Kasturi Lal v State of U.P. (1965)

Law of Torts · Vicarious Liability

Facts.

The plaintiff, a jeweller, was detained by police on suspicion and his gold and silver were seized and kept in the police malkhana. A head constable misappropriated the gold and fled to Pakistan. The plaintiff sued the State.

Issue.

Is the State liable for the negligence of police officers in keeping property seized under statutory powers?

Held.

No. The Supreme Court held that the seizure and custody were done in exercise of sovereign powers conferred by statute, and the State was therefore immune — while expressing open dissatisfaction with the state of the law.

Why it matters.

It is the case every answer on State liability must confront. It has since been distinguished almost out of existence by N. Nagendra Rao and Common Cause, and bypassed altogether by the constitutional tort.

📄 Full Law of Torts notes + Question Bank (₹199) — every topic in depth, model answers to all past exam questions, in one printable PDF. Get the bundle · All landmark cases · All Law of Torts topics