3 min readNew DelhiMar 29, 2025 05:05 AM IST
First published on: Mar 29, 2025 at 05:05 AM IST
A Delhi court on Monday directed IDBI Bank, a private security company, and a former security guard employed at the bank by the company, to pay Rs. 22.4 lakh to the kin of a man who died in 2008 from an accidental shot fired from the security guard’s gun.
“The gun in question cannot shoot fire on its own, and it was due to the negligent act of defendant no. 2 (Vinay Kumar, security guard at the time), which cannot be said to be simply an accident or mistake. Moreover, the defendant was deputed as a gunman, and in that capacity, he was required to take all care and precaution while handling his arm and ammunition,” said District Judge Naresh Kumar Laka of Tis Hazari Court in his order dated March 24.
Kumar’s gun went off accidentally, hitting the eye of the deceased Chander Dev, who was then 49 at the time and was an employee with the bank. His wife Manju Devi filed a suit before the court demanding compensation for his death which was caused due to the gunshot.
Along with Kumar and IDBI Bank, security company, Central Investigation & Security Services Ltd. was also made a defendant in the suit. “…this court holds that defendant no. 1 to 3 are equally liable for their individual as well as combined act of negligence and in terms of strict liability. Therefore, all the defendants are liable to compensate the plaintiffs in the ratio of 33.33% each,” said the Judge, directing the defendants to pay Rs. 7.5 lakh as compensation to Dev’s family for negligence.
“The gun which was brought to the bank or engaged by the bank was a dangerous weapon. Therefore, as a principle of vicarious liability and all the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this court holds that defendant no. 3 (IDBI Bank) is also liable to make good the losses which occasioned to the plaintiffs on account of the loss of life of Sh. Chander Dev,” the court added.
While calculating the compensation, the court took stock of Dev’s salary and also accounted for his remaining work years before retirement. “…defendant no. 1 and 2 were under obligation to maintain the gun regularly, impart training to the gunman and to take all precautions to prevent any accidental incident,” the court said.
In their written statements submitted before the court, the defendants argued that there was no defect in the gun and that compensation worth Rs. 2 lakhs had already been credited to Dev’s family as per the Family Security Scheme. It was also argued that even if the gun was faulty, it was not in Kumar’s control.
Along with Kumar and IDBI Bank, security company, Central Investigation & Security Services Ltd. was also made a defendant in the suit 
Share
