando. [16] From the statements of 5 (five) witnesses provided by the respondents in the course of the inquiry by the learned Addl.District & Sessions Judge, Manipur West they are only deposing that the owner, driver and handyman of the bus were killed in the cross firing at Tonsen Lamkhai, Thoubal District. After careful appreciation of the statements of PWs produced by the petitioners and statements of RWs produced by the respondents, the learned Addl.District & Sessions Judge, Manipur West gave a find in his report dated 22.2.2005 that the CRPF personnel deliberately killed the Mohd Nawab Ali, Driver of the Bus, Mohd Bashir Ahmad, owner of the Bus, Mohd Leihajuddin, handyman of the bus. The relevant portion of the report dated 22.2.2005 submitted by the learned Addl.District & Sessions Judge, Manipur West are quoted hereunder: “61. I have scrutinized the evidence of Shri M.Nilkamal Singh. The evidence of Shri Nilkamal Singh is not shaken it his cross-examination. He was a person who sustained bullet injuries on his person in the said incident. This independent witness who was at the scene of the occurrence narrated the occurrence vividly. Nothing tangible had been brought out to impeach his testimony. There is no any ground for discarding his evidence. His unimpeachable evidence has established that the CRPF personnel dragged down/pulled down ¾ persons including himself and that they were taken towards the southern direction. His evidence has also established that he along with 2/3 persons were compelled by the CRPF personnel to stand by raising their hands on the road near public bus waiting shed. His evidence has also established that the CRPF personnel opened indiscriminate firing thereby causing the death of 3 persons and bullet injuries on his persons. His evidence has also established that he was taken by the police personnel for treatment to Hospital. His evidence has also established that the CRPF personnel opened indiscriminate firing thereby causing the death of 3 persons and bullet injuries on his persons. His evidence has also established that he was taken by the police personnel for treatment to Hospital. His evidence that the intestine of one of the persons who got bullet injuries on his abdomen protruded his intestine is corroborated by the evidence of Dr.L.Fimate (PW No.7) who performed the post mortem examination on the dead body of Md.Nawab Ali of Yairipok. 62. There is no dispute that the dead bodies of the said Md.Nawab Ali, Md.Bashir Ahmad and Leihajuddin were found on the road near public bus waiting shed at a distance of one electric post i.e. the distance between two electric poles from the place where the bus stopping. It is one of the circumstance leading for taking into consideration that they were taken along with the said M.Nilakamal Singh (PW.no.5) and that the said 3 (three) deceased persons were shot death by the CRPF personnel at the place. 63. The evidence of Md.Fazur Rahman (PW No.4) has also established that after stopping the firing some CRPF came to the place where the bus was stopping and that they the driver, handyman and other 2/3 persons where taken towards south at a distance of 200 meters. His evidence has also established that after about 15 minute from the time taking the driver, handyman of the bus and 2/3 persons, he heard the sound of firing to get down along with ¾ persons were taken. 64. The evidence of Shri M.Nilakamal Singh (PW No.5) cannot establish that the 3 persons who were dragged down and shot death by the CRPF personnel were Md.Nawab Ali, Bashir Ahmad and Leihajuddin. But, the evidence of Md.Fazur Rahman shows that the driver and handyman of the bus were taken by the CRPF personnel and they were shot death by them (CRPF). The respondents 1 to 4 did not deny the fact that the 3 (three) persons who were taken along with Shri Nilkamal Singh and who died on the road, near the bus waiting shed were the driver, handyman and owner of the bus bearing Regn.No.MNP 8842. The respondents 1 to 4 did not deny the fact that the 3 (three) persons who were taken along with Shri Nilkamal Singh and who died on the road, near the bus waiting shed were the driver, handyman and owner of the bus bearing Regn.No.MNP 8842. So, it shall be deemed that the 3 (three) dead bodies found on the road near the place where the said M.Nilakamal Singh were dead bodies the said Md.Nawab Ali, Md.Bashir Ahmad and Md.Leihajuddin. 