# Smt. Saroj v. State of U.P. and Ors

- **Citation:** (2013) 3 ILRA 1206
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2013-09-24
- **Case number:** W.P. No. 11981 of 2009
- **Bench:** Shri Narayan Shukla
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/smt-saroj-v-state-of-u-p-and-ors-42657
- **Pages:** 3

## Headnote

Constitution of India, Art. 226- Insurance
claim-husband of petitioner-working as
presiding officer in General election of
Parliament 2004-death caused due to snake
biting-claim denied by company on ground
death not covered under II scheduled-as
accidental death-held-necessarily a part of
accidental death-entitled for claim of Rs.
500000/- alongwith 12% interest from the
date of death.

Held: Para-10 & 11

## Text

1206 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
garb of this right a victim cannot be allowed
to linger on proceedings.

37. Hence, in view of above this
Court is of the view that the orders passed
by the trial court are not sustainable and
the same are liable to be set aside.

38. The Advocate appointed by the
victim should be permitted to assist the court
by supplementing the arguments already
advanced by Public Prosecutor by oral
submissions in addition to written argument if
any filed by him.

39. Consequently, these petitions are
allowed. The impugned orders dated
3.8.2013 and 16.8.2013 are set aside. The trial
court is directed that the Advocate appointed by
victim of the case shall be permitted to advance
oral argument in addition to written argument if
any earlier filed, fixing a date and maximum
time which the trial court may think reasonable
in one stretch but not less than a day. This will
be an opportunity granted only once to the
victim alone as defined in Section 2(wa) of
Cr.P.C. No further adjournment shall be
allowed to the victim in this regard.

40. The interim order stand
discharged.
--------

ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: LUCKNOW 24.09.2013

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SHRI NARAYAN SHUKLA, J.

Writ Petition No. 4648(M.S.) of 2006

Smt. Saroj

 ...Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and Ors.
 ...Opp. Parties

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Tripathi B.G.Balak
Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C., Sri Brijendra Chaudhary
Sri Raj Kumar Singh

Constitution of India, Art. 226- Insurance
claim-husband of petitioner-working as
presiding officer in General election of
Parliament 2004-death caused due to snake
biting-claim denied by company on ground
death not covered under II scheduled-as
accidental death-held-necessarily a part of
accidental death-entitled for claim of Rs.
500000/- alongwith 12% interest from the
date of death.

Held: Para-10 & 11
10. Thus, after reading the aforesaid
definition, it is apparent that the incident
caused by the forceful act can be said to
be caused by violent . When the snake
bites, definitely it uses its physical force
in doing so. Therefore, the said attack of
snake cannot be said to be natural or
ordinary one but it is an unnatural
accidental attack with physical force.

11. Therefore, I am of the view that death
caused by snake biting is necessarily an
accidental death caused by violent which is
covered under the scope of cover as is
provided in the part II of the Schedule of
the Insurance Policy.

Case Law discussed:
W.P. No. 11981 of 2009

(Delivered by Hon'ble Shri Narayan Shukla, J.)

1. Heard Mr Tripathi B.G. Balak,
learned counsel for the petitioner as well
as learned Standing Counsel.

2. Briefly the facts of the case are
described as under:-

The petitioner claims herself as wife of
Krishna Chandra, who was deputed on
election duty during General Election of
Parliament in the year 2004. Petitioner's
3 All] Smt. Saroj Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.
1207
husband was a Government employee
working as a Pharmacist at Community
Health Center, Amargarh district Pratapgarh.
During the course of election duty he was
deputed to work as a Presiding Officer of
Polling Station No. 152, Kannya Primary
School, Chandpur South, Pratapgarh, Vidhan
Sabha Kshetra No. 102, Pratapgarh. The
State Government by means of Circular
dated 19 th April, 2004 informed to all
District Election officers about its decision to
provide the insurance cover to all the persons
being on election duty. The election was to
be held in three phases. The date of election
of first phase was fixed on 26 th April,2004.
In this phase of election the period of
insurance cover was indicated as from
23.4.2004 mid night to 27.4.2004 mid night
,i.e, about four days.

