In *Kasturi Lal v. State of U.P., AIR 1965 SC 1039*, the Supreme Court held that the State was NOT liable for the tort committed by its servants. Why?

1. In **Kasturi Lal v. State of U.P., AIR 1965 SC 1039**, the Government was NOT held liable for the tort committed by its servant because the tort was said to have been **committed by him in the course of the discharge of statutory duties**. 2. The statutory functions imposed on the employee were **referable to and ultimately based on the delegation of sovereign powers of the State**. 3. The Court held that the Government was not liable as the activity involved was a **sovereign activity**, affirming the sovereign / non-sovereign distinction drawn in *P. and O. Steam Navigation*. 4. So the State retained immunity for purely sovereign acts; *Vidyawati* and later cases have progressively narrowed the sovereign category as the welfare state expanded. _Source: ICSI CS Executive — Lesson 5, 'Suit against State in Torts — Kasturi Lal v. State of U.P.', p. 130._