Current Events :
Captain Shiva Chouhan made military history on January 2, 2023, by becoming the first woman officer of the Indian Army to be operationally deployed at the Siachen Glacier, the world’s highest and coldest battlefield. She belongs to the Indian Army’s elite Fire and Fury Corps (Corps of Engineers / Bengal Sappers) and was stationed at the forward Kumar Post, situated at a grueling altitude of 15,632 feet.
Hailing from Udaipur, Rajasthan, she lost her father at the young age of 11. Her mother took sole responsibility for her upbringing and education.
She graduated with a bachelor’s degree in Civil Engineering from the NJR Institute of Technology in Udaipur in May 2021.
Driven by a childhood dream to join the armed forces, she secured the All India Rank 1 in the SSC-Tech 25 entry. She trained at the Officers Training Academy (OTA) in Chennai and was commissioned into the Engineer Regiment.
In July 2022, she displayed immense physical grit by leading the 508-km Sura Soi Cycling Expedition from the Siachen War Memorial to the Kargil War Memorial to commemorate Kargil Vijay Diwas.
.
.
.
On 5th December 1971, in the Chhamb Sector, Point 303 was once again, for the third time, in the hands of Pak. The previous two times A Squadron Deccan Horse led by Major (Brigadier) Iesh Rikhye had counter attacked and recovered the company position. The company commander was Major Devinder Singh ‘Dove’ Pannu of 5 Sikh, a friend and coursemate of Iesh, both of 19th NDA Course. Dove had been killed that morning and so had his dog (Dove was awarded the VrC). In the afternoon of 5 December, Captain Surendra ‘Batsy’ Batra with two troops of A Squadron, Deccan Horse countereattacked at Point 303 and recovered the comapany position. That evening orders were received from HQ 191 Infantry Brigade to withdraw East of the Mannawar Tawi. The order was received with astonishment and anger as this comapany had been recovered three times! A Squadron had one officer killed, one wounded; one JCO killed and several OR including Amar Singh, the reigning pole vault champion of the Regiment; Nanna the washerman, the fearsome left back of the squadron in hockey who followed the simple dictum ‘gitta nan rawwe te banda nan jawe’ had also been killed. The squadron withdrew at night. Lt Col Batsy Batra (SS, 1966) has written a book of Hindi poetry that will soon be released and available on Amazon; I have attached the cover. M
operations, especially in mountainous terrain along the northern borders
The Indian Army on Tuesday rolled out its long-awaited Integrated Battle Group (IBG) concept, marking the beginning of one of its most significant organisational reforms in recent times. Conceived as agile, brigade-sized and self-sufficient combat formations, the IBGs are intended to enable faster mobilisation and more integrated operations along India’s sensitive frontiers.
The rollout follows the Ministry of Defence’s approval last year for raising IBGs for the mountainous sectors along the Line of Actual Control in Arunachal Pradesh and Sikkim. Acting on the approval, the Army undertook a major restructuring exercise, culminating on July 1 with six Major Generals taking command of five newly raised IBGs and a dedicated Fire Support Group (FSG) under the 17 Mountain Strike Corps (Brahmastra Corps) deployed along the northern border with China.
The formations have been raised under the Army’s ongoing transformation programme to create leaner, mission-ready forces capable of responding to emerging threats at short notice.
“Every IBG will be self-contained, mixing elements of every arm and service according to the terrain and operational requirements,” noted General Upendra Dwivedi during media interaction last year, who demitted the COAS office on June 30. In the event of hostilities, the IBGs will be able to launch swift strikes against the enemy.
IBGs were at the forefront of the changes in the Northern Theatre Command and are understood to have applied lessons learned from the unprecedented military exercise ‘Himvijay’ held in October 2019.
IBGs are larger brigade formations that integrate infantry, artillery, tanks, air defense, attack helicopters, and logistics units.
As reported earlier, two Integrated Battle Groups (IBGs) were initially planned. One IBG was expected to be under the command of the 9 Corps, which operates along the western border with Pakistan, while the other would be under the 17 Strike Corps, which operates along the northern border with China, which has been operationalised.