65. No ballistic expert was examined by the petitioners to give the opinion regarding the distance from where the guns which hit the said Md.Nawab Ali, Md.Bashir Ahmad, Leihajuddin and Shri M.Nilkamal Singh (PW No.5). However, Shri M.Nilkamal Singh has established that the guns were fired upon them from a distance of 15/20 ft. 66. In view of the reasons stated above, I come to the following findings: (i) that on 3.10.1999 at about 1305 hrs the militants ambushed to the combined force of 35 Bn CRPF and 81st Bn CRPF at Tonsen Lamkhai near a bus waiting shed along Waikhong Sugnu Road and that the CRPF personnel retaliated to the said attack. (ii) that an encounter had taken placed between the militants and the combined force of 35 Bn CRPF and 81st Bn CRPF and that the encounter continued for about 15/20 minutes. (iii) that in the said attack some CRPF personnel including one R.K.Singh 2-I/C IRLA No.2299 had died and many CRPF personnel sustained bullet injuries. (iv) that the bus bearing Regn.No.MNP 8842 reached there while the exchanged of firing was going on, and that the said bus was stopped there on hearing the sound of firing. (v) that after stopping the exchange of fire between the CRPF personnel and the militants, some CRPF personnel came to the place where the bus was stopping and dragged down/pulled own Md.Nawab Ali, Md.Bashir Ahmad and Md.Leihajuddin and M.Nilakamal Singh from the said bus and that they were compelled to proceed towards the southern direction. (vi) that the CRPF personnel compelled them to stand in a row by raising their hands on the road a distance of about 40/50 ft away from the said bus waiting shed. (vi) that the CRPF personnel compelled them to stand in a row by raising their hands on the road a distance of about 40/50 ft away from the said bus waiting shed. (vii) that the CRPF personnel opened indiscriminate firing upon them thereby causing the death of the said Md.Nawab Ali, Md.Bashir Ahmad and Md.Leihajuddin in on the spot and bullet injury on the person of the said M.Nilakamal Singh. (viii) that the CRPF personnel deliberately killed the said Md.Nawab Ali (the husband of Mst.Farida, PW No.3), Md.Bashir Ahmad (Mst.Tombi Devi, PW No.2) and Md.Leihajuddin ( the husband of Mst.Nazima PW No.1)” [17] After the learned Addl.District & Sessions Judge, Manipur West had submitted his report to this court, copies of the inquiry report dated 22.2.2005 were furnished to the learned CGSC who is appearing on behalf of the No.1. The Union of India; 2.The Commissioner/Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, North Block, New Delhi. 3. The Director General of CRPF, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi; 4. The Commandant, 35 Bn CRPF, Camp Haotabi, Thoubal District, Manipur; and also the learned GA appearing for the State respondents for filing objections and comments to the finding of the learned Addl.District & Sessions Judge, Manipur West in his report dated 22.2.2005. But in spite of giving ample opportunities to the respondents to submit their objections and comments to the finding of the learned Addl.District & Sessions Judge, Manipur West, in his report dated 22.2.2005 they have not filed their comments and objections. [18] In a large number of writ petitions similar with the present writ petition, this court, in exercise of public law jurisdiction, to meet the ends of justice, in addition to the other remedies available in the ordinary course of law, by way of damages, awarded compensation for the established infringement of indefeasible rights of the citizen of India guaranteed under Article 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India to the kith and kin of the citizen of India killed by the security personnel in unjustified firing. Some of the cases in which this court had entertained claim under public law jurisdiction for compensation for unconstitutional deprivation of fundamental rights to life and awarded compensation for the established infringement of indefeasible rights guaranteed under Article 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India are: (1) Shri Ranjan Gogoi Vs Union of India & 7 Ors: 1995 (II) GLT 384 (DB), (2) Shri Kangujam Ongbi Devi Vs State of Manipur & Ors: 1999 (2) GLT 202, (3) Terarongsen & Ors Vs Union of India & Ors: 2003 (1) GLT218: (4) Tarulata Devi Vs State of Assam & Ors: 2001 (2) GLT 419: (5) Kaisiliangmani (Th) Vs Union of India & Ors: 2005 (1) GLT 185; (6) CR (HC) No.11 of 1995: Shri Chanambam Menjor Singh Vs The Comtd/C.O 61 CRPF Mantripukhri & Ors and (7) The common judgment & order of this court dated 16.12.1998 passed in Civil Rule Nos.786; 840; 841; 842; 843; 844/96 - Takhellambam Ningol Saikhom Ongbi Surnalata Devi, aged about 28 