Adrija Laskar, Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad
INTRODUCTION
The case State of Madhya Pradesh v. Chironji Lal & Ors.1 concerns the state's vicarious
liability (sovereign functions).
In Vicarious Liability, an individual is accountable for his or her wrongful acts, but not for the actions of others. However, in some cases, vicarious liability, or the liability of one person for the act of another, may arise. For A to be held liable for the act committed by B, there must be some kind of relationship joining A and B, and the unlawful act must be connected in some way to that relationship.
“Vicarious liability” for wrongdoing arises from the relationship between Master and Servant, the principal and the agent, the company and the director, and Company and partner.
Vicarious liability is founded on the principles of ‘respondent superior' (i.e., responsibility must be that of the preferable) and 'Qui Facit per alium facit per se' (i.e., he who behaves through others is regarded in law to be acting himself).
In a similar case of Padmalochan Panda v. State of Orissa2, the Orissa Military Police used a lathi charge on a mob gathered in front of the District Court to convey their demands. It was claimed that police officers attacked members of the mob without any orders from the Magistrate or other police authorities, injuring the plaintiff. He filed a complaint against the State for his injuries. The lower court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, but on appeal, the High Court acknowledged that police officers engaged in misconduct in the execution of their duties without authorization and that this did not exempt the unlawful act from the competence of delegated sovereign function, it was further held that any harm suffered by the plaintiff were caused by the exercise of sovereign duties.
Commentaires