Friday, January 29, 2010

POINT OF VIEW ON SUKHNA LAND SCAM

A point of view by Lt-Gen Harwant singh ( Retd ) on the Sukhna Scam

"On a piece of private land, adjacent to Army establishment (Corps HQ) at Sukhna, an educational institution was being planned. Law does not permit construction of any building within 1000 meters of a military installation. This law has been breached at innumerable places. At Badowal (near Ludhiana ) marriage palaces and other construction has come up next to an army ammunition depot, objections by the military authorities not withstanding. A number of villas have been constructed next to a very sensitive defence installation at Kasauli, inspite of the IAF taking the issue to Himachal High Court, where nothing came of it. A toll barrier has come up next to ammunition depot at Lalru, inspite of serious of protests by the army. The list is endless….

At Sukhna the concerned builder had approached the military authorities for an NOC (no objection certificate) to raise an educational institution close to corps HQ on private piece of land. This was just to make sure that at a later stage the army may not obtain a stay or seek demolition of the buildings, through the courts. This request for NOC was turned down by the army for security reasons. In fact army never issues any such NOC. After some gap, concerned builder once more approached the military authorities, for an NOC and on its brochure had the picture of the present military secretary (Lt-Gen Avadesh Prakash) who was shown as the future director of the institute. Being in a key position as MS at army HQ, he pressurized those at Sukhna corps HQ to issue an NOC. Thus it makes a case of gross impropriety and violates the purpose of the law which ensures security of military installations. Equally those who relented to this pressure have become party to this misdemeanor, which included two generals and few other officers. Gen Avadesh Prakash is involved in a similar case at Ranikhet, where in addition there are allegations of misappropriation of regimental funds.

Command Headquarters at Calcutta took a serious view of this impropriety (gross misconduct) and ordered a court of inquiry. The army commander at Calcutta has reviewed the inquiry report and recorded his recommendations. It is now for the army chief to examine the details of the inquiry report and the recommendations of the army commander and take further action. Ranikhet case is being dealt with separately by Central Command.

Military draws its manpower from within the country, where moral standards have fallen, corruption is rampant and a climate of loot and plunder prevails right across the national landscape. The difference is that this fall in standards is unacceptable in the military. That is how military’s internal mechanism searches out cases of corruption, misdemeanor and misconduct etc, (liquor, ketchup, local purchase frauds, moral turpitude and Sukhna like cases, violators of civil rights etc types,) irrespective of the rank of the miscreant and apply to these the rigors of military law. It is not that every crook is caught. Some do manage to hoodwink the system but their number is minimal.

The process of application of Military Law has well defined set of rules and procedures and these cannot be short circuited without prejudicing the legal position. No senior commanders in the chain of command is expected to show undue interest is a case while under investigation and being dealt with at the lower level. Military’s justice system is not only prompt but eminently fair and this is borne by the fact that not more than 4 to 5 % of the military’s cases are reversed by the high courts/supreme court and that percentage is far less than judgments of lower courts reversed by the higher judiciary

The RM and the media ought to be aware of this. Therefore, RM’s, summoning the Army Chief and telling him that severe disciplinary action ( in the interest of morale of the army etc ) should be taken against officers involved in Sukhna and Ranikhet cases, tend to subvert the military’s legal system. Eastern Army Commander is known for his sense of propriety, probity and fairness. It was best to have left the case to his judgment at that stage. What, if the President of India was to call upon the Chief Justice of India to dole out severe punishment in a particular case or take a lenient view! Now that the case has comes up before the Army Chief and the RM, they can .do whatever is proper: keeping in focus the evidence on record, nature of the case and army commander’s recommendations.

Nor should the RM try to link this need for action against these officers with the morale of troops. Morale is an area and domain entirely the province of the Army Chief and his officers. What one expected the RM to do, if he wanted to make morale of troops and officers his concern as well, was to look carefully at the, distortions and disparities brought about by the Sixth Pay Commission, as these relate to the defence services and which have adversely impacted the morale of troops and veterans and not left this vital issue in the hands of the bureaucrats, who in the first place are the ones to bring about the distortions. In this important area of his direct concern, the RM has singularly failed.

Handing over the case to the CBI will achieve double purpose. One, it will put it on a long drive. Two, it will not be possible to build a legal case against the officer (s) under the civil law, for what they did.

Military does take prompt disciplinary action against offenders, when and where they are detected, irrespective of the rank. But do look at the MoD, which oversees the military. Bhatnagar, as the defence secretary was charge sheeted by the CBI in the Bofors case and instead of taking legal action against him, he was moved as Lt-Governor to Sikkim, placing him beyond the reach of the Indian Law. Another defence secretary, Ajit Kumar was indicted by the Delhi high court for tampering with the service record of a senior IAF officer, which had resulted in denial of promotion to him. Instead of taking legal action against him he was merely shifted to another ministry. Yet another defence secretary was involved in a shady deal in the purchase of one lakh rifles for the army when no ammunition for these was available anywhere in the world and for years these rifles remained rotting in the depots. No action was taken against him. (It is only when he moved as chief secretary to Tamil Nadu and tried the old MoD tricks that Iron Lady put him behind bars.) Had such misdemeanors been committed by a military officer, the full weight of the military law would have been applied on him.

So it is best to leave the army to deal with such cases. Media, both print and electronic, whatever its compulsions, should refrain from sensationalizing such cases, for they serve no useful purpose except highlight its own naivety. Now that we are on this subject of dealing with such cases, the media may as well tell us what action has been taken against all those officers of the MoD, involved in the Tehelka Sting Operation. Additional secretary who took a gold chain from the Tehelka team was promoted, because, we are told, and hold your breath, he did not take the chain home but kept it in the safe in his office! While all the army officers involved in the case were dealt with without delay, interference by civil courts not with standing. One of then ending up behind bars and others faced various degrees of disciplinary actions. In one case a general officer was merely entertained to a dinner by the Tehlka Team and that was enough to end, his otherwise bright career.


THE END"