Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
CASE NO.:
Writ Petition (civil) 36 of 2005
PETITIONER:
Smt. Angrej Kaur
RESPONDENT:
Union of India & Ors.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 03/05/2005
BENCH:
ARIJIT PASAYAT & S.H. KAPADIA
JUDGMENT:
J U D G M E N T
ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.
This writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of
India, 1950 (in short the ’Constitution’) presents some unusual
features. In mythology Sati Savitri’s prayer ensured that her husband
Satyaban escaped jaws of death. Petitioner Smt. Angrej Kaur is the wife
of one B.S.F. Constable named Surjit Singh. Though he has been
declared to have died in the Indo-Pak war in 1971, the petitioner on
the basis of certain materials believes that he is alive and is
languishing in Kot Lakhpat Rai Jail, Pakistan.
The factual scenario in the present petition as projected by the
petitioner runs in somewhat similar lines and even at first flush may
appear fictional. It is in essence prayer for writ in the nature of
habeas corpus. Though technically it may appear to be unacceptable as
the concerned person is stated to be in custody in a Pakistan jail, yet
the petitioner’s human emotions refuse to accept this legal landline.
First the factual background as projected by the petitioner needs
to be noted.
Surjit Singh was Constable in 57 Battalion of B.S.F. and he was
posted in Chhamb Sector on 3rd/4th December, 1971. Initially he was
reported to be missing. A communication dated 26.7.1972 was received by
the petitioner from the concerned authorities granting her family
pension of Rs.130/- as Surjit Singh was reported to be missing. On
26.9.1974 the Commandant of the concerned authority issued certificate
to the effect that for all official purposes he had died on 4.12.1971
while on duty. A letter to this effect was also received by the
petitioner. In spite of these informations, the petitioner believes
that her husband is alive and she did not believe that he could have
died. Her unfailing faith on the almighty made her believe that the
information was wrong. She awaited for information about Surjit Singh
being alive, as her prayers were coming from her heart. Her son Amrik
Singh was hardly one year of age at the time his father was reported
dead. Now he is in his thirties. Though more than three decades passed
by, she refused to believe that her husband has died. She read in the
newspaper (Punjabi Daily) ’Ajit’ on 3.9.2004 that one
Khushi Mohammad had returned from Pakistan Jail after 14 years. The
news report indicated that though Khushi Mohammad and few others were
released there were as many as eighty five Indians Still lying in jails
of Pakistan in pitiable circumstances and the name of one Surjit Singh
was mentioned along with others. The petitioner believes that said
Surjit Singh was none other than her husband. On 4.9.2004 Amrik Singh
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
went to meet aforesaid Khushi Mohammad at Nishant Colony, Malerkotla
City, Punjab and showed him the photograph of his father Surjit Singh.
Khushi Mohammad immediately identified the person in the photograph and
confirmed having seen him in ’Kot Lakhpat Rai Jail’ in Pakistan. This
news was of a great solace and joy to the petitioner and her family
members. On 16.9.2004 Amrik Singh met other persons who had been
released along with Khushi Mohammad. They also identified the
photograph of Surjit Singh and confirmed having seen in Kot Lakhpat Rai
Jail in Pakistan. On 24.9.1994 the petitioner sent representation to
various authorities, functionaries and dignitaries requesting that
efforts be made to bring back Surjit Singh from Pakistan Jail. Making a
grievance that she had not received any positive response to her
petition, the writ petition was filed. On 7.2.2005 direction was given
to the opposite parties to look into the grievance of the petitioner
within a period of four weeks. An affidavit has been filed on behalf of
the Union of India, Ministry of Home Affairs and the Directorate of
B.S.F. Various steps taken by
the authorities have been indicated. From the status report, we find
that steps have been taken to find out actual position. It also appears
that initial response of the Pakistan authorities was that they have
checked various jails but Constable Surjit Singh could not be traced.
It appears that the matter has been discussed at the B.S.F. and
Pakistan Rangers meetings. In the India-Pakistan Quarterly Meeting (DIG
level), the matter was discussed on 29.12.2004. In February, 2005, the
Pakistan authorities intimated that steps were being taken to trace
Constable Surjit Singh and he will be repatriated if found in Pakistan.
Since there was a negative response from the Pakistan authorities,
later matter appears to have been taken up at Bio-Annual meeting and
the B.S.F. authorities have requested their counterparts in B.S.F. to
take up the matter expeditiously. We are satisfied that the B.S.F.
authorities have taken all possible steps to find out the petitioner’s
husband. Let the Ministry of External Affairs which was requested by
B.S.F. authorities to look into the matter also intervene in the
matter. If a soldier, while fighting for the country’s security, is
captured and taken to other country’s prison contrary to the official
belief that he was dead, it would be in the interest of not only
petitioner and her family members but also for the armed forces of this
country to see that he is brought back to our country. It is not to be
understood that we are issuing a writ of habeas corpus to any authority
outside India. Our directions essentially relate to Indian officials.
But it cannot be lost sight of
that law cannot ever be a combination of meaningless and purposeless
combination of words. The judicial system reaches its pinnacle when it
serves the ultimate object of all laws; i.e. delivering justice to the
recipient who deserves it, not shackled by pitfalls and landmines of
technicalities. Within the four corners of legal framework, the reliefs
can be moulded to achieve the ultimate objective, that is to deliver
justice.
We, therefore, dispose of this writ petition with the direction
that the authorities shall continue the efforts to find out the actual
position and expeditiously intimate the petitioner, the results of the
efforts/inquiries made by them. Though we are disposing of the writ
petition, let status report indicating the latest development in the
matter be filed within three months, which shall be placed before us.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.