Army sources said the current exercise is a pilot project, with the 17 Mountain Strike Corps serving as the test bed for the new organisational model. The performance of the five IBGs and the Fire Support Group will be evaluated under operational conditions before a decision is taken on extending the concept to other Corps across the Army.
Each IBG will consist of approximately 5,000 personnel, making it larger than a brigade (3,000 to 3,500 troops) but smaller than a division (10,000 to 12,000 troops), headed by a brigadier and commanded by a Major-General officer.
As part of the restructuring, the Army has also introduced the appointment of a Chief Operations Officer (COO), a Brigadier-level officer who will oversee operational planning, intelligence, logistics and battlefield coordination within each IBG. The new appointment is intended to streamline operational decision-making and allow the General Officer Commanding to concentrate on higher-level operational and strategic direction during both peacetime and conflict.
Alongside the five IBGs, the Army has also raised a Fire Support Group under the command of a Major General. The formation brings together long-range artillery, rocket systems, precision-strike capabilities, and surveillance assets, providing concentrated firepower to support combat operations rather than relying on dispersed artillery resources.
Unlike a conventional division, which assembles infantry, armour, artillery and supporting arms from different formations during mobilisation, each IBG integrates infantry, mechanised forces, armour, artillery, engineers, air defence, signals and logistics under a single commander. The objective is to reduce mobilisation time and improve battlefield coordination by fielding a combat-ready formation from the outset.
Officials said the restructuring also shortens the chain of command by delegating greater operational authority to field formations, enabling quicker decision-making and faster employment of combat power during rapidly evolving situations.
The IBG initiative forms part of the Army’s wider modernisation drive, which gathered pace after the 2020 military standoff with China in eastern Ladakh. Since then, the Army has accelerated efforts to build more agile formations, integrate drones and loitering munitions into combat operations, strengthen network-centric warfare capabilities, deepen jointness with the other services and decentralise operational command.
The latest restructuring is expected to shape the future organisation of the Indian Army as it adapts to the demands of high-tempo, technology-driven warfare.
The Delhi High Court had ruled that holding an equivalent or higher civil appointment, or completion of qualifying service, does not create an enforceable right to substantive military rank if the norms for promotion—including medical eligibility and selection requirements—are not met by the individual concerned.
A Colonel permanently seconded to the Survey of India (SOI) as part of the organisation’s defence stream officers in 2005 was elevated to the level of Director in the SOI in 2012 and then to Additional Surveyor General in 2020, which are equivalent to the ranks of Brigadier and Major General, respectively, in the Army.
In 2023, the defence stream officers were reverted from the SOI back to the Army’s Military Survey.
The officer contended that he had completed the requisite length of service and that, under the equivalence framework contained in the 1989 Rules, he had become eligible for the substantive ranks of Brigadier and Major General.
In this regard, the SOI sent communications to Army Headquarters for consideration of the grant of corresponding military ranks.
The Army, however, declined to confer the said ranks on the officer on the grounds that he was placed in a low medical category and did not satisfy the promotable medical standards applicable for the grant of higher substantive military ranks under the Army Regulations and administrative policies.
The officer moved the Armed Forces Tribunal, which directed the Army to grant him the ranks of Brigadier and Major General with retrospective seniority corresponding to his approved civil appointments in the SOI. The Tribunal’s orders were challenged by the Army before the High Court.
Overturning the Tribunal’s orders, a Division Bench of the High Court, comprising Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Amit Mahajan, held that the conferment of substantive military rank is inseparable from the statutory promotion framework governing the Army.
The Bench observed that the 1989 Rules recognise equivalence between specified civil appointments and military ranks for purposes of organisational parity and functional coordination between the civil and defence streams.
However, a careful reading of the Rules reveals that they do not create an independent promotional channel nor provide that conferment of substantive military rank shall automatically follow civil promotion, particularly upon repatriation of officers to the defence forces.
The Bench also pointed out that Defence Service Regulations clearly contemplate assessment of overall suitability, including medical fitness and comparative evaluation within the promotion stream.