years, w/o (late) S.Premchand Singh, resident of Uripok Achom Leikai, PO & PS Imphal, District Imphal, Manipur … Petitioner in CR No.786/96 Smt.Koijam Ongbi Kamala Devi, aged about 45 years, Mother of (late) Toijam Rajendro Singh, resident of Wangkhei Ayangpalli, PO & PS Imphal District Imphal, Manipur … Petitioner in CR No.840/96, (1) Wangkhem Kerani Singh aged about 48 years, service by occupation, resident of Uripok Basaspati Leikai, PO & PS Imphal, Manipur, (2) Wangkhem Ongbi Amurei Devi, aged about 45 years, W/O W.Kerani Singh, resident of Uripok Basaspati Leikai, PO & PS Imphal, Manipur… Petitioners in CR No.841/96- Smt Hijam Ongbi Tombi Devi, aged about 65 years, Mother of (late) Hijam Khogen @ Boy Singh, resident of Uripok Polem Leikai, PO & PS Imphal, District Imphal, Manipur… Petitioner in CR No.842/96 - 1.Leichombam Ningol Angom Ongbi Tampha Devi, aged about 65 years, W/o A.Tamu Singh, resident of Pheiyeng Saban Leikai, PO & PS Lamsang, District Imphal, Manipur, 2. Ningthoujam Ningol Angom Ongbi Khomdonbi Devi aged about 32 years, w/o (late) Angom Debendra Singh, resident of Pheiyeng Saban Leikai, resident of Pheiyeng Saban Leikai, PO & PS Lamsang District Imphal, Manipur… Petitioners in CR No.843/96 - Smt Laishram Ningol Ningthemcha Ongbi Manglembi Devi, aged about 48 years, w/o R.K.Khomdonsana Takhellambam Leikai, PO & PS Imphal, District Imphal, Manipur… Petitioner in CR No.844/96 -Versus- 1. Union of India represented by Secretary (Home) Government of India, New Delhi, 2. State of Manipur, represented by Secretary (Home), Government of Manipur, Imphal, 3. Director General of CRPF, New Delhi, 4. Inspector General of CRPF, Group Centre, Bn CRPF, C/o Group Centre, Langjing, Imphal… Respondents in all the CRs for awarding compensation to the kith and kin of the citizen of India killed in the indiscriminate firing by the CRPF personnel at the place near the Regional Medical College, RMC, Imphal, Manipur. Langjing, Imphal, 5. Commandant, 79th Bn CRPF c/o Group Centre Langjing, Imphal, 6. Const.Putti Lal of 79 Bn CRPF c/o Group Centre Langjing, Imphal, 7. Constable Md.Razak of 79th Bn CRPF, C/O Group Centre Langjing, Imphal and 8.The Commandant, 119th [19] From perusal of the report of the learned Addl.District & Sessions Judge, Manipur West dated 22.2.2005 and also from the statement of PWs, statement of RWs and statement of witness of the State respondent and materials available on record, it appears that the finding of the learned Addl District & Sessions Judge, in his report dated 22.2.2005 had been based on sufficient reasons and also that the finding was made after careful appreciation of the statements of witnesses. This court is not sitting as an appellate authority or re-appreciating the statement of witnesses examined by the learned Addl.District & Sessions Judge, Manipur West in the course of his inquiry. But this court is examining as to whether or not the findings made by the learned Addl District & Sessions Judge, in his report are perverse and based on no evidence. After such examination of the report of the learned Addl.District & Sessions Judge, I am of the considered view that the report submitted by the learned Addl.District & Sessions Judge is acceptable for the limited purpose of deciding the fact that the CRPF personnel is responsible for the unjustified killing of (1) late Mohd Bashir Ahmad owner of the bus bearing Reg.No.MNP.8842, (2) late Mohd Nawab Ali Driver and (3) late Mohd Leihajuddin Handyman respectively of the said bus. [20] Redressing the wrong by award of monetary compensation against the State for its failure to protect the fundamental right of its citizen had been discussed by the Apex Court in a catena of cases and held that the award of compensation for established infringement of indefeasible right guaranteed to a citizen under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is a remedy available in public law since the purpose of public law is not only to civilize public power but also to assure the citizens that they live under a legal system where under their right and interests shall be protected and preserved. The grant of compensation in proceeding under Article 32 or Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the established violation of fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 is an exercise of the Court under the Public Law jurisdiction for penalizing the wrong doer and fixing the liability for the public wrong on the State which failed in discharge of its public duty to protect fundamental right of the citizens. [21] The