Sr. No.53 Supp. List II IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CM 3201/2024 In LPA 136/2024 U.T OF J&K AND ORS. ...APPELLANT(S) Through: - Mr. Mohsin Qadri, Sr. AAG with Ms. Shaila Shameem, Assisting Counsel . Vs. JANA BEGUM AND ORS. …RESPONDENT(S) Through:- Mr. Razia Amin, Advocate vice Mr. Z.A. Qureshi, Sr. Advocate CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE ORDER(ORAL) 06.05.2025 1. This intra-court appeal arises out of an order and judgment dated 16th June, 2023, passed by the learned Single Judge [for short “the writ Court”] in OWP No. 718/2015 in the case titled “Mst. Jana and Ors. Vs. State of J&K and Anr.”, whereby the writ Court has allowed the writ petition filed by the respondents and directed the appellants herein to pay a compensation of Rs. 5.00 lacs to the respondents within a period of three months from the date of the judgment. It is further provided that in case the amount of compensation is not paid to the respondents within the aforesaid period, it shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the judgment. 2. The impugned judgment is challenged by the appellants, inter alia, on the following grounds:- (i) That the writ Court has not considered the objections of the appellants and the stand taken therein and, therefore, the judgment impugned is contrary to the correct factual and legal position attending the case. (ii) That the writ Court has not appreciated that there was not enough evidence on record to demonstrate that the death of the detenue had happened due to negligence of the appellants. 3. It was argued by Mr. Mohsin Qadri, learned senior AAG that despite the appellants having amply demonstrated that the jail authorities had taken all the security and safety measures in accordance with the provisions of the jail manual, the writ Court held the State responsible for the death of the detenue. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record, we are of the considered opinion that the judgment passed by the writ Court is well reasoned and does not call for interference by us in this appeal. It is not in dispute that one Mohammad Ismail Shah was at the time of his death lodged in Central Jail, Srinagar, as an undertrial in case FIR No. 174/2009 for offences under Sections 302, 109 RPC of Police Station, Kulgam and FIR No. 169/2009 of Police Station Qazigund. 5. It is also not disputed that while he was lodged in the jail, he came to be attacked by a co-prisoner, namely Ghulam Hassan Malik, as a result whereof the detenue Mohammad Ismail Shah received fatal injuries and died in the Central Jail, Srinagar itself. Once it is demonstrated that a person lodged in the jail has been killed by a co-prisoner, the negligence of the jail authorities in providing a safe and secure atmosphere to the prisoners is presumed, and the burden shifts to the jail authorities to come clear of this presumption. 6. We have gone through the judgment passed by the writ Court as also the material on record, and we do not find any material placed on record by the appellants to demonstrate that the unfortunate incident which consumed the life of the prisoner Mohammad Ismail Shah happened despite all reasonable care and precautions taken by the jail authorities. Rather, the negligence on the part of the jail authorities is writ large, and the death of any prisoner that happens within the precincts of jail is required to be explained by the jail authorities. 7. Without delving much into the issue and borrowing the reasoning given by the writ Court, we find no merit in this appeal and the same is dismissed. (SANJAY PARIHAR) (SANJEEV KUMAR) JUDGE JUDGE Srinagar, 06.05.2025 “Mir Arif” MIR ARIF MANZOOR I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 08.05.25