“Promotion to a higher substantive rank in the Army, therefore, cannot be reduced to a ministerial consequence flowing merely from civil advancement. Military promotion remains a specialised domain where considerations of medical category, cadre management, operational readiness and organisational balance legitimately operate,” the Bench said.
Holding that a low medical category may not operate as an absolute bar in every situation, and that the regulations vest discretion in competent military authorities to determine promotability, the Bench said that medical categorisation constitutes an essential component of promotability and eligibility for conferment of higher rank, and is not confined merely to suitability for a particular posting.
An officer granted substantive rank remains liable for deployment across the full spectrum of responsibilities attached to that rank.
“Conferment of a higher substantive rank therefore carries implications extending beyond individual status and directly impacts promotion avenues and seniority alignment within the regular Army cadre,” the Bench said.
“Once the officer stood permanently repatriated and his case came to be reconsidered by the competent Army authorities, the issue of promotability necessarily fell for assessment in accordance with the norms and standards applicable within the Indian Army and not merely on the basis of functional requirements communicated by the SOI,” the Bench added.
Designed by the Navy’s Warship Design Bureau (WDB) and built by MDL-Mumbai, ‘Mahendragiri’ “is capable of undertaking anti-air, anti-surface and anti-submarine operations, and is equally suited for maritime security, power projection, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR), search and rescue, and sustained presence missions”, according to a Navy spokesperson.
“The frigate is equipped with an advanced suite of indigenous and state-of-the-art weapons and sensors, including surface-to-surface and surface-to-air missile systems, sophisticated electronic warfare capabilities, comprehensive anti-submarine warfare systems and an integrated combat management system,” the official added.
Incorporating advanced stealth features, enhanced survivability, reduced radar signature and a high degree of automation, the frigate is powered by a modern combined diesel or gas (CODOG) propulsion system, enabling high-speed operations with “exceptional endurance across the full spectrum of maritime missions”.
“With over 75 per cent indigenous content, ‘Mahendragiri’ exemplifies the Government of India’s ‘Aatmanirbhar Bharat’ initiative,” the Navy said.
he Commonwealth War Graves Commission (CWGC) has added 9,909 men previously omitted from commemoration records, recognising them as casualties of the First World War who died of injuries away from the battlefield.
The soldiers have now been acknowledged through the Punjab Registers project, a five-year partnership between the CWGC, the UK Punjab Heritage Association, and the University of Greenwich.
During the First World War, more than 1.4 million men from the Indian Army served on all major battlefronts.
One in six soldiers fighting for the British came from pre-partition India, with half a million from Punjab, including Sikh, Muslim, Hindu and Christian servicemen. Yet, many of these men have long been overlooked in mainstream histories.
Early work on the Punjab Registers showed that some soldiers listed as having died during the conflict were missing from CWGC records and commemorations. The majority of the missing casualties were men who had died in non-operational zones within India during the war.
Due to rulings made by the British Indian Government at the time, these men were not afforded war graves status, and so their names were never shared with the Commission. This project has overturned that decision, read the statement.
A major verification process was undertaken. A CWGC-funded PhD student at the University of Greenwich, George Williams, and nineteen volunteers from around the world, many with personal ties to the Registers, examined 15,935 deaths and compared them with 74,000 existing CWGC Indian Army records.
Their enormous effort was supported by computer-assisted analysis, and each stage was reviewed by the CWGC and Indian Army specialists. The process revealed that 9,909 casualties were missing from the records. The Punjab Registers project forms part of the Commission’s wider Non-Commemoration Programme, established in 2021 to address historical inequalities in commemoration.
So far, the programme has identified more than 20,000 additional names for commemoration, the statement reads. In a statement on its social media handle X, the Commonwealth War Graves Commission (CWGC) stated, “Today, we are announcing the largest single addition to our casualty records since the Second World War, following a major international research project drawing on rare historical records.” “A total of 9,909 Indian Army servicemen, previously missing from our records, have now been added, correcting a past historical omission that meant they were never formally commemorated,” the statement reads.
