SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(SC) 646

2007(4) Supreme 690
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.P. Singh & Harjit Singh Bedi, JJ.
Masooda Parveen — Appellant
versus
Union of India & Ors. — Respondents
Writ Petition (civil) 275 of 1999
Decided on : 02-05-2007
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant : M.S. Ganesh, Sr. Adv., Ms. Shomona Khanna, Seshachary and Anupam Lal Das, Advocates.
For the Respondent : Vikash Singh ASG., Vikash Sharma, R.C. Kathia, Ms. Shiva Lakshmi, Ms. Amrita Narayan, T. Prasad, D.S. Mahra, Shreekant N. Terdal, Anis Subrawardy, S. Mehdi Imam and Tabrez Ahmed, Advocates.

Headnote:Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 32 – Writ petition by petitioner 1 praying for a direction to Respondent Union of India to pay compensation and for providing a job on compassionate grounds for custodial death of her husband - Deceased a small-time businessman trading in saffron, sustained heavy losses on which his creditors approached local militants for help in recovering amounts due to them – Petitioner’s case that surrendered militants along with a unit of Army (17 Jat ) reached deceased’s home and searched his house but found nothing incriminating therein – Deceased was nevertheless taken to Lethapora Army Camp, Head Quarters of the 17 Jat, and tortured mercilessly leading to his death - Plea of petitioner that deceased had left behind an indigent family - Not an iota of evidence to support petitioners’ plea except for statements that she had made in petition – Even though Court must lean a little in favour of victims on account of adverse situation in which they stand placed, but Court must find something to lean on - No evidence to suggest that petitioners’ case was worthy of belief - Army and police record pertaining to incident on contrary showed that deceased was indeed a militant and that circumstances leading to his death were as per circumstances put on record by respondents – Petition having no merit dismissed.(Paras 10 to 13)

       Facts of the case :

       A Writ petition was filed by petitioner1herein in the instant case praying for a direction to Respondent Union of India to pay compensation and for providing a job on compassionate grounds for custodial death of her husband. According to petitioner deceased was a small-time businessman trading in saffron, sustained heavy losses on which his creditors approached local militants for help in recovering amounts due to them. Petitioner’s case that surrendered militants along with a unit of Army (17 Jat ) reached deceased’s home and searched his house but found nothing incriminating therein but Deceased was nevertheless taken to Lethapora Army Camp, Head Quarters of the 17 Jat, and tortured mercilessly leading to his death.

       Findings of the Court:

       The Court held that there was not an iota of evidence to support petitioners’ plea except for statements that she had made in petition. Even though Court must lean a little in favour of victims on account of adverse situation in which they stand placed, but Court must find something to lean on. No evidence to suggest that petitioners’ case was worthy of belief. Army and police record pertaining to incident on contrary showed that deceased was indeed a militant and that circumstances leading to his death were as per circumstances put on record by respondents. Petition having no merit was dismissed accordingly.

JUDGMENT

HARJIT SINGH BEDI, J.—

1.In this writ petition, a prayer has been made that the respondent - Union of India be called upon to pay compensation and to provide a job on compassionate grounds for the custodial death of Ghulam Mohi-ud-din Regoo, the husband of petitioner No.1.

The facts taken from the petition are as under :

“The deceased Ghulam Mohi-ud-din Regoo, was an advocate enrolled and practicing in the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir before the Srinagar Bench. In addition to his practice he was also a small-time businessman trading in saffron, but on account of certain factors, sustained heavy losses on which his creditors approached local militants for help in recovering the amounts due to them. As a consequence of this pressure, Regoo shifted from his village Chandhara to Sopore and remained away for a period of two years from 1992 to 1994 and then returned as there was in the meanwhile a decline in the strength of the militants. It appears that some militants who were working alongwith the Army got him arrested on 6th October, 1994 on the allegation that he was a Pakistani Trained Militant (PTM) and he was kept in custody for about three months and then released, and on return continued to follow his vocations in a peaceful manner. On 1st February, 1998 some surrendered militants alongwith a unit of the Army (17 Jat) reached Regoo’s home in Chandhara at about 8.30 p.m. and searched his house but found nothing incriminating therein. He was nevertheless taken to the Lethapora Army Camp, the Head Quarters of the 17 Jat, and tortured mercilessly leading to his death whereafter explosives were placed on his dead body and then detonated to camouflage the murder. It is further the petitioners’ case that the morning after the incident, his body was handed over to the police and was thereafter subjected to a very casual and cursory post mortem examination. It is in these circumstances that a case for compensation etc. has been made on the plea that the deceased had left behind an indigent family comprising of petitioner No.1 (his widow) and four children, the eldest being a son 20 years of age. Petitioner No.1 sent several applications to the State Chief Minister, and other Government agencies and also addressed letters to the Chief Justice of India on 22nd June, 1998 and 20th July, 1998, on which the matter was referred to the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee which advised her to approach the State High Court. Petitioner No. 1 in her letter dated 19th October, 1998 to the Chief Justice of India pointed out that she was not interested in pursuing her case before the Jammu and Kashmir High Court as the Bar Association was politicizing it which was not called for. The matter was accordingly treated as a Writ Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India and after notice to the parties, Rule-Nisi was issued on 9th February, 2001.”

2.Two affidavits in reply have been filed by the respondents; one by Major D.S. Punia, the officer in-charge of the patrol of the 17 Jat which had arrested Regoo and taken him for interrogation to the Lethapora Army Camp and the other by respondent nos. 3 & 4 the State of Jammu and Kashmir etc.

3.In the affidavit in reply filed by Major D.S. Punia, the story, has to a point, been admitted. It has however been pointed out that on the basis of intelligence provided to the Battalion, a patrol party from the Lethapora Army Camp had searched Regoo’s house at about 8.30 p.m. on 2nd February, 1998 which had led to his apprehension and that he had thereafter been taken to the Camp and interrogated on which he had revealed that he was a Pakistani Trained Militant and an Ex-divisional Commander of the A1 Barq Terrorist Group, and had also offered to lead a patrol to a hide out in the Wasterwan Heights, a short distance away, where arms and ammunition had been stored in a militant hideout. It has further been deposed that a patrol under his command was accordingly deputed to move to the h















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top