SC clears ambiguity, interprets phrase in Employees' Compensation Act
The court noted that there is "considerable doubt and ambiguity" surrounding this phrase in section 3 of the Act insofar as cases concerning accidents occurring to employees while proceeding to work and vice versa.
A bench of Justices Manoj Misra and K V Viswanathan noted that depending on facts, different rulings have interpreted this differently.
Section 3 of the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923 deals with the employer's liability for compensation.
"We interpret the phrase 'accident arising out of and in the course of his employment' occurring in section 3 of the EC Act to include an accident occurring to an employee while commuting from his residence to the place of employment for duty or from the place of employment to his residence after performing duty, provided the nexus between the circumstances, time and place in which the accident occurred and the employment is established," the bench said.
The top court delivered its verdict on an appeal challenging a December 2011 Bombay High Court order.
The high court had set aside an order of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Civil Judge, Osmanabad, which had awarded ₹3,26,140, along with interest, to the family members of a victim who died in an accident while he was on his way to report for duty.
The award was ordered in a claim filed under the EC Act.
In its verdict, the apex court noted that the deceased was employed as a watchman in a sugar factory and his duty hours were from 3 am to 11 am on April 22, 2003, the day of the accident.
The bench said it was undisputed that he was proceeding to his place of duty when the accident occurred at a spot located around five kilometres from the workplace.
"In view of the above, considering that the deceased was a night watchman and was dutifully proceeding to his workplace to be well on time, there was a clear nexus between the circumstances, time and place in which the accident occurred and his employment as watchman," the bench said.
It said as the accident had clearly arisen out of and in the course of employment, the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Civil Judge was justified in ordering the claim under the Act.
While allowing the appeal, the bench set aside the high court order and restored the judgment of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Civil Judge.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
an hour ago
- The Print
Physics teacher booked under POCSO Act dismissed from school
During his previous posting in Paonta Sahib in Sirmaur district, Kumar was accused of misbehaving with and molesting girl students. Rakesh Kumar, presently posted at Government Senior Secondary School in Solan district, was served dismissal orders by the director of school education. Shimla, July 29 (PTI) The Himachal Pradesh government on Tuesday dismissed a Physics teacher from service for alleged molestation of girl students, citing grave misconduct and violation of provisions under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. An FIR was registered against him on May 9, 2023, under Section 354A (penalizes sexual harassment) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 11 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, officials said. A departmental inquiry under the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, was initiated on September 6, 2023 and entrusted to Vaibhav Kumar Shukla, Principal of Government Degree College, Paonta Sahib. Kumar had approached the Himachal Pradesh High Court seeking quashing of the charge sheet or a stay on the departmental proceedings until the conclusion of the criminal trial. However, the court dismissed the plea, observing that there was no ground to stay the inquiry under the given circumstances. The inquiry officer, in his report, stated that the documents submitted by Kumar to contest the charges appeared questionable in authenticity and failed to adequately disprove the allegations. The report also noted that Kumar remained in judicial custody from May 9 to June 3, 2023, indicating the serious nature of the case. 'Taking into account the gravity of the misconduct, the nature of allegations involving moral turpitude, and the imperative need to ensure student safety, I am of the considered opinion that Rakesh Kumar is not fit to be retained in government service,' the inquiry officer concluded. Based on the findings, the government imposed a 'major penalty' and dismissed Kumar from service with immediate effect. PTI BPL OZ OZ OZ OZ This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
SC staying precedential effect of Bombay HC acquittals in train blast case is worrying
Last week, the Supreme Court (SC) stayed the precedential effect of a carefully reasoned Bombay High Court (HC) verdict that acquitted 12 persons accused in the 2006 Mumbai train bombings. The stay, without giving substantive reasons, is worrying. The case arose out of one of the most horrific terror attacks India has seen. On July 11, 2006, a series of seven coordinated bomb blasts ripped through compartments of Mumbai's trains, killing 187 people and injuring over 800. The Anti-Terrorism Squad of the Maharashtra Police took over the investigation, resulting in the arrest of 13 persons. The accused were charged under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (MCOCA), the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA), as well as the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. In 2015, a special court convicted 12 of them, sentencing five to death and the rest to life imprisonment. Its judgment relied heavily on the confessional statements made by some of the accused under Section 18 of MCOCA, declaring them 'voluntary and truthful' despite the defence arguing that they were the result of torture and emphasising that they were subsequently retracted. Since the death sentence had been imposed, the case was referred to the Bombay HC for confirmation. The persons sentenced to life imprisonment also filed appeals, and these cases were heard together by a Division Bench. In