SAVITRI SHARMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition, as originally filed, was in the nature of a habeas corpus petition filed by the petitioner, who is the wife of Shri G.L. Sharma (hereinafter referred to as 'Sharma') for the production of Sharma, who had gone missing while in the service of Army. However, with the passage of time, this petition has taken a different turn. Sharma has not been traced and we are now concerned with the terminal and other pensionary benefits, which could be admissible to the petitioner as widow of Sharma on the premise that he is presumed dead, though solving the mystery of Sharma's disappearance remains the focal point in shaping the relief to which the petitioner would be entitled to.

(2.) The events leading to the filing of the writ petition as well as the circumstances/developments, which led to altering the stance of the petition, may be recapitulated in brief.

(3.) Naib/Risaldar (RT) Shri G.L. Sharma had joined the Indian Army in the year 1982. At the relevant period, i.e., 1991-92, he was posted with 43rd Armed Regiment of the Indian Armed Forces at Pathankot. He was Naib/Risaldar working as a religious teacher. As per the averments made in the petition, problem began when Col. Bikramjit Singh took over as the Commanding Officer in that Unit and when he was advised by Sharma not to do anything which might deteriorate the communal harmony of the Unit. It is alleged that the behaviour of Col. Bikramjit Singh, Commanding Officer was not such as to generate confidence and faith amongst his subordinates belonging to other communities. He had even ordered and got demolished a mosque in May 1991. He was also indulging in number of corrupt practices like embezzlement of Government funds, forgery of documents, illegal activities and using soldiers as personal servants and sending them to their relatives to do their household jobs, misuse of ration supply and issuance of railway warrants for wrong stations, etc. When Sharma apprised him of the deteriorating morale of Jawans and damage done to the communal harmony to the Unit, he was threatened by the Commanding Officer of dire consequences. Sharma was constrained to report to the Brig. Commaner 94(I) Armed Brigade against Col. Bikramjit Singh as per the provisions of Rule 26 para 317 of Defence Service Regulations. However, he was shocked when, as a result of this complaint, he was reportedly discharged from the Unit. This discharge was triggered on the basis of forged letter dated 10.02.1992 allegedly written by Sharma seeking his resignation. On coming to know this fact, Sharma protested and wrote a letter of complaint to the Brigade Commander on 07.04.1992 complaining about the forged letter, as he had not given any application of discharge. In response, the Brigade Commander called Sharma on 18.04.1992 in the presence of C.O. However, even when Sharma maintained that he had not given any discharge letter, Brigade Commander refused to set up Court of inquiry in order to favour the then C.O. On the same night, various Jawans came to the house of Sharma at the behest of C.O. and threatened the entire family of dire consequences. Because of this threat, Sharma was forced to send his family back to his native place and after that he returned to the Unit. However, the petitioner thereafter did not receive any letter or communication from Sharma. When she did not hear about Sharma, she made representations to the Commanding Officer, Chief of Army Staff, the Defence Minister and the President of India on 20.11.1995, which was followed by another representation. After few days, she found that the discharge order of Sharma, her husband, was cancelled and now he had been declared as "absconder". According to the petitioner, her husband, Sharma was in the Unit in April, 1992, but his whereabouts had been concealed. She suspected that he was under illegal detention of Army Officers, particularly, Commanding Officer. This forced her to file the present petition for habeas corpus.