Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, JJ.
Sri Hira Ram – Appellant
Versus
District Magistrate And Another – Respondents
Writ C No.28747 of 2022
Decided on : 13-07-2023
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Chandra Shekher Singh
The main legal point established is the requirement for verification of documents and the District Magistrate's power to get necessary verification done when relevant records are not available or destroyed.
Headnote:
U.P. Fighters of Democracy Honour Act - Honour money claim rejection - Section 2(a), Section 4 - The court discussed the provisions of the U.P. Fighters of Democracy Honour Act, particularly Section 2(a) defining 'Fighters of Democracy' and Section 4 outlining the procedure for sanctioning Honour money. The court emphasized the requirement for verification of documents and the power of the District Magistrate to get necessary verification done when relevant records are not available or destroyed. The court found that the findings of the District Magistrate were perverse and illegal, and directed the release of Honour money to the petitioner.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner's claim for Honour money under the U.P. Fighters of Democracy Honour Act was rejected based on lack of evidence regarding his detention during the emergency period.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the rejection of the petitioner's claim was based on erroneous findings and directed the release of Honour money to the petitioner.
Issues: The main issue was the rejection of the petitioner's claim for Honour money due to lack of evidence of detention during the emergency period.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for verification of documents and the power of the District Magistrate to get necessary verification done when relevant records are not available or destroyed.
Final Decision: The impugned order was quashed, and respondent no. 2 was directed to release Honour money and other benefits to the petitioner within four weeks.
JUDGMENT :
Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.
1. The petitioner has called in question an order dated 8.8.2022, passed by respondent no. 1, District Magistrate, Mau, rejecting the claim of the petitioner for sanction of ‘Honour money’ under the provisions of the U.P. Fighters of Democracy Honour Act, 2016 (for short, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
2. The object of the Act is to provide for Honour money, free transport facility and free medical facility to fighters of democracy who actively fought to protect the democracy during emergency period (25.06.1975 to 21.03.1977) and who were detained in jail under MISA/DIR for participating in such activities and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.
3. Some of the relevant provisions of the Act are as follows:
Section 2 (a) “Fighters of Democracy” means such permanent residents of Uttar Pradesh who actively fought to protect the democracy during emergency period i.e. from 25.06.1975 to 21.03.1977 and who were detained at any time during this period, on political grounds in jail under MISA/DIR for participating in such activities.
(d) “Honour money” means such Honour money to be given to the fighters of democracy as may be determined by the State Government from time to time.
“4. (1) Any Honour money under this Act shall be sanctioned by the District Magistrate of the concerned district in the proforma given in Appendix 'A'.
(2) The District Magistrate shall pay the Honour money directly after necessary verification of the documents submitted by the applicant.
(3) (i) A fighter of democracy must be a resident of Uttar Pradesh and was detained under MISA/DIR in any jail of the country. He shall have to annex the certificate as such, which shall be verified by the District Magistrate concerned at his level;
(ii) While considering the case of such fighters of democracy whose documents are not available in the jail or destroyed, the District Magistrate concerned shall, after necessary verification, satisfy himself with other available documents that FIR was lodged in relevant sections under MISA/DIR against the applicant while opposing the emergency imposed during period from 25.06.1975 to 21.03.1977 and his arrest/detention is confirmed;
(iii) Such fighters of democracy, against whom other criminal sections were also imposed besides MISA/DIR, the District Magistrate shall satisfy himself that such other sections were imposed while fighting for the democracy during emergency and in opposition of imposition of emergency and arrest/detention was not other than political grounds; ……………...”
4. The petitioner claims that he was arrested and detained in jail from 20.11.1975 to 20.12.1975 under the Defence and Internal Security of India Rules, 1971 (for short, hereinafter referred to as ‘DIR’) while agitating against the imposition of Emergency. He was also charge-sheeted and convicted.
5. The petitioner further claims that on account of aforesaid reasons, he is covered by the definition of ‘Fighters of Democracy’ and was entitled to ‘Honour money’. Accordingly, he applied in prescribed format to respondent no. 2 for sanction of Honour money.
6. The application filed by the petitioner has been rejected by the impugned order after returning a finding that the report of Incharge Inspector, P.S. Kotwali, District Mau dated 24.5.2022 states that no FIR was ever found to be lodged against the petitioner. Moreover, Senior Superintendent, District Jail, Azamgarh in his report dated 21.6.2022 has mentioned that no record was found relating to detention of the petitioner in District Jail, Azamgarh between 25.6.1975 and 21.3.1977.
7. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order on the following grounds: -
(a) The impugned order is perverse and does not take into consideration the bail order dated 20.12.1975, the charge sheet dated 3.2.1977 and the order of conviction dated 3.2.1977. The aforesaid documents clearly reveal that the petitioner was arrested on 20.11.1975 and was granted bail on 20.12.1975.
(b
