The Supreme Court on Monday asked the army to take a sympathetic view of a discharged soldier receiving disability pension due to alcohol dependency, observing that the man served in extremely difficult terrains at Siachen Glacier and deserved exceptional consideration on account of his service record.
“These are soldiers who have served on the border and they have served the nation. We understand the perspective of the army too but let’s try not to take away something that has already been given to them. They have families to take care of...sometimes, we have to look at the human side of justice,” a bench of justices Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and Sudhanshu Dhulia observed.
The bench was hearing an appeal filed by the army against a 2020 order by the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) to give disability pension to a sepoy, who was discharged as an “undesirable soldier” in 2014 over poor military discipline, arising out of his alcoholism.
Also read: Pegasus panel gives report to Supreme Court
Representing the army, additional solicitor general (ASG) Madhvi Divan submitted in the top court that alcohol dependency cannot be treated as any form of disability in a disciplines force, and therefore, it was decided to discharge him as an “undesirable soldier”. Since the release was not on any medical ground, the ASG said, the soldier was not entitled to disability pension.
{{/usCountry}}Representing the army, additional solicitor general (ASG) Madhvi Divan submitted in the top court that alcohol dependency cannot be treated as any form of disability in a disciplines force, and therefore, it was decided to discharge him as an “undesirable soldier”. Since the release was not on any medical ground, the ASG said, the soldier was not entitled to disability pension.
{{/usCountry}}The bench, however, noted that the soldier had served over 10 years in the force, of which most of his postings were in Jammu and Kashmir, including one at Siachen Glacier.
According to the soldier, it was during his posting at Siachen when he started drinking alcohol on the advice of the unit medical officer to protect him from extreme weather conditions.
“We get the army’s point of view. But, after all, judges are also human...they have feelings. We are also moved when we see our soldiers being carried in coffins and the grief all around. We saw the visuals of two Air Force officials over the weekend...You see their spouses, their families, and it shakes you up,” remarked the bench.
The court was referring to the tragic incident on Thursday evening when two pilots were killed after an Indian Air Force MiG-21 jet crashed during a training sortie in Rajasthan’s Barmer.
“Think of carving out an exception for this man. We understand the concerns of the army and we also don’t want to create a precedent of sorts. Had this petition been his appeal, we might have taken a different view. But now, he and his family are getting the disability pension and we don’t want to take that away,” said the bench.
Also read: Malegaon blast case: Supreme Court asks Bombay high court to decide on Lt Col Purohit’s plea
At this, ASG Divan agreed to consult the authorities in army on treating this case as an exception. The court then adjourned the hearing by a week.
In its 2020 order, the AFT had held that the soldier’s indiscipline emanated from intoxication, which was a result of his alcohol dependency, which should be considered a ground for granting him disability pension.
It had further noted that an “undesirable soldier” has all his rights intact as a soldier even after discharge, in terms of pension and other benefits such as disability pension.