Saakshe Jain, Symbiosis Law School, Noida
INTRODUCTION
One of the most controversial and important rulings in the history of tortious state accountability for the deeds of its employees is this ruling. The judgement was passed in the year of 1964 by the Corum of judges Gajendragadkar, P.B. (CJ), Wanchoo, K.N., Hidayatullah, M., Dayal, Raghubar, Mudholkar, J.R. The appellant is Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain and the respondent is the State of Uttar Pradesh.
FACTS
The appellant who was a partner of the firm who dealt in selling jewellery, he arrived in Meerut with aim to sell gold and silver jewellery. Three police constable took him into custody on the suspicion that the possession of stolen property. He was released on bail and the silver jewellery which was seized by officer was returned but the gold jewellery was not returned to him. He made repeated requests for the same but could not recover it from police officers. A suit was filed either to return the jewellery or pay its value with interest to him. The respondent claimed that the head constable who was in-charge of malkhana went to Pakistan with the gold and some cash which was stolen. A suit was filed against the state authorities for negligence of police officers.
