NYOMA COURT OF INQUIRY FACTS REVEALED-WAS ATTEMPTED RAPE THE TRIGGER TO THE UPRISING?

Access to exclusive documents has now for the first time revealed the sequence of events which led to the unprecedented brawl between officers and jawans of 226 Field Regiment in Nyoma in Ladakh in May last year. The three-member inquiry was conducted by Brig Ajay Talwar, Colonel Ajit Singh and Colonel NK Kanotra.

The documents are a part of the Army’s Court of Inquiry held after the shocking incident. As a result of the fall-out of this inquiry, an unprecedented 168 troops of the regiment will be facing a general court martial. They include four officers, including the commanding officer of the regiment, Col P Kadam, 17 Junior Commissioned Officrs and 147 jawans.

The documents accessed include crucial statements of key witnesses in the court of inquiry which has led the Army to find out the exact reasons behind the break-down of discipline in the regiment which was deployed for field firing in Ladakh. These statements include that of the Commanding Officer, Col Prasad Kadam, wife of a Major, a jawan accused of rape, depositions of medical experts and a crucial report of the Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL), Chandigarh.

The most crucial of all is the testimony of the wife of a Major who has alleged that one jawan of the regiment attempted to rape her in the absence of her husband. This alleged attempted rape has become the bed-rock of the inquiry and it has been suggested by various witnesses that everything else that followed in the regiment was as a result of this.

The lady, whose name is being withheld to protect her identity, has described in detail how the jawan detailed as Sahayak to her husband tried to rape her. She stated this in categorical terms when specifically asked by members of the Court of Inquiry. The lady also told the court that while fighting off the jawan she had hit him with a torch as a result of which he bled. The evidence of bleeding on the lady’s garments were sent to CFSL Chandigarh for matching the samples given by the Sahayak and the report of the laboratory stated that the possibility of the samples coming from the lady and the Sahayak could not be excluded.

In his deposition to the court, the Jawan accused of attempting to rape the lady has stoutly denied the same and has attributed the bleeding and blood stain to an injury sustained while moving he luggage of the officer and his wife. He has instead alleged that he entered the room to switch off the kerosene heater and found the door unlatched. He alleges that the lady was changing her clothes at the time, without securing the door, and got angry with him and abused him. The Sahayak has alleged in his statement that he was beaten up by three officers later in the evening. It is alleged that it was this beating and denial of initial medical aid to the jawan which enraged other jawans of the regiment and caused them to turn on their officers.

Witnesses have also testified that enraged jawans raised slogans of Bharat Mata Ki Jai, Inqulab Zindabad, 226 Field Regiment ki Jai on the occasion. They also raised slogans like ‘Raksha Mantri ko Bulaya jae” and “Media ko bulaya jae” when two senior officers visited to pacify the angry jawans. They also demanded that the three offices who beat the jawan should be handed over to them.

During the course of the inquiry the CO, Col Prasad Kadam, also revealed that there was permission to move the wives of the officers only till Darbuk and not till Nyoma. Col Kadam admitted that he allowed them to be moved to Nyoma because they would have been “alone” in Darbuk. Col Kadam also gave details of how he was assaulted by troops of his regiment and hit with stones till he lost consciousness.

Various witnesses have made statements to the effect that three officers badly thrashed the Sahayak. It is, perhaps, keeping in mind all these circumstances that the Army has ordered the court martial of these officers along with the CO.

Meanwhile, the Army has ordered the Summary of Evidence in this case as the next step leading, eventually, to a trial of all the accused officers and jawans.

PUNJAB POLICE APES INDIAN ARMY COMBAT FATIGUES

The issue of various state police forces, and para-military forces too, wearing combat fatigues has been much debated over the past few years. The para-military forces are now commonly deployed in counter-insurgency operations and need to wear disruptive pattern uniforms for obvious reasons. In fact, all para-military forces, be it BSF, CRPF, ITBP, CISF or SSB, have evolved their own pattern of disruptive pattern which is absolutely distinct from the one used by the Indian Army.

