The Chhattisgarh High Court has assumed suo motu jurisdiction over a tragic incident involving the death of a three-year-old girl who was critically injured due to an iron pipe toppling on her at an Anganwadi centre. The bench, comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Bibhu Datta Guru, was prompted into action after a news report revealed that DJ equipment—irrationally discarded within the Anganwadi premises—was the immediate cause of the fatal accident.
The court took serious note of the circumstances leading to the death, deeming the incident a grave instance of negligence and institutional failure. The young child had been playing at the facility located in the Talapara area of Bilaspur when the unstable iron pipe, dumped carelessly among abandoned sound system items, gave way and fatally struck her. She was swiftly taken to the district hospital and later shifted to a higher-care facility, but the injuries proved fatal despite medical efforts.
Upon reviewing the disturbing developments, the High Court directed the District Magistrate of Bilaspur to submit a personal affidavit by the next date of hearing. The affidavit is to detail the steps taken by the administration in response to the incident, identify officials responsible for allowing such unsafe conditions, and outline any disciplinary or criminal measures initiated against them. The court also stressed that the affidavit must indicate whether compensation has been provided to the bereaved family—and if not, the current status of such considerations. Equally important, it called for measures proposed or enacted to prevent the recurrence of such tragedies at Anganwadi centres.
During the proceedings, the court questioned the inexplicable presence of DJ equipment in the Anganwadi premises. It sought to understand whether the site had become a makeshift storage space for non-educational, unrelated items, raising public safety concerns. The government clarified that the equipment belonged to a relative of an Anganwadi employee who had apparently stored it there. The court expressed strong displeasure at this explanation, emphasizing that nothing could justify installing potentially hazardous materials within a space meant for young children. Justice Sinha remarked on the unacceptable nature of treating a child’s life with such disregard.
The order reflects judicial outrage at the trivialization of child safety in an institution mandated to safeguard and educate young children. It underscores the court’s expectation that public authorities must take proactive steps—not merely reactive ones—to enforce safety and regulation at such premises. By issuing a suo motu order, the court signaled that negligence within state-run childcare facilities will not be tolerated and must be met with transparent accountability and reparative action.
This ruling is a marked assertion of judicial responsibility to ensure that institutional lapses, especially those resulting in loss of life, are met with swift inquiry and correction. The High Court’s approach foregrounds the importance of prompt, targeted remedial measures—ranging from investigation of culpability to relief for victims and systemic safeguards—as essential to restoring faith in governance and public institutions.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.