3. Admittedly, petitioner's husband
Krishna Chandra died on 26.4.2004 while he
was on election duty. The Deputy District
Election Officer, Pratapgarh through his
letter dated 5 th august,2004 recommended
his case for grant of insurance claim through
his wife ( Petitioner ) to the Insurance
Company,
namely,
I.C.I.C.I.
Lombard
General Insurance Company Ltd., i. e.
Opposite Party No.4. However, Insurance
Company refused to executed the insurance
benefit to the petitioner on the ground that
the Policy does not cover the death caused
due to other than accident. In turn the Deputy
Election Officer, Pratapgarh informed the
petitioner that the Insurance Company had
declined to extend the insurance benefits to
her.

4. The reason of death of petitioner's
husband is snake bite. The Insurance
Company says that death due to snake
bite is not an accidental death. Therefore,
such a death is not covered under the
cover of Insurance Policy.

5. Part II of Schedule of Group
Personal
Accident
Insurance
Policy
speaks about the scope of cover. It says
that the policy shall cover the death,
permanent disability and partial disability,
resulting solely and directly from accident
caused by violent, external and visible
means independent of any other cause,
arising out of and in course of election
whilst discharging the election duties.

6. It is not in dispute that the death
caused due to snake biting is not a natural
death. It is also not the case of
respondents
that
the
deceased
was
suffering from any disease which became
the cause of his death. The word "
violent" has been defined by the different
dictionaries.

7. The Webster's Third New
International Dictionary defines the word"
violent" as under;

(1)Characterized by extreme force :
marked by abnormally sudden physical
activity and intensity,

(2) furious or vehement to the point
of being improper, unjust or illegal,

(3)extremely or intensely vivid or
loud,

(4)produce or effected by force,

(5) tending to distort or misrepresent

(6)extremely excited.

8. The Oxford dictionary defines the
word"violent" as under;

"1.Involving or caused by physical
force that is intended to hurt or kill,

2. showing or caused by very strong
emotion,
1208 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

3. very strong and sudden"

9. The word" violent" is defined by
Collins English Dictionary as under:

1. marked or caused by great
physical force or violence:a violent stab
2.(of a person) tending to the use of
violence, esp in order to injure or
intimidate others 3.marked by intensity of
any kind: a violent clash of colours
4.characterized by an undue use of force;
severe; harsh 5.caused by or displaying
strong or undue mental or emotional
force; a violent tongue 6.tending to distort
the
meaning
or
intent:
a
violent
interpretation of the text violently adv.
ETYMOLOGY C14:from Latin violentus,
probably from vis strength."

10. Thus, after reading the aforesaid
definition, it is apparent that the incident
caused by the forceful act can be said to
be caused by violent . When the snake
bites, definitely it uses its physical force
in doing so. Therefore, the said attack of
snake cannot be said to be natural or
ordinary one but it is an unnatural
accidental attack with physical force.

11. Therefore, I am of the view that
death
caused
by
snake
biting
is
necessarily an accidental death caused by
violent which is covered under the scope
of cover as is provided in the part II of the
Schedule of the Insurance Policy.

12. In the same circumstances the
High Court of Orissa dealing with the
case of death due to snake bite held that
such a death is unnatural/accidental death.
Therefore, it is covered under the
Insurance Policy and extended the benefit
of Rupee Five Lac (Rs.5,00000/-) of the
insurance amount in favour of the
claimant [Dhruba Chandra Behra Vs.
National Insurance Co. Ltd. and others
W.P. (C) No.11981 of 2009 decided on
13.1.2011].

13. Therefore, there is no iota of
doubts that the death of the petitioner's
husband is covered under the Insurance
Policy. That being so, the petitioner being
wife of the deceased is entitled to get the
insurance amount from the respondents.

14. In the result, the writ petition is
allowed with the direction to the opposite
parties to make payment of insurance
amount, i.e, Rs.5,00000/- ( Rupee five
lac) to the petitioner within one month
from the date of communication of this
order along with an interest at the rate of
Rs. 12/- per annum accrued from the date
of death of the petitioner's husband.
--------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 02.09.2013

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SUDHIR AGARWAL, J.

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.5077 of 1996

Vijnesh Kumar

 ...Petitioner
Versus
The D.M & Anr. ....Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Ramendra Asthana

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C.

Constitution
of
India,
Art.
16-
Regularization-public appointment without
advertisement,
without
giving
equal
opportunity
to
all
eligible
persons-in
absence of statutory provision-relief for
absorption-not available.

Held:
Para-6