Apex Court (3 Judges) in its latest decision rendered on 3.2.2006 in Sube Singh & Ors Vs State of Haryana & ors: Writ petition (Criminal) No.237 of 1998 also reiterated that the award of compensation against the State is an appropriate and effective remedy for redress of an established infringement of fundamental right under Article 21 by a public servant, the quantum of compensation will, however, depend upon the fact and circumstances of each case. An award of such compensation (by way of public law remedy) will not come in the way of the aggrieved persons claiming the additional compensation in civil court, in enforcement of private law remedy in Torts nor come in the way of Criminal Court ordering compensation under Section 357 of the Cr.P.C. [22] Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India, which are the heart and soul of the Constitution of India, cannot be treated only as showpieces, which are to be polished time and again and kept in the rack. Article 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India are to be used, protected and enforced by all in consonance with the rights contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and also the Declaration and Covenants of Civil and Political Rights and Covenants of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to which India is also a party. Article 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India are to be used, protected and enforced by all in consonance with the rights contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and also the Declaration and Covenants of Civil and Political Rights and Covenants of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to which India is also a party. The word “life” is also recognized as a basic human rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 which has the same meaning and interpretation as had been placed in the Article 21 of the Constitution of India according to the various decisions of the Apex Court. The meaning of the word “life” cannot be narrowed down and protections guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution shall also be available to all the persons. [23] In view of what has been discussed above, I am of the considered view that the respondents i.e. No.1. The Union of India; 2.The Commissioner/Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, North Block, New Delhi. 3. The Director General of CRPF, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi; 4. The Commandant, 35 Bn CRPF, Camp Haotabi, Thoubal District, Manipur; should be directed to pay compensation to the kith and kin of (1) late Mohd Bashir Ahmad owner of the bus bearing Reg.No.MNP.8842, (2) late Mohd Nawab Ali Driver and (3) late Mohd Leihajuddin Handyman respectively of the said bus. For fixing the amount of compensation, the economic condition of (1) late Mohd Bashir Ahmad owner of the bus bearing Reg.No.MNP.8842, (2) late Mohd Nawab Ali Driver and (3) late Mohd Leihajuddin Handyman respectively of the said bus in the said incident on 3.10.1999 at Tonsen Lamkhai, Thoubal District and also their present cost of living are taken into consideration and fixed Rs.3 lacs each to the kith and kin of the owner, driver and handyman. [24] Accordingly, the respondents No.1. The Union of India; 2.The Commissioner/Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, North Block, New Delhi. 3. The Director General of CRPF, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi; 4. The Commandant, 35 Bn CRPF, Camp Haotabi, Thoubal District, Manipur are directed to pay compensation of Rs.3 lacs each to the kith and kin of the owner, driver and handyman of the said bus bearing reg.no.MNP 8842 within a period of 8 (eight) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. The Commandant, 35 Bn CRPF, Camp Haotabi, Thoubal District, Manipur are directed to pay compensation of Rs.3 lacs each to the kith and kin of the owner, driver and handyman of the said bus bearing reg.no.MNP 8842 within a period of 8 (eight) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Further, it is made clear that this amount of compensation is in addition to the other remedies available to the petitioners of the present writ petitions in the ordinary course of law by way of damages in the civil suit. Respondents are, further, directed to pay a sum of Rs.3000/- (Rupees three thousand) as fee for the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in the present three writ petitions within 8 (eight) weeks from today. Writ petitions are allowed in terms of the directions indicated above.