Chief of Army Staff, General Bipin Rawat, on Friday visited Drass sector. During the visit, he was briefed by the General Officer Commanding, ‘Fire & Fury’ Corps on the prevailing situation and operational preparedness in the Sector. General Bipin Rawat also interacted with army personnel deployed on the Line of Control (LC). The Army Chief was accompanied by the General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Northern Command.

While interacting with the army men, the COAS appreciated the tenacity and resolve of the soldiers guarding the borders in the harsh terrain and extreme weather conditions. Recalling the valour and sacrifice of troops who fought in Operation VIJAY in this sector in 1999, he exhorted all ranks to execute their assigned tasks with the same vigour and responsibility. He also called upon all ranks of the ‘Fire & Fury’ Corps to re-dedicate themselves towards upholding the values that the Army stands for, an army spokesman said in a statement issued to media.

Sandeep Dikshit
Tribune News Service
New Delhi, July 17

The International Court of Justice’s verdict on the Kulbhushan Jadhav case was a partial victory for both sides with a tilt towards India, if the claims and submissions both sides are taken into consideration. But at the end of the day, a retrial and subsequent judgment by the Pakistan courts will again bring the case back to life.

At the ICJ, India won consular rights that it had pressed for and got Jadhav’s execution stayed. The ICJ also frowned on Pakistan failing to read Jadhav his rights and neither informing India immediately upon his arrest not permitting Indian officials to meet him. Pakistan has taken comfort in the fact that the ICJ did not acquit or release Jadhav, thus rejecting the main Indian prayer.

Though the ICJ found Pakistan guilty of breaching its obligations under the Vienna Convention, it did not grant the main relief sought by India of seeking Jadhav’s release and transfer to India as well as seeking a retrial by a civilian court.

Both countries had upped their stakes in the case as is evident that India had six diplomats at the court, including an Ambassador, an Additional Secretary and the Joint Secretary in charge of the Pakistan Desk. Pakistan, too, had pressed into service five diplomats, including an Ambassador and the Director General (South Asia).

The Indian side was helmed by Senior Advocate Harish Salve along with two Indian advocates, while Pakistan fielded its Attorney General besides a battery of local and foreign lawyers.

At the outset, the ICJ made it clear that Jadhav should have been given consular access because there is no reference to spies being excluded in the Vienna Convention. Pakistan had based its denial of access on the understanding that the convention precludes visiting rights to spies. Due to limitations of ICJ’s jurisdiction in such cases, it did not go through the evidence against Jadhav to determine his guilt or innocence.

The Indian plea stood on four pillars: (i) violation of Vienna Convention had rendered the sentence by the Pakistan military court infructuous; (ii) restoration to the original position; (iii) restrain Pakistan from convicting Jadhav, and (iv) trial before civilian courts after excluding Jadhav’s confession. Due to jurisdictional issues, the ICJ could only decide whether Pakistan had breached Article 36 of the Vienna Convention.

The State cannot arbitrarily pick and choose from amongst similarly situated persons, a cut-off date for extension of benefits especially pensionary b

https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/classification-of-pensioners-by-providing-cut-off-date-146278

Permission given for construction of hangars, apron and link taxi track’

The Jallianwala Bagh massacre was the result of a well-planned conspiracy aimed at bringing together a crowd which could be killed by Dyer, says eminent historian VN Datta in conversation with Nonica Datta

Nonica Datta: You were born in Amritsar. What did you understand about the Jallianwala Bagh massacre as a child?

VN Datta: It was horrible… Our house was a 10-minute walk from Jallianwala Bagh at Katra Sher Singh in the walled city of Amritsar. My elder sister told me that she heard the bullets and that my mother began to beat her chest thinking that my father was dead. When I was about six years’ old, I used to walk in the Bagh and observe the bullet marks on the walls. Because of my family memory, I, too, became an indirect witness to the Jallianwala Bagh massacre. Later, I wrote extensively on the subject. My book, Jallianwala Bagh, appeared in 1969.

ND:Why do you think Brigadier General Reginald Dyer did what he did? 

VND: You have to think of the circumstances which led to Dyer’s action. After the victory in World War I, British confidence was at its peak. In addition, Punjab was ruled by the iron hand of Lieutenant Governor, Sir Michael O’Dwyer. He terrorised the troops and peasants. And then came the infamous Rowlatt Bills. There was political unrest in the province.

Dyer did not look upon Jallianwala Bagh massacre as an isolated event, but as an integral part of the Amritsar disturbances. Three days before, on the 10th, the city had been the scene of widespread violence following the arrest of local leaders from Punjab—Dr Saifuddin Kitchlew, Dr Satya Pal, Bugga and Ratto; five Europeans had been murdered; and a lady missionary, Miss Sherwood, had been assaulted. I would say that the assault on Miss Sherwood provided the context for Jallianwala Bagh incident to happen.