The Army too has gone in for a standard pattern of the fatigues which bear the insignia of the Indian Army distinctly on the cloth at regular intervals. This was done in order to ensure that no one is able to ape the Army fatigues, especially in counter-insurgency operations, where militants often dressed up as Army personnel and attacked military targets.

However, much to my surprise I saw the same uniform being worn by women cops of the Punjab Police. The occasion as the launch of s special women's task force launched by the Punjab government to counter crimes against women, especially eve-teasing in front of schools and colleges. The Punjab Deputy Chief Minister, Sukhbir Singh Badal, launched the special task force in the presence of the Director General of Punjab Police, Sumedh Singh Saini, and other senior police officials.

(Note the IndArmy insignia on the sleeve)

It was indeed shocking to see that the Punjab Police had copied the disruptive pattern of the Army down to the last T. The uniforms even had the Indian Army watermark, complete with the insignia. It appears that the Punjab Police acquired the cloth wholesale from some vendor who also supplies to the Army and then went ahead and got the uniforms stitched for its women cops.   

These women cops are supposed to be 'Commandos', given the flashes they wear on their arms. These 'Commandos' go around on scooters and motorcycles, wearing these combat fatigues to deter eve-teasers and those who may harass women. While the intention is noble, it is not understood why they had to wear Indian Army fatigues to achieve the same. Is it because Khaki is not macho enough? Is it because Khaki does not inspire the same awe and respect that olive green does? Or is it simply the brain-child of someone who thought he could get away by aping Army uniform? Whatever may be the case, it is an offence which has been committed and the Army must take note of it and protest.

It is all the more interesting that the contingent of this special task force which was flagged off also had women cops dressed in Khakis and in a new blue coloured uniform too. Their task is also similar to these  'Commandos' but for some unknown reason they do not get to don the fatigues.

While imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery, the Punjab Police seems to be taking it too far. The DGP's flag wears three stars on it. A replica of what the Army has started doing to reflect the status of the flag-ranked officer. The previous DGP was a step ahead. He even had a Ashoka emblem on the flag along with three stars trying to bring himself to the equivalent of an Army Commander or GOC-in-C. Mercifully, the present incumbent has refrained from doing so.

Western Command must raise this issue in the next military liaison conference and sensitise the state government and Punjab Police on sanctity of uniforms.

WORSHIPING FALSE HEROES

"SANAWAR: Keeping the century old bonding alive with the glorious past of Indian armed forces, Lawrence School Sanawar on Monday unveiled, in its premises, the bust of Major William Stephen Rakes Hodson who has the distinction of raising Indian Army's prestigious 'Hodson horse'".

It was this innocuous story, buried in the inside pages of The Times of India which made me put down my cup of tea this morning and take note. Apart from the fact that the reporter has faithfully reproduced the press note issued by the school/Army down to the last sycophantic word, the fact that a murderer has once again been glorified disturbed me.

I have written previously in this blog on how many persons, of considerable eminence, have considered it wrong for Major Hodson to find a place of prominence in the the name of one of the most illustrious armoured regiments of the Indian Army. In fact, I had widely quoted Lt Gen SK Sinha, former Vice Chief of Army Staff, who had written in his memoirs of his attempts to convince 4 Horse to get rid of the name of Maj Hodson from their regimental crest, but to no avail.

Several vitriolic replies were received on the subject and most of them have been printed. That however does not deter me from expressing my views again on the preposterous bust-unveiling which has taken place in Sanawar by a Lt General who is GOC 9 Corps. I am more outraged by the fact that the only other bust in the school is that of the young martyr of the 1971 war, 2/Lt Arun Khetarpal, PVC and that the murderer Hodson now gets a place of pride next to him.

What could be more dichotomous than having two busts which are absolutely at cross-purposes with each other. One that of a national hero who laid down his life defending the country 40 years ago and another of a colonial master who repressed the First War of Independence with as much force as he could.

Hodson may indeed have played a role in establishing the school at Sanawar but what purpose does it serve to display his bust in the school? Does the school tell its students about the dubious role played by him while putting down the first Indian War of Independence in 1857 when he murdered the two sons of Bahadur Shah Zafar? Do they inform the students of the dubious nature of his character as stated by Lt Gen SK Sinha in his book? Why should he be glorified at all. His association with the school, as with the regiment, should be a footnote in history of both and need not be highlighted beyond that point. His association with both is a fact of history and must be acknowledged as such but to glorify him is sickening.

But the inherent flaws in our thinking and how we revere anything British when it comes to traditions in our schools and regimental institutions have led to the unveiling of this bust. It is time which acts come under scrutiny and are derided for whatever they are worth. These should not go uncommented or unnoticed. It is nothing but a misplaced sense of regimental honour when the name of a murderer is not removed from the regimental crest and when the officers of the regiment go about establishing the bust of the same murderer in schools.

They will not be allowed to manipulate history. Villains can never be heroes. Even if they have armoured regiments named after them.  

THE GOLD CARD RIP-OFF IN CSD

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others"

-George Orwell

A unique investigation is underway by the Ministry of Defence regarding misuse of CSD smart cards by senior retired officers of the Army.
As per the information relayed, data is being collected on the gross misuse of gold cards which are allotted to retired Chief of Army Staff along with the officers of the rank of Army Commanders. The investigation by MoD has revealed that some senior retired officers are in possession of more than one smart card. These Gold cards entitle them to unlimited purchase through CSD.
It is learnt that the Army HQs too is seized of the matter and it is being ascertained as to how more than one such card was issued in first place and where and at which CSD canteen were these being used. It is learnt that very heavy purchases were being effected by these cards every month and that this has raised eyebrows.
The fact that retired service chiefs names have also surfaced in the course of the digging up of data, has left the Army HQs a but surprised.
However, all those who may jump to conclusions and start pointing accusatory fingers at the retired brass of the rank of Army Commanders and COAS, there are a few good men left still. The MoD has found that there are many officers who chose not to avail the facility of unlimited purchase given by the Gold Card. I have been able to find out the names of two such individuals who has chosen to surrender their Gold cards and have asked that they be provided the normal purchase power as due to their rank.
My sources inform me that two such officers are Lt Gen HS Panag (retd), former Northern and Central Army Commander and Lt Gen AK Singh (retd) who has recently retired from service as Southern Army Commander.
Individuals like these deserve to be saluted for their honest and upright approach. Equally, one would like the names of those to be made public, those who have more than one privelege card and have been making purchases worth an atrocious sums of money. Normally  the Army would very easily deny that any such thing has happened. However, since the investigation is being done by the MoD, there is slim chance of the Army spin dims getting a chance of cover-up.
All such mindless cards should be immediately withdrawn and only the purchase limit authorised by rank should be put into effect. There should not be any silly limitless purchase power because it lends itself to misuse and this is precisely what has been happening.
The Ministry of Defence will do well to institute corrective action and immediately withdraw or cancel the Gold Cards.

  

SHOULD ARMY CHANGE IT'S RECRUITMENT POLICY?

The recent petition filed in the Supreme Court challenging the Army's caste, religion and region-based recruitment policy for its soldiers has not had the desired amount of discussion in the fora of defence intelligentsia. Though it is correct that this issue has been debated at many levels in the past, it may not be wrong to approach it once again in light of the petition filed in the SC and the importance given to it by the court given the fact that the Solicitor General has been asked to assist the court in the case.

In the immediate aftermath of the unfortunate events of the 1984 desertions in Sikh units, the Army did try amalgamation of regiments/units to a certain degree by changing the 'pure' composition of caste, religion, region based battalions to a 'mixed' composition. The experiment did not work out to satisfaction and was discarded in time.

At the point of time when the practice of mixed battalions was still in vogue, I chanced to speak to a second-in-command of a Dogra battalion who had a company each of South Indians, Rajputs, Jats and Dogras in the battalion. The officer was not very happy with the state of affairs. He felt that the effectiveness of the unit was reduced as a fighting force and that the essence of the Dogra Regiment was lost by having such mixed troops and in time of actual action there might be a loss of cohesiveness in the troops.

The option of having mixed fighting units with pan-India composition appears very reasonable to many, including the gentleman who has filed the petition in the Supreme Court. Arguments of such individuals often is that this system had been devised by the British for their use and efficacy in that day and age and in present day India there was no place for such a system.

However, the fact remains that despite India being one country, we are a country where language, culture and customs change every few hundred kilometers. Our uniqueness lies in the fact that despite our diverse nature we still retain our ability to bond with each other at the macro level.

Thus, when it comes to fighting, killing and dying for the country, Indian Army cannot be compared with other armies of the world where such regimental system does not exist. Everything which the British did was not bad and the basic framework which they have provided was based on their own experience in the British Army where they had region-based regiments which catered to that specific area only. It was a time tested system which was introduced with suitable amendments in Indian conditions.

The challenge to this system from external factors like sceptics going to the Supreme Court can be withstood but things may indeed change internally with the march of time. As the nation develops and better and more lucrative opportunities arise, young men may be lesser inclined to join the service. As it turns out, during the recent session of Lok Sabha Defence Minister AK Antony has admitted to a shortage of men in the enlisted ranks. This is the first time the MoD has publically accepted this fact.

Therefore, it will only be some years or decades down the line when the regimental system may have to be amended once the Army finds that it cannot muster adequate number of young men from the particular religion, caste or region to fill its vacancies in the various regiments. A case in point relates to the already existing crises in the Sikh Regiment and Sikh Light Infantry Regiment of the Army where the recruiters are facing difficulty in filling their quota. Alternate job preference, poor physical condition etc may be the cause behind it but this could replicate in other regiments too. The Maoist threat to turn of the tap of Gorkha recruitment in Nepal a couple of years back must also be borne in mind.

It is in this context that the Army may have to fine tune its policy in the years to come. As of now, however, the system is working perfectly fine. As the Americans say, 'If it ain't broken, don't fix it".

  

AFT ORDERS MS TO APOLOGISE TO WAR VETERAN

Delivering a sharp rap on the knuckles for not adhering to a judgement given by it and causing undue harassment to a petitioner, the Kolkata bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal has directed the Military Secretary, Lt Gen Syed Ata Hasnain to express regret to the petitioner.

Giving its directions in a contempt application field by Col Arun Dattaji Patole (retd), naming the Military Secretary, Lt Gen Syed Ata Hasnain and the Chief of Army Staff, General Bikram Singh as respondents, the AFT bench has also come down very hard on the Col MS (Legal) for not taking the matter seriously. The bench has found his attitude to be "callous" and recommended action against him by higher authorities, if they so desire.

The genesis of the order lies in an order given by the bench earlier directing the MS to hold a special promotion board of the officer to the rank of Brigadier and intimate the result to him with complete reasoning. He was also directed to provide a personal hearing to the Colonel if he was not satisfied with the reply.

The Army did hold a special promotion board but communicated its result in a perfunctory manner without giving any detailed reasoning:

"I.  Ref WP 15548(W)|2OO3  filed by you in the High Court at Kolkata.
2 . Consequent  to  the relief granted by Kolkata High Court in WP 1,5548-w/2003  vide order dated 2 Feb 2, you were considered  as Special  Revielw  (Fresh) case of the 1971 batch of AOC by the No. 2 SB held from 06 to 0B Apr 2011,  under the previous system of selection  (value judgement) and not approved  for promotion  to the acting rank of Brig."

