Justice Delayed Is Justice Denied: NHRC Seeks Action in Varanasi Electrocution Death Case

The death of a common citizen due to administrative negligence is not just an accident—it is a failure of the State’s duty to protect life. In a significant development, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has taken cognizance of a tragic electrocution death that occurred in Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, and has formally sought an Action Taken Report (ATR) from the State Government.

The Incident: A Life Lost While Hoisting the National Flag

On 22 January 2024, a man lost his life after being electrocuted while hoisting a flag at a temple in Varanasi. What should have been an act of devotion and patriotism turned fatal due to the presence of unsafe live electric lines. Despite receiving medical treatment, he succumbed to his injuries on 3 February 2024.

He left behind:

• A widow

• Three minor children

• A family pushed into sudden financial and emotional distress

This was not a natural disaster or an unforeseeable event—it was a preventable tragedy.

NHRC Steps In: Accountability Demanded

A complaint was submitted to the NHRC on 3 June 2025, highlighting the electrocution death and the negligence of electricity authorities. After examining the matter, the Commission passed an order on 8 January 2026, directing:

• Transmission of the complaint to the Principal Secretary, Department of Energy (Power), Uttar Pradesh

• Submission of a detailed Action Taken Report within four weeks

• Consideration of financial compensation of ₹5,00,000 for the victim’s family

• Submission of the report in English through the official HRCNet Portal

This direction reinforces the principle that electrocution deaths are human rights violations, not mere accidents.

Why This Case Matters

Electrocution deaths due to exposed or poorly maintained power lines are alarmingly common in India, especially in:

• Temples and religious places

• Narrow urban lanes

• Rural and semi-urban areas

Each such death reflects:

• Administrative negligence

• Poor safety audits

• Absence of accountability

When the State fails to maintain basic infrastructure safely, it violates Article 21 of the Constitution of India — the Right to Life.

Compensation Is Not Charity—It Is a Right

The widow in this case has sought compensation of ₹5 lakh, a modest amount considering:

• Loss of the sole earning member

• Long-term responsibility of raising three children

• Emotional trauma caused by State failure

NHRC jurisprudence is clear: ex-gratia compensation is a constitutional remedy, not a favor.

The Road Ahead

The responsibility now lies with the Uttar Pradesh Energy Department to:

1. Conduct a fair and transparent inquiry

2. Fix accountability for negligence

3. Release compensation without delay

4. Implement preventive safety measures

If the ATR is delayed or evasive, the NHRC has the power to:

• Issue further directions

• Recommend disciplinary action

• Enhance compensation

A Larger Question

How many more lives must be lost before public safety becomes a priority?

This case is not just about one family—it represents thousands of silent victims of infrastructure neglect across India. The NHRC’s intervention offers hope, but justice will only be complete when accountability and compensation are actually delivered.

✍️ Author’s Note

Cases like this underline the importance of vigilance, legal awareness, and human rights advocacy. Citizens must continue to raise their voices—because silence only strengthens negligence.