Chandigarh/Jammu, Aug 22: The Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) has upheld a “severe displeasure” censure awarded to a former Rashtriya Rifles sector commander over the December 2023 custodial deaths of three civilians in Dera Ki Gali in Jammu and Kashmir’s Poonch district.
It has also held that excessive force cannot be used against civilians.
“Excessive force was used in violation of the law. It was, thus, a failure of command and control function. Failure to stop use of excessive force and failure to pass clear directions were the direct fallout thereof,” the order of the tribunal read.
“The troops involved in follow-up operations face a dilemma. Having lost their brothers in arms and that too in a brutal manner, makes their blood boil and development of emotions of revenge is quite natural. On the other hand is discipline, instilled by rigorous training, commanding them to exercise restraint and scrupulously follow plans to trace the culprits. Even in war, the Indian soldier is known for his discipline and adherence to the Geneva Conventions is the rule,” the order said.
The tribunal, however, has directed authorities not to maintain a record of the punishment on the officer’s file as the two-year penalty period has elapsed and ceased to be operative.
Dismissing the plea of Brigadier Padmasambhava Acharya, the tribunal held that even under intense emotional provocation following the loss of comrades in counter-insurgency operations, human emotions must yield to military discipline, constitutional mandates and strict human rights safeguards.
However, while addressing the specific policy provisions governing military censures, the tribunal directed the authorities not to maintain a record of the disciplinary action on the officer’s administrative file, treating it as an exception limited strictly to the facts of the case.
“This is a direction based on the facts of the instant case only and is not to be treated as a precedent or an exposition of the law,” the tribunal said in its order that was passed recently.
It referred to the defence ministry’s policy dated October 30, 2023, which stipulates that while a censure awarded to an officer typically remains part of his administrative record for 10 years, to be shared with selection and promotion boards, a “Severe Displeasure” issued by a corps commander remains operative for a maximum period of two years.
Noting that the censure awarded to Brigadier Acharya on July 8, 2024, had completed its two-year period and ceased to be operative, the tribunal ordered that the record of the punishment should not be retained, while clarifying that the directive was based solely on the specific circumstances of the case and would not serve as a legal precedent.
The case relates to an operation launched on December 21, 2023, when a military convoy was ambushed near Dera Ki Gali (DKG), leaving four soldiers dead. The bodies of two of the dead soldiers were also mutilated. In the subsequent search operations, sub-units rounded up local civilian suspects for questioning to gather actionable intelligence.
During interrogation at the Company Operating Base in Mastan Dhara, three civilian suspects succumbed to their injuries. A Court of Inquiry convened by HQ 16 Corps led to administrative action against Brig. Acharya, the then commander of 13 Sector RR, for failing to exercise proper command and control, improper handling of civilians and failing to prevent excessive force.
Challenging the two-year censure issued by the general officer commanding of 16 Corps, the officer had argued that senior commanders, including the corps commander and the GOC of counter-insurgency force “Romeo”, were present at the DKG control room during the operations and should share responsibility. He had also contended that the corps commander had acted as a judge in his own cause.
Rejecting these arguments, the tribunal clarified the operational hierarchy of field forces, ruling that direct command and control over ground operations rests with the commanding officer and the sector commander. Higher commanders visiting forward control rooms to gain situational awareness do not exercise micro-level executive control over sub-unit tactical interrogations.
Citing landmark Supreme Court verdicts, the bench reiterated that internal-security duties require a distinct approach from conventional warfare, emphasising that Army guidelines strictly prohibiting physical force or third-degree methods during interrogation are legally-binding orders that must be scrupulously followed.–(PTI)