When the officer reminded the MS of the directions of the AFT bench and that he wanted an interview with him he received an arrogant reply which bordered on dismissive attitude:

"  In case you want to  have personal hearing you must intimate  the date so that date is fixed and case be
explained about non  empanelment along with  the reasons as directed by  the  Hon'ble Armed Forces
Tribunal.  lt is clarified  that you have to come on at your own expenses  for the said interview,  as no funds are allocated for  calling retired  officers for  personal hearing."

Clearly, not pleased with the action taken by the MS Branch in pursuance of the orders given by it, the Bench passed the following hard-hitting order.

 "We direct that MS, during his visits to various Command HQs. including Pune and Kolkata (where


the appricant  usualy resides)  must intimate the applicant  and grant all possible facilities  to give him a personal hearing in which all aspects must be explained  to  him in detail within the limits of security.  The applicant  should be apprised  as to why he was low on merit and whether ail points that were to be covered
have indeed been covered  while considering  his case in the special  board. subsequent  to such a personal  hearing,  it will only be appropriate  for the MS on behalf of the respondents to express  regret to the war veteran for the delay and agony thus caused.  Thereafter,  the MS shall pass a speaking  order in writing explaining  the detairs of the interview and the reasons  for non-empanelment  of the applicant  in the special
board that was conducted  on the order of this Tribunal".

WHEN MILITARY JUSTICE IS MISUSED TO SETTLE SCORES

I am quite convinced, that on the face of it, if all parameters are followed to the T, the military system of justice in our country can be the most fair. I know of countless instances where the system has delivered justice despite command pressures and has not succumbed to them. Yet, there are also numerous and, maybe more, examples which I can re-collect where the military justice has failed miserably in delivering justice and where personnel have been vilified and crucified for no fault of theirs.

This present example is also one of failure of military justice and one where the person persecuted was from that branch which is meant to help the Commanders mete out justice. The Judge Advocate Generals Branch is unfortunately rotting to the core today, because of which unscrupulous elements are having a field day being at the helm of affairs and running down honest and dedicated officers to settle personal scores.

In this instance, an officer has been hounded just because his immediate superior did not like him and was unhappy to have him serve under him. He not only managed to get him side-lined, at the cost of his career, but also got him punished when he resisted the attempts to fix his career.

And to utter disgrace to the uniform they wore, Commanders at various levels played an active part in allowing this travesty of justice to take place. The officer, Lt Col Mukul Dev, was punished while his superior, Brig PS Rathore, now the Judge Advocate General of the Army in the rank of Maj Gen, was allowed to go scot free despite being similarly indicted by the CoI.

I am reproducing below, the excerpts from the judgement passed today by the Kolkata bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal, after Lt Col Dev approached it for justice. It is an eye opener on how justice fails to deliver and how senior officers look the other way while careers of junior officers are destroyed.

Lt Col Dev and the acumen and perseverance to fight the injustice, but consider how many officers, JCOs and Jawans may be suffering for the same reasons and not having the wherewithal to fight the system.
Let's hope the present Chief of Army Staff, General Bikram Singh, is alive to the problems that plague the JAG Dept and takes steps to clean the mess.

EXCERPTS FROM JUDGEMENT OF KOLKATA AFT BENCH

25.       We have the following observations with regard to the manner in which this COI was convened, conducted, analysed and directions from the Army Commander was obtained which resulted in  different degree of administrative actions against some out of those who were held responsible in the said COI.

(a)   The matter was not at all that severe or grave administrative breach to initiate a COI. After all it was publication of Part II Order which is nothing but a statement of “Occurrence” that was done on 04.04.2009 and later cancelled after  it was found out by the  higher officials that a transfer of an officer could not have been done without the approval of the MS Branch at Army HQ.  The entire episode did not cause any loss of property, fund or moral fibre. It was, if at all, an incidence which could have been tackled within the space of routine administration. It definitely did not warrant a senior officer of the rank of  GOC-in-C to order a COI for such a mundane and routine administrative affair.

