Delhi HC stays Rs 75 lakh compensation to man who drove into chained police barricades

Delhi government argued that the accident couldn’t have taken place without contributory negligence on part of the motorist.

The Delhi high court on Wednesday stayed the payment of a compensation of Rs 75 lakh to a man, who is in a vegetative state after crashing into chained barricades placed on a road while riding a motorcycle. The stay was granted after the city police challenged the May 18 order of a single judge granting the compensation.

The man’s motorcycle crashed into the chained barricades placed on a road on an early December morning in 2015, leading to very serious injuries. (Sushil Kumar/HT PHOTO)

A bench of chief justice DN Patel and justice Prateek Jalan admitted the appeal by the Delhi police, filed through advocate Gautam Narayan, additional standing counsel of the Delhi government (ASC) (civil), which had challenged the May 18 order of justice Navin Chawla, directing the Delhi Police to give Rs 75 lakh to Dheeraj Kumar, who was 21 years old at the time of the incident in December 2015.

The accident took place on an early December morning in West Punjabi Nagar area when Kumar and his father were returning home on a motorcycle and rammed into police barricades, which were chained together to cordon off a road completely. The victim was admitted at Safdarjung Hospital and after undergoing multiple surgeries and treatment, he was discharged in a state of unconsciousness.

Challenging this decision, ASC Narayan, on Wednesday, told the court that to curb law and order problems, address security concerns, especially keeping in mind that Delhi is the national capital and the seat of the central government, houses sensitive establishments, is home to embassies and high commissions of several countries across the world and since top functionaries of the central government and the judiciary etc., reside here; the police actively takes several measures, including the placing of barricades from 12 am to 5 am in various parts of Delhi, including residential areas, to restrict and check movement.

He said that the barricades are a common enough sight on the roads of the city and the normal and expected reaction of any law abiding member of the public, on coming across a cordoned of stretch of road, ought to be to respect the said measure and turn away and not to attempt to maneuver through, thereby defeating the very purpose of the security measure.

The plea contended that the single judge, however, accepted the case set up by the petitioner, in toto, despite the fact that it is not supported by any evidence with regard to the factors that caused the accident, and vicarious liability has been placed on the police on the basis of presumptions and assumptions.

“The fact that the accident could not have occurred without contributory negligence on part of the motorist has been totally lost sight of,” the plea read.

Following this, the court stayed the order of the single judge even though the counsel told the court that the money has already been deposited in the Registry of the Delhi high court.

The youth and his father had earlier approached the high court seeking compensation towards the refund of medical expenses, loss of income/dependency, loss of prospects, continuing future needs as also for the pain and suffering suffered due to the accident.

The high court, in its verdict of May 18, said the barricades were chained and therefore, did not allow vehicles to pass through and such chains could not have been visible to the motorist from a distance.