“This milestone is the outcome of the Punjab Registers project, a five-year partnership between the CWGC, the UK Punjab Heritage Association (UKPHA), and the University of Greenwich. Together, the organisations digitised and analysed a rare and fragile collection of documents held at Lahore Museum, containing the names and service details of approximately 3,20,000 Punjabi recruits,” reads the statement on the website of the Commonwealth War Graves.
Claire Horton CBE, Director General of the CWGC, said: “Over a century after the end of the First World War, our mission endures, ensuring all those who died in the service of the Commonwealth receive the commemoration they deserve. The Punjab Registers project is a landmark moment in that mission.
The recovery of every one of these 9,909 names helps restore missing chapters in family and world histories.
It stands as a constant, timeless reminder that commemoration is not only about the past, it is about personal identity, family legacy, and recognising the human cost of war.”
“The CWGC remains committed to meaningful physical commemoration and to working with governments and nations to seek their views on a memorial to honor these individual soldiers with the dignity and respect they so rightly deserve,” stated Horton.
THE Ministry of External Affairs’ assertion that the passport is not a “citizenship document” but a “travel document” has birthed a fundamental, unsettling question: if the passport is not proof of citizenship, what is?
The vast apparatus of the Indian State dispenses benefits through myriad documents: ration card, health insurance enrolment, Kisan credit card and a host of similar instruments. These documents are, lock, stock and barrel, no proof of citizenship whatsoever.
Then comes Aadhaar. Section 9 of the Aadhaar Act, 2016, states unequivocally that the Aadhaar number/card neither confers nor is evidence of citizenship.
The driving licence fares no better. It is a permit issued under the Motor Vehicles Act to a person who is not otherwise disqualified, authorising them to drive a motor vehicle.
The Electoral Photo Identity Card (EPIC) sails in the same boat. Voting, a constitutional right, and not a fundamental right, is not an inalienable right available to every citizen by the mere fact of citizenship.
Furthermore, voter ID is issued not by the Central Government but by the Election Commission, whose plenary powers, broad as they may be under Article 324, do not extend to the determination of citizenship. This has been confirmed by the Supreme Court (SC) in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) case — Association for Democratic Reforms v. ECI (2026).
Having ruled out these tokens of identity, we return to the passport. The government’s reliance on Section 20 of the Passports Act, 1967, which enables the issuance of a passport even to a non-citizen in public interest, suffers from the fallacy of composition.
Besides, it draws strength from the Passport Manual (Chapter 2, Paragraph 6.1), which states that “a passport provides evidence of the holder’s nationality, but this is placed in the same category as any other evidence of the citizenship status of an individual.” This gives birth to two distinct and necessary lines of consideration.
First, for all Indian nationals who hold a passport issued not under Section 20 but under the general rule of Section 5(2), the passport is an assertion of citizenship. Section 6 mandates the passport-issuing authority to reject an application for a passport inter alia on the ground that the applicant is a non-citizen.
The entire inquiry and verification apparatus is predicated on the applicant being a citizen.
The machinery of citizenship across borders is also anchored to the passport as the operational certificate of citizenship. The Indian Community Welfare Fund (ICWF), designed to assist overseas Indian nationals in times of distress and emergency on a means-tested basis, is explicitly reserved for “Indian citizens,” not for Persons of Indian Origin or Overseas Citizens of India (OCI).
The government’s own consular machinery requires the production of an Indian passport to establish the beneficiary’s citizenship, and an endorsement on that passport is mandatory for accessing the fund.
Furthermore, the architecture of the OCI, under Section 7A of the Citizenship Act, 1955, rests on this very edifice. An OCI cardholder, a former Indian citizen, must prove one’s own lineage of citizenship extending up to four generations to qualify. The primary, and often the only, document that establishes this former citizenship is a passport.
In the same vein, children born abroad to Indian citizens are registered with Indian diplomatic missions to acquire citizenship by descent, and the parent’s citizenship is proved by their Indian passport.
At border trade posts like Tamu-Moreh in Manipur along the Myanmar border, interdependent communities of both nationalities traverse daily, depositing their IDs at the check-post in the morning and retrieving them upon return by sunset. Nationality is determined by these documents.