(b)   That apart by issuing clarificatory order dt. 2.4.09, the posting of the applicant in the Q (Land-2) Branch has not been cancelled or kept in abeyance. There has been remarkable departure from the sanction of the Army commander-in-Chief on the material points on which the COI was directed to be held and the convening order which only confined to “pint point the responsibility for the above publication” and not enquiring into the side stepping of the applicant. Therefore, the very convening of this COI could have been avoided unless there were different motives to be attributed by obtaining strength from findings of such a COI.

(c)   Coming to the COI itself, we find that convening order clearly spells out that the COI would also “pin point responsibility for above publication” of wrong Part II Orders. Our attention was drawn to Para 584 (c) of Regulations of Army 1986 which clearly gives out situations where Part II Orders are published.  Despite such directions of the convening authority in the said convening order, HQ Central Command, while replying to a query raised by MOD (AG) (their Note No. 48545/Stat/CC/1163/AG/DV 4(b) dated 25.08.2010 in Para 2 (ii) there of),  has stated that the subject COI pertains to only investigation of illegal publication of Part II Order and the terms of reference was to “Investigate the circumstances under which such Part II Orders were published”. This aspect of “ pin pointing responsibility …” has been omitted in their reply to MOD

(d)   It is evident from Para 3 (b) and (c) of HQ Central Command Note of even No. dated 02.11.2010 addressed to MOD (AG) that in the aforesaid reply HQ Central Command (DV) had not furnished full and complete facts to the MOD by not revealing one part of the convening order which was to “Pin point the responsibility for above publication”. Since the ibid query was required to be answered accurately; half truth answer in this manner would have given a different twist while MOD was adjudicating on the Statutory Complaint submitted by the applicant, who was aggrieved with administrative action taken against him.

(e)   We also noticed that the COI, in its opinion, has clearly given following facts based on its findings :-

(i)                 The Court felt that entire episode of wrong Part II Order was published due to ambiguous written instructions that were interpreted without efforts resulting in wrong Part II Orders.

(ii)               The COI held following officers responsible for this lapse. 

(aa)     Brig U.K. Chopra.

(ab)     Brig P.S. Rathore

(ac)     Lt Col Mukul Deb

(iii)             In addition, the Court held following officers responsible for  aggravation for the above lapse

(aa)     Col S.K. Malhotra

(ab)     Lt Col V.M. Singh

(ac)     Lt Col A. Bahukhandi

(f)     It is interesting to note that the opinion of the Court with regard to Lt Col Mukul Deb, who was punished for maximum severity, was responsible for a lapse of “not exercising caution” while initiating a noting. So were the other officers, who were blamed for “not exercising due caution”.  Brig U.K. Chopra and Brig P.S. Rathore were held responsible for the lapse for issuing vague instructions in transfer of Lt Col Mukul Deb and relieving him from the post of AJAG respectively.  Very strangely, these aspects were not indicated to the MOD by HQ Central Command in response to their query, which was raised while MOD was examining Lt. Col. Mukul Deb’s statutory complaint. 

(g)   The Notings on the file (19015/COI/MD/C/AG/DV merely relate to views of various Staff officers and their opinion and we shall not comment on them. We would however, like to point out our observations that the GOC-in-C in his direction on the COI has conveniently omitted the names of the two Brigadiers (Brig Chopra and Brig Rathore)  thereby keeping his administrative process incomplete. Ideally he, having found them being blamed for omissions/commisions  of lapses, the said COI, should have either dealt with them administratively  or exonerated them completely or partially by disagreeing on the findings of the COI with adequate reasons endorsed in his directions. Such incomplete administrative actions at the level of Command HQ by Army Commander is often not seen and indicative of lack of transparency and non-application of mind which create a ground for hostile discrimination on the part of the aggrieved officer.

(h)   The lapses pointed out in processing the file vide note dt. 24.8.10 & 18.2.11 (vide annexure-A24) have not been reconciled by the superior authorities.    