As a result, Dyer became furious and determined. He rushed from Jalandhar on 11 April. On 12 April, he moved around the city of Amritsar. On 13 April, from the Hathi Gate, he reached the narrow Jallianwala Bagh. He could not take the machine guns inside. With 50 troops on the platform—25 Gurkhas, 25 Baluchis—he shot about 1,650 bullets, and I calculated around 700 people died. He later told the Disorders Inquiry Committee that he realised his force was small and to hesitate might induce attack.

I believe Dyer’s decision in Jallianwala Bagh was partly influenced by his seeing Amritsar as a possible storm-centre of rebellion and partly by the circumstances of 10 April.

The Punjab Government feared that on the Baisakhi Day a large number of villagers would come to the city and their presence would make the situation sinister. On 12 and 13 April, Dyer issued two orders banning public meetings and processions in Amritsar city. When the massacre took place, martial law had not been introduced and the Brigadier General was not empowered to take charge of the city. But Dyer assumed full control of the situation and ignored the civilian officers. My argument is had he acted in concert with civilian officers, it is possible that the catastrophic episode might have been averted.

As soon as Dyer arrived in the Bagh, he stood on the raised platform and opened fire without warning. Not only this but, he fired continuously even when he could see that people were running for their lives. The Hunter Committee accused him of infringing the principle of minimum force, but failed to explain satisfactorily why he did so, maintaining that Dyer merely exceeded the bounds of his duty.

All these insights were possible because of my discovery of the volumes VI and VII of the Disorders Inquiry Committee (also known as the Hunter Committee) to which Dyer gave an account of his actions. I noticed that the previous volumes, I–V, did not contain the material that these two volumes possessed. These latter volumes included consolidated reports secretly maintained by the British government. I was the first to bring these volumes to the notice of scholars and able to discover hitherto unknown facts.

ND: It is evident that your pioneering work provides an altogether different historical perspective on 1919. Tell us how you would interpret the Jallianwala Bagh massacre? 

VND: I feel that the massacre was the result of a well-planned conspiracy aimed at bringing together a crowd which could be killed by Dyer. There was no martial law (in Amritsar and Lahore) till 15 April. There were no police present at Jallianwala Bagh. The Deputy Commissioner was absent from the scene. Dyer took no steps to prevent the meeting.

ND: Why do you call the massacre a conspiracy? 

VND: In order to understand the massacre, it is necessary to follow the movements of Hans Raj, the chief organiser of the Jallianwala Bagh meeting. At the time of the meeting, when some people began to move away, he urged the crowd to be seated and declared ‘the Government will never fire’. After a while, he waved his handkerchief and Dyer and his Indian troops appeared. When the shooting began, Hans Raj had already left. He was an agent provocateur. He was later spirited away to Mesopotamia and his house in Amritsar was burnt.

ND: Who was in the crowd? Who were the prominent leaders present in the Bagh? 

VND: Before the massacre, Jallianwala Bagh was a dumping ground of no political significance. In his testimony to the Disorders Inquiry Committee, Dyer said that the crowd was not innocent but hostile. He claimed it was a planned affair, with an organised mob assembled with the intent of defying authority.

But the crowd was an amorphous lot. Many had come to the city as part of a cattle fair on the Baisakhi festival and had wandered into the Bagh. There was no leader of importance present there. I talked to people who had survived the massacre. I interviewed Rattan Devi, Uttar Kaur and Uttam Devi, who rushed to the Bagh immediately after the firing. Their testimonies formed an essential part of my book, Jallianwala Bagh. I also had long conversations with Dr Kitchlew. Despite his failing health, he gave me valuable information. Hans Raj Mittal, a leading lawyer of Amritsar, told me that the Jallianwala Bagh episode was a conspiracy hatched by Hans Raj.

ND:  What is the legacy of the Jallianwala Bagh massacre? 

VND: After the massacre—as SK Datta, principal of Forman Christian College, Lahore, said—there was a parting of ways between the British and Indians. The massacre paved the way for the ultimate downfall of the British Empire and a new leadership by Gandhi appeared on the national scene.

In my works, I have tried to move away from a nationalist hagiography of the Jallianwala Bagh massacre. However, there is no doubt that it proved a great asset to the nationalist cause. 1919 changed the political complexion of Punjab, which could never recover from that military violence.

— This interview is one of a series of interviews with VN Datta conducted by Nonica Datta between July 2018 and April 2019 in New Delhi.

In a story stirring pride and inspiration, two brothers from an Army family fought great adversity and overcame numerous challenges to don the olive green uniform after passing out from the elite Indian Military Academy Dehradun. Abhimanyu Ganachari and his younger brother Abhinav grew up with the singular aim of becoming an officer in the Indