In a recent ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court made it clear that not every untimely death of a soldier falls within the ambit of “service-related combat situations” warranting higher pensionary benefits.
The case stemmed from a petition filed by a widow whose husband, a soldier, lost his life during a drunken altercation with a colleague. She sought a liberalised family pension on the grounds that her husband’s death should be treated under Category ‘E’ of the Ministry of Defence’s 2001 pension instructions, which extend benefits to deaths resulting from acts of violence or attacks by extremists and anti-social elements.
The widow challenged the order of the Chandigarh Bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal, which had turned down her claim. She maintained that clause (g) of Category ‘E’ was broad enough to include her husband’s death. In addition, she urged that clause (f)(ii) covering fatalities during battle inoculation training exercises or live ammunition demonstrations could also be applied to her case.
The Union Government, however, opposed the plea, asserting that the incident had no connection with combat or hostile conditions but stemmed from a personal quarrel after drinking. It further noted that the petitioner was already receiving a special family pension.
The Division Bench of Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi and Justice Vikas Suri upheld the government’s stand, clarifying that the clauses relied upon by the petitioner could not be stretched to cover such a situation. The Bench observed, “…the same will not cover a situation of a private fight amongst employees after being drunk.”
On the alternative plea, the court held that clause (f)(ii) is confined strictly to training exercises involving live ammunition, which had no relevance in the present case. The Court concluded, while dismissing the petition, that the grant of special family pension already made to the widow was appropriate, and no claim for liberalised family pension could be entertained.
Picture Source :
