Post-leave road-accident deaths fall outside Bharat Ke Veer listing criteria.

The petitioner’s son, a BSF employee, died in a road accident on 11 December 2015 while travelling to rejoin duty after leave.

An inquiry treated his death as attributable to bona fide government duty, and the petitioner received the applicable financial benefits.

She sought a direction to upload her son’s details on the “Bharat Ke Veer” portal and challenged the eligibility criteria governing uploads, alleging discrimination against personnel who died while performing bona fide duty.

The Union of India opposed the claim, submitting that the applicable criteria covered specified categories of deaths and not every employee who died.

1. Whether the petitioner’s son’s death in a road accident while travelling to rejoin duty after leave fell within the criteria for uploading his details on the “Bharat Ke Veer” portal.

2. Whether the portal’s eligibility criteria were discriminatory or otherwise unlawful for excluding the petitioner’s son’s case.

The Court considered the eligibility criteria set out in the circular governing the “Bharat Ke Veer” portal.

The criteria covered, among other cases, deaths attracting central ex-gratia of ₹35 lakh, specified deaths in border skirmishes or action against militants or terrorists, deaths at specified high-altitude or inaccessible posts due to natural disasters or extreme weather, deaths within Categories D and E of Schedule II to the Central Civil Services (Extraordinary Pension) Rules, and deaths during rescue or relief operations.

The criteria also allowed consideration of personnel killed on leave because they belonged to the security forces, subject to the stated conditions and approval process.

The Court examined the circular’s specified categories and concluded that the petitioner’s son’s accidental death while travelling to rejoin duty after leave did not fall within them.

Although the petitioner relied on the finding that the death was attributable to bona fide government duty, the Court held that this did not bring the case within the portal’s eligibility criteria.

It therefore found no basis to direct an upload or grant the requested relief.

The Court dismissed the writ petition.