26.       In view of our ibid discussions and observations especially with regard to incomplete directions by the GOC-in-C, we feel that the matter must be brought up to the notice of COAS (Respondent No  2) as it is for him to direct completion of action as appropriate.  The COAS may also note that Senior Officers at that level must endorse their views on such enquiry reports in a transparent manner indicating their agreement or disagreement or partial agreement with adequate reasons.

27.       Brigadiers, who head branches in Command HQ do have important supervisory role in this case, but their failure, though pointed out by the C of I, has gone un-noticed by the GOC-in-C while giving his direction. The COAS must issue directions to rectify such lapses in HQ Central Command.

28.       We also find that that the GOC-in-C has partially agreed that the findings of the Court but has not mentioned his views with reasons for said partial agreement. Such actions create  doubts in our mind since they can never be termed  “transparent”. The COAS may also consider this aspect.  

29.       Considering the matter from all its angles, we are of the opinion that the  recordable censure of “severe displeasure” issued against the applicant is not only too harsh but totally uncalled for. As admittedly, the respondents have accepted that in the order dt. 20.3.09 the word “transferred” should not have been used and that it was used inadvertently. It is clear from the above discussion that by use of such word i.e. “transferred”, the entire misconception and misunderstanding started although the respondent authorities tried to rectify their alleged fault or mistake by issuing subsequent clarificatory order but without cancelling the same. Therefore, in our considered view, the alleged lapse of the applicant lies unsubstantiated. The respondents cannot also escape the liability of publishing an order which was couched in a confusing language.  It is also to be noted that apart from this incident, no other misconduct was alleged against him though the ld. adv. for the respondents has submitted that in another occasion the applicant was issued with a non-recordable warning for using foul and intemperate language against higher officers, which, however, is not under challenge in this case.

30.       We have gone through the show cause notice and the detailed reply  given thereto by the applicant. But in the impugned order dt. 29.9.09, there was no discussion of the points raised by the applicant in his reply to the show cause. It simply states in para 3 as follows :-

“3.        Apropos, I direct that my “severe displeasure (recordable)” be conveyed to IC 46298N Lieutenant colonel Mukul Dev, Assistant Judge Advocate General of Headquarters, Central command for the above mentioned lapse on his part.”

31.       In our considered opinion when by such recordable censure, the entire service career of an young army officer is going to be ruined, it should not be taken lightly and at least reasons for non-acceptance of the reply given by the delinquent officer should have been recorded, which is the basic principle of natural justice. The order is not at all a speaking order.  We, therefore, cannot sustain this impugned order and it is liable to be set aside and quashed. Consequently, the order dt. 21.2.12 rejecting the statutory complaint filed by the applicant against the impugned punishment order is set aside and quashed. The applicant on this issue stands exonerated.

32.       In this context, we also direct the COAS (respondent No. 2) to re-examine as to why the administrative action on the subject C of I has remained incomplete for nearly three years, in which two other Brigadiers, including respondent No. 5, were also investigated upon, apportioned some degree of supervisory lapse, but their names have been conveniently omitted from the directions by the GOC in C, who has not recorded any reasons for such omission, neither in his order nor in response to the MOD, when queried for by them, while they were processing the statutory complaint of the applicant. Actions like withholding information or not assigning adequate reasons while dealing with such cases especially, by senior officers compounds lack of transparency leading to denial of natural justice apart from the vices of not rendering public service in a holistic way.  The COAS shall look into this aspect objectively.

33.       In the result, the original application is allowed on contest but without cost. The impugned orders dt. 29.9.09 and 21.2.12 are hereby quashed. The applicant be exonerated of the charge levelled against him in the show cause notice dt. 21.8.09.

34.       Let the original records be returned to the respondents on proper receipt,.

 35.      Let plain copy of the order be handed over to the parties.

(LT. GEN K.P.D.SAMANTA)                                   (JUSTICE H.N.SARMA)

        MEMBER(ADMINISTRATIVE)                                    MEMBER(JUDICIAL)