2025:JHHC:27046 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P (C). No. 2130 of 2008 ------- Mst. Sakina Khatoon, w/o. late Rais Ansari, resident of village Lalmatia, P.O. Lalmatia, P.S. Lalmatia, District Godda. ……….. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. Secretary, Department of Home, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi. 3. The Deputy Commissioner, Godda. 4. The Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Eastern Coal Field Ltd., Sanctoria, P.O. Desargarh, District Burdwan (West Bengal). 5. The Chairman, Coal India Ltd., Netajee Subhash Chandra Bose, Kolkata. 6. Chief General Manager, Rajmahal, Group of Mines (Eastern Coal Field Ltd.), Dhankunda, P.O.+P.S. Lalmatia, District Godda (Jharkhand). ……….. Respondents ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioner : Mr. P.K. Choudhary, Advocate For the State : Mr. Kumar Pawan, AC to SC(M)-III For the ECL : Mr. Rajesh Lala, Advocate ---- 12/ 08.09.2025 The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner praying therein for a direction upon the respondents to make compensation to the petitioner on account of brutal death of her husband. 2. From record it appears that the petitioner had knocked the door earlier by way of filing writ application being C.W.J.C. No. 9763 of 1997, which was dismissed as pre-mature. 3. After some argument, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since he is having no instruction with regard to the development in the concerned criminal case; as such, if it would be found in that criminal case that the CISF and/or the Officials of respondent-Department is involved in killing of her husband, then she would be at liberty to approach the competent Civil Court for compensation. 2025:JHHC:27046 2 4. Learned counsel for the respondent-ECL submits that the petitioner’s husband was not employee of ECL and he was employee of a private Truck Owner. 5. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the fact that the petitioner’s husband was killed way back in the year 2003 and a criminal case was also instituted against unknown; as such, acceding to the prayer of liberty by the petitioner, the instant writ application is hereby disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum for getting compensation, after verifying the development in the case, if so advised. 6. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with the liberty as prayed for. (Deepak Roshan, J.) Kunal