Law says No,………even if you and I may be of opinion that such Army Soldiers should be given some kind of pension…….

Because, even when he goes on leave, he continues to be an Army Man and he is liable to report on duty on short call.

WHO LOST THE CASE ?

One Talwinder Singh lost case in Supreme Court on 20th April, 2012

Union of India V/s Talwinder Singh 2012(5) SCALE 1

WHAT HAD HAPPENED TO HIM?

In 1990,When he was on leave, a Gulli from children’s play stuck in his left eye. His left eye got injured. The Army office denied disability pension on ground that this injury had nothing to with his military service.

In 2009, after 19 years legal battle in court, Punjab and Haryana High Court directed that he be given disability pension.

In 2012, Supreme Court, relying on settled law, cancelled HC order granting him disability pension.

MY PERSONAL VIEW BASED ON HUMANITARIAN GROUNDS

The fact that this man was batting in Courts for 22 years, and once High Court had given him disability, the order of HC could have been set aside, but pension granted by High Court should not have been cancelled.

Imagine his torture and his legal expanses for fighting this battle for 22 Years in Courts!

The Rules and Laws of Military need to be made humane for those who serve army.

Haresh Raichura

16/6/2012

Law is similar to piegeon holes box. Every action has to fit under some provision of law.

Indiscriminate fire was opened from an Italian Ship. Two innocent Indian fisherman died.

On 26.2.2012 Police directed that the ship is not to sail without prior permission.

LAW RELATING TO POWER OF POLICE TO SEIZE THE SHIP

Sec.102 of Code of Criminal Procedure gives police certain powers to seize property.

The Property can be seized, if (a) It is a stolen property (b) if it is suspected to be a stolen property or (c) The Property is Object of Crime under investigation.

In case of M.T. Enrica Lexie v/s Doramma 2012(5)SCALE 134 on page 138, Supreme Court noted,

“The Police officer in course of investigation can seize any property under Sec.102if such property is alleged to be stolen or is suspected to be stolen or is the object of crime under investigation or has direct link with the commission of offence for which the police officer is investigating into.”

In this case, a question was put to counsel whether the ship was object of the crime. The counsel answered in negative. The counsel further said that ship is not further required for investigation.

Supreme Court therefore allowed ship to sail after putting heavy conditions.

Haresh Raichura
16th June,2012