BHAGWAT PRASAD vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1


CGHC010221582022 2026:CGHC:45744

NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 3002 of 2022
SHYNA
AJAY
Order Reserved on : 1.10.2026
Digitally signed
by SHYNA AJAY
Date:
2026.10.29
18:28:29 +0530
Order Pronounced on 29.10.2026 :
Bhagwat Prasad S/o Dauram Kenwat, Aged About 34 Years R/o Village
Pikri, Tahsil Kasdol, District Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.)
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through its Secretary, Ministry Of Revenue
and Disaster Management, Secretariat, Capital Complex, Mahanadi
Bhawan, Nawa Raipur District Raipur (C.G.)
2 Collector, District Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.)
3 - The Tahsildar Kasdol, District Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
(Cause Title downloaded from CIS Periphery)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harshmander Rastogi, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shobhit Mishra, Dy. GA

2

SB: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad
C A V Order
1. By means of the present Writ Petition, the petitioner assails the
rejection of his claim for financial assistance/compensation under
the Chhattisgarh State Revenue Book Circular (RBC) on account
of the unnatural death of his father due to drowning. The aforesaid
application for compensation was rejected on the ground that the
water depth at the site of the incident was only 3 feet and there
was no flow of water.
2. The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :
a. This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to call for the
records from the respondent authorities concerned
pertaining to the case of the petitioner for perusal of
this Hon'ble Court, if this Hon’ble Court thinks fit in
the facts and circumstances of the case
b. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass an
order set aside the decision of respondent authorities
rejecting claim of petitioner for grant ex-gratia
amount to the petitioner on account of death of his
father due to drowning in river and direct them to pay
ex-gratia amount, as per policy of the State, to the
petitioner within the time frame as may be fixed by
this Hon'ble Court in the facts and circumstances of
the case and in the interest of justice.
c. Cost of the proceedings.
d. Any other writs and directions that may be
deemed fit and just in the facts & circumstances of
case.
3.
Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition, are that

3
on 09.01.2020 at about 07:00 a.m., the petitioner’s father namely
Dauram Kenwat, who suffered from epilepsy, went to the
riverbank to answer the call of nature, where he accidentally fell
into the river and died due to drowning, leading to the registration
of Merg Intimation No. 05/2020. Thereafter, the postmortem
examination was conducted at Community Health Centre, Kasdol,
wherein the examining doctor categorically opined the cause of
death to be asphyxia due to drowning and the nature of death to
be accidental. On the basis of the guidelines of the State
Government providing ex-gratia compensation to families of
drowning victims, the petitioner submitted an application on
20.02.2020 (Annexure P/1) before Respondent No. 3 (the
Tahsildar, Kasdol), who initiated enquiry through the local Patwari.
However, based on the report of the Patwari, the Additional
Collector recommended rejection of the claim vide order dated
10.08.2020 on the ground that the water level was merely 3 feet
without any flow and attributing the death to epilepsy rather than a
natural disaster. The said recommendation was accepted by
Respondent No. 2 (the Collector, District Balodabazar Bhatapara)
on 11.08.2020 and resulted in the final rejection of the claim of the
petitioner vide the impugned order dated 19.8.2020 passed by the
Tehsildar, Kasdol {Respondent No.3}. Assailing the said rejection,
the petitioner submits that once medical evidence establishes
asphyxia due to drowning, the claim cannot be turned down on
ground of shallow water depth (3 feet), as drowning is possible in
shallow water if a person collapses flat in an unconscious state.

4
Hence, this Petition.
4.
Mr. Harshmander Rastogi, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the rejection of the claim for compensation by the
respondent authorities is patently illegal, arbitrary and
unsustainable in law. The State Government having framed
provisions under the Revenue Book Circular for grant of ex-gratia
compensation in cases of unnatural death due to drowning, the
application was required to be considered objectively rather than
rejected in a summary and arbitrary manner. He submits that
postmortem examination of the deceased was duly conducted and
in the autopsy report, the examining doctor categorically opined
that the cause of death was asphyxia resulting from drowning. He
further submits that once the medical evidence conclusively
establishes death by drowning, the claim could not have been
turned down on the hyper-technical and irrelevant ground that the
water depth at the site was merely 3 feet.
5. Per contra, Mr. Shobhit Mishra, Dy. GA for the State submits that
the impugned rejection of the claim of the petitioner vide the
impugned order(s) is in accordance with law. After the unnatural
death, the case was duly registered and the concerned Tehsildar
directed the submission of a detailed report. In the course of the
enquiry, the Patwari conducted a spot inspection, prepared the
Panchnama and site map and recorded statements of the
witnesses. Pertinently, during the enquiry, the petitioner himself
categorically admitted that his deceased-father suffered from
epilepsy and would frequently collapse upon experiencing

5
epileptic seizures or dizziness. On the date of the incident, the
deceased suffered a similar seizure and fell into the river. He also
submits that the enquiry report confirms that the water level at the
site was merely 3 feet, making accidental drowning improbable.
Furthermore, while the postmortem report reflects asphyxia, it is
legally and medically settled that a finding of asphyxia alone is
insufficient without a positive Diatom Test to conclusively establish
death by drowning, which is not available in the present case. He
submits that in view of the petitioner’s own admission regarding
his father’s medical history of epilepsy and the shallow depth of
the water, no case for grant of ex-gratia compensation under the
Revenue Book Circular is made out.
6.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the
documents annexed with the petition with utmost circumspection.
7. Evidently, a perusal of the postmortem report shows that the
father of the petitioner died of asphyxia. However, insofar as
death by drowning is concerned, there is no definitive report on
record to conclusively confirm that the deceased succumbed to
drowning. In cases of suspected drowning, a specific forensic
procedure known as the Diatom Test is required to verify
antemortem water inhalation, however, no such report is available
in the present matter. Furthermore, the petitioner himself admitted
that his father suffered from epilepsy and was prone to sudden
seizures and dizziness, which likely caused him to collapse into
shallow water. Such an accidental fall resulting from a pre-existing

6
medical condition does not fulfill the requisite criteria for grant of
compensation under the Revenue Book Circular .
8.
In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is unable to hold
that the impugned rejection order(s) suffers from any legal
infirmity. Accordingly, the order dated 19.08.2020 passed by the
concerned Tehsildar is in accordance with law and calls for no
interference by this Court.
9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
(Amitendra Kishore Prasad)
Judge
Shyna Ajay