MOHINI DEVI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the order dtd. 25/10/2018 passed by Respondent no. 4 (Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition) denying the family pension of freedom fighter to the petitioner. Petitioner has also prayed for issuance of a writ of Mandamus commanding and directing the Respondents to grant benefit of the family pension treating her as successor of freedom fighter.

(2.) The facts of the case may succinctly be stated as follows:

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would take us through the document, especially Annexure No. 2 to the writ petition, which shows that husband of the petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the criminal Court for imprisonment till the rising of the Court and to pay a fine of Rs.20.00 and in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months under Sec. 38(5) of the Defence of India Rules, 1939. Rule 38 (5) prohibits any person from carrying or bringing in possession of any material, which may be taken as revolution or to assist the enemy. The said Rules were framed under the Defence of India Act,.