http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: SUDIP MAZUMDAR

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       15/07/1996

BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. G.B. PATTANAIK (J)

CITATION:  JT 1996 (6)   651        1996 SCALE  (5)474

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                  THE 15TH DAY OF JULY, 1996 Present:           Hon’ble Mr.Justice K.Ramaswamy           Hon’ble Mr.Justice G.B.Pattanaik K.T.S. Tulsi,  Additional Solicitor General, (Rajeev Dhavan) Sr. Ad.  for Intervenors,  Ranjit Kumar,  A.Subba Rao,  Anil Katiyar, Uma Nath Singh, E.C.Vidya Sagar, Ms. A. Subhashini, L.R.Singh, Pramod Kumar and Ms. Vimla Sinha, Advs. with them for the appearing parties.                          O R D E R The following Order of the Court was delivered. Sudip Mazumdar V. State of Madhya Pradesh                          O R D E R      Application for intervention is allowed.      The departed  soul of  Shri Govind  Mukhoty would  feel satisfied for  the result as he had done yeomen’s service to protect the  precious lives of the tribals who used to go to collect firewood  etc. but  became victims of firing in  the range. He  devoted his  life and  was an  ardent champion of human rights  of underprivileged  and one of the cases which he had  left over  unfinished, is this case which we are now disposing or  partly. In  this case,  or,  account  of  test firing practices  being organised  at a  test  firing  range near Itarasi  in Madhya Pradesh, several of the tribals  are becoming victims  of the  firing and some of them succumb to the injuries  and several  sustain grievous  injuries.  That resulted in  filing this writ petition. This Court, by order dated March  13, 1994  by a Constitution Bench, had accepted the recommendations  made by  High-level  Committee  of  the Government constituted  pursuant to  an order passed by this Court. The  recommendations, as  accepted by this Court, are as under:           "(i) The  substitute plans  of      erecting barbed wire fencing around

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

    the four  target  areas  have  been      worked out  and is  as  per  sketch      P.,Q. and Q1.           (ii)  DSC  personnel  will  be      deplayed to patrol the target areas      to prevent  unauthorised  entry  by      metal pickets  into the target area      and to protect the barbed wire.           (iii)  Watch  towers  will  be      constructed around  the fencing  to      provide    effective    field    of      observations to  the DSC  guards to      carry out duties at (b) above.           (iv)  Approach  roads  to  the      target areas  will  be  constructed      for easy access.           (v) Additional  transport will      be provided  to CPE Itarsi to ferry      DSC troops  to and fro target areas      and  to   convey  food   and  other      essential  requirements   to   them      while on duty."      This Court  gave the  direction  as      under:      "We direct the Government to accord      sanction in terms of its own prayer      in  Criminal   Misc.  Petition  No.      1360/94 immediately  so as to allow      the tender  process to be completed      and the  work to  commence within 3      months  from   today.  The   actual      physical execution  of the work for      which 24  months’ time is indicated      in the  aforesaid  Note,  shall  be      reduced  to   and  completed  in  a      period of 18 months."      For compliance  thereof, the  matter was adjourned from time to time and ultimately time was extended by order dated January 12, 1996 to submit full compliance report. Today, an affidavit has  been filed by Brigadier Kuppuswami Ramani who is in-charge of Central Proof Establishment, Itarasi. As per the report, full compliance of the directions issued by this Court has  been made.  We accept  the report  and close  the matter on implementation part.      The writ  petition is  accordingly disposed  of partly. The  proceedings  in  this  writ  petition  are  accordingly closed.  On   maintainability,  reference  is  awaiting  the decision of the Constitution Bench.