a 671-page judgment, the HC examined every aspect of the prosecution's case, finding its narrative to be riddled with inconsistencies and lacking in conclusive proof. Among other things, the court found that several key eyewitness testimonies were wholly unreliable, with some witnesses coming forward after more than 100 days of silence. The ability of witnesses to identify the accused in court after more than four years was doubted. Crucially, the HC declared that the invocation of the stringent MCOCA was improper. When prior approval for invoking that Act was granted, information about the existence of the legal ingredients and conditions was clearly not furnished before the approving authority. Also, the 'prior' approval was found to be without application of mind. Another key ingredient for the invocation of MCOCA is that there must be a 'continuing unlawful activity', as defined in that Act, and that condition was not fulfilled. The HC also held that the confessions relied on by the prosecution were inadmissible due to evidence of brutal torture, lack of voluntariness, and procedural violations under MCOCA, including defective 'prior' approvals and identical statements. It noted medical evidence of injuries, retractions made immediately upon judicial custody, and the absence of critical details like the bombs' chemistry, all of which undermined the credibility of the alleged confessions. The court also noted the failure of police to prove voluntariness through oral evidence and the striking fact that the accused had remained silent for months in custody. They allegedly confessed only after MCOCA was invoked: A pattern that undermined the genuineness of the statements. The HC ultimately acquitted all 12 of the accused, concluding that the prosecution 'utterly failed to establish the offence beyond a reasonable doubt against the accused on each count'. The acquittal alerts us to the disturbing fact that the actual masterminds of the 2006 Mumbai train blasts have remained scot-free for nearly two decades. It is particularly pertinent to pay heed to a preliminary paragraph in the HC's judgment, where it emphasises the dangers of 'creating a false appearance of having solved a case by presenting that the accused have been brought to justice'. This, the HC rightly notes, 'undermines public trust and falsely reassures society, while in reality, the true threat remains at large'. The stay order by the SC is jarring for several reasons. The first is the summary manner in which the Court, 'taking note of the submissions made by the learned Solicitor General on the question of law', said it was 'inclined to hold that the impugned judgment shall not be treated as a precedent in any other pending proceedings'. Based on this, the SC ordered 'there shall be a stay on the operation of the impugned judgment' to that extent. For the Court to 'hold' something, normally, both sides would be heard, and the Court would provide a reason. Instead, the stay order appears to be solely based on the assertion of the Solicitor General. There is no mention of any specific questions of law, or even the potential impact of the judgment as precedent. The SC order does not even refer to the tests it typically applies while determining whether a stay is to be granted. It makes no mention of whether the state has made out a prima facie case, whether the balance of convenience lies on its side, or how irreparable damage might be caused if the HC judgment is not stayed. Second, the stay order appears to undermine the HC's authority. The HC is not only a constitutional court, but also the mandatory reference court for death sentences, and the first appellate court meant to decide authoritatively on both facts and law. To summarily strip a judgment from such a body of its precedential value is unfair and demoralising. Third, and perhaps most important, is the signal the order sends out. This must be viewed in a broader context concerning cases involving terror offences, where there are often myriad pressures on the judiciary to secure a conviction to placate public outcry. In these cases, it takes a certain degree of judicial courage and integrity to focus on the particular questions of fact and law that arise in a case without being swayed by general public discourse. The HC's judgment was a bold affirmation of the principle that the judicial task is to dispassionately weigh evidence and uphold the law, however horrifying the crime. The judgment acknowledged the tragedy of the lives lost and harm caused, but refused to sacrifice the lives of innocent persons for the sake of a 'false appearance' of closure. Viewed in this broader context, the stay order sends a disconcerting message that even the most thorough and well-reasoned acquittals in these kinds of sensitive cases may be suspended on the basis of assertions by the state. The writer is a senior advocate, Supreme Court of India
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Teacher arrested for obscene video call with minor student
NAVI MUMBAI: A 35-year-old female teacher of a school in Ulwe was arrested on Monday for allegedly video calling a Class 10 student and engaging in a sexual conversation. The incident came to light when the student's mother found the video call recording on the boy's phone, where the teacher was semi-nude, said a police officer. (Shutterstock) According to police, the teacher allegedly video called the boy on Sunday night and made obscene gestures while engaging in a sexual conversation, which the student recorded on his phone. The boy's mother found the recording of the video call on his phone and confronted him, after which he told her that the woman in the video was his teacher, the officer said. 'The complainant found videos wherein the accused teacher had exposed her private parts,' said the investigating officer. The mother approached the Koparkhairane police on Monday and reported the incident. Based on her complaint, the police registered a case against the teacher under relevant sections of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. She has been remanded in police custody for one day.
