Mere ‘presumption of death’ insufficient for ex gratia relief, says Delhi High Court
Delhi High Court ex gratia relief, Delhi HC on presumed death: The Delhi High Court dismissed a widow’s plea challenging the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, observing that a mere presumption of death does not satisfy the conditions required to grant an ex gratia relief.
3 min readNew DelhiUpdated: Nov 11, 2025 05:20 PM IST
Delhi HC on presumed death: The Delhi High Court denied ex gratia relief to a widow stating that a mere presumption of death does not fulfil the conditions required for granting the relief. The image is generated using AI.
Delhi High Court ex gratia relief: The Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed the plea of a widow seeking an ex gratia payment of Rs 50000 from the Defence Civilian Medical Aid Fund (DCMAF), holding that her claim that her husband’s “presumed death in an accident” lacked any factual or legal basis.
Justices Navin Chawla and Madhu Jain said, “Although an FIR was lodged and the deceased was presumed to be dead upon expiry of seven years, the presumption of ‘death in an accident’ lacks any factual or legal basis.”
The high court noted that the widow was not able to establish that her husband met with an accident, which was a mandatory condition for granting relief under DCMAF rules, which mandate a sum of Rs 50000 in the event of ‘death in an accident’.
The bench noted that the ex gratia relief is provided only when the death is due to either ‘specified medical conditions’ or ‘accident’ and not for ‘mere presumption of death’.
The court also emphasised the provisions of Section 108 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, stating that the section deals with the presumption of fact of death when the person is not heard for seven years, but does cover the ‘specific circumstances surrounding the death.’
One of the widow’s advocates, Anirudh Sharma, argued that the situation of the deceased falls under the general definition of an accident and hence the widow should be eligible for the ex gratia amount of Rs 50000 under the DCMAF.
However, one of the advocates representing the Union of India, Ripudaman Bhardwaj, argued that the petitioner could not confirm that her deceased husband died of an accident and that on a mere presumption basis, an ex gratia payment cannot be made.
Story continues below this ad
He contended for dismissal of the petition, pointing out that none of the conditions provided under the DCMAF rules had been satisfied, and the widow was already in receipt of all retrial dues of the deceased employee.
The court observed that granting ex gratia relief in the absence of compliance with the DCMAF rules would be beyond the ‘scope of the statutory framework’ and dismissed the widow’s plea for being devoid of merit.
Background of case
The deceased, Jai Singh, a vehicle mechanic with the Ministry of Defence, went missing in 1999 while proceeding to report for his duty. He was presumed dead in 2006 by the Civil Judge (Junior Division) Gurgaon under Section 108 of the Indian Evidence Act.
The deceased’s wife moved the high court seeking a grant of an ex gratia relief to challenge the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT)’s order of May 2025, which denied her relief on the premise that an ex gratia payment cannot be granted on a mere presumption of death.
Story continues below this ad
The high court reaffirmed the decision of the CAT, stating that the case did not satisfy either of the two conditions prescribed under the DCMAF rule.
Richa Sahay is a Legal Correspondent for The Indian Express, where she focuses on simplifying the complexities of the Indian judicial system. A law postgraduate, she leverages her advanced legal education to bridge the gap between technical court rulings and public understanding, ensuring that readers stay informed about the rapidly evolving legal landscape.
Expertise
Advanced Legal Education: As a law postgraduate, Richa possesses the academic depth required to interpret intricate statutes and constitutional nuances. Her background allows her to provide more than just summaries; she offers context-driven analysis of how legal changes impact the average citizen.
Specialized Beat: She operates at the intersection of law and public policy, focusing on:
Judicial Updates: Providing timely reports on orders from the Supreme Court of India and various High Courts.
Legal Simplification: Translating dense "legalese" into accessible, engaging narratives without sacrificing factual accuracy.
Legislative Changes: Monitoring new bills, amendments, and regulatory shifts that shape Indian society. ... Read More