Even Section 15 of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025, states that when a foreigner in India with a valid passport is recognised as a national by the law of more than one foreign country, the civil authority may treat that foreigner as the national of the country on whose passport he entered India. Thus, a passport is the determinant of nationality.
Although the SC, in State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer (1963), held that ‘citizenship’ and ‘nationality’ are not interchangeable, the judgment was made in the context that while juristic persons may be nationals for the purposes of international law, they cannot be citizens for the purposes of municipal law or the Constitution, which contemplates citizens as natural persons.
For natural persons, the conceptual distinction between nationality and citizenship, rooted in Roman law, has collapsed in the modern constitutional scheme. Roman law distinguished the nationals into civis (citizen with full political-civic rights), latinus (intermediate status), peregrinus (foreigner), servus (slave), and hostis (enemy) until all free subjects evolved into cives, leaving only foreigners and those stripped of citizenship outside the civic pale.
An Indian national holding a passport issued under Section 5 (neither a slave, nor an enemy alien, nor a person deprived of citizenship) is a citizen simply because no other category exists to accommodate him.
The second consideration flows from the Passport Manual: “any other evidence of the citizenship status”. What document is such evidence?
Three successive questions provide the answer. First, is the issue of the document preceded by such rigorous process that it effectively requires adducing all evidence of citizenship? The passport application requires a declaration of citizenship, verification of place and date of birth, and parentage. Second, are citizens fundamentally entitled, and prospective citizens eligible, to apply for that document? The right to travel abroad, a fundamental right under Article 21, as laid down in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), is operationalised by the issuance of a passport.
A non-citizen, having no such fundamental right, may obtain a passport under Section 20, but the Section 5 route is a citizen’s gateway. Third, is the issuing authority for a passport the Central Government and not any state government or any other instrumentality?
As things stand today, the standalone document that serves as practical proof of citizenship for a citizen by birth is a passport issued under Section 5. Certainly, it is not the only mode of proof but that is all a citizen has.
The ideal, of course, is a meticulously maintained National Register of Citizens (NRC), complemented by the National Population Register (NPR). Yet, the experience of Foreigners Tribunals and Illegal Migrants Determination Tribunals serves as a grim cautionary tale.
Any sincere citizenship determination exercise must be anchored in one unshakeable maxim: the burden to prove citizenship does not rest on the citizen; but the burden to rebut the presumption of citizenship rests on the State.
It must not become a Kafkaesque gauntlet in which the poor, the disaster-borne, the landless and the illiterate are presumed aliens until they prove their citizenship, without the means — or even knowledge of what document would suffice — to do so.
wo Assam Rifles personnel were killed and several others injured in an ambush by suspected militants in Manipur’s Ukhrul district on Monday, the police said.
The incident occurred around 1.30 pm in the Nungshang Khong area of the hill district when the suspected militants fired at a convoy of the paramilitary force, a senior officer said.
“The deceased include a warrant officer and a driver. They died on the spot. The incident occurred some 17 km from the district headquarters under the Ukhrul police station limits when the convoy was returning to the 40th Assam Rifles battalion headquarters at Sangshak,” the officer said.
Following the attack, additional security personnel were deployed in the area and an exchange of fire broke out between the central forces and armed militants in a nearby locality, he said.
The attack site had been cordoned off while a forensic team was sent from Imphal to conduct an inspection, the officer said. Locals claimed that several farmers, who were working in nearby paddy fields at the time of the firing, were detained by security forces for interrogation.
In a statement, Chief Minister Y Khemchand Singh condemned the killing of the two Assam Rifles personnel and conveyed his deepest condolences to the bereaved families. He asserted that the government would not tolerate such brutal violence and would not remain a mute spectator to these atrocities.
Security forces have been conducting search and area domination operations in the fringe and vulnerable localities across Manipur since the ethnic violence broke out three years ago. More than 260 people have been killed and thousands rendered homeless in the ethnic strife between Meiteis and Kuki-Zo groups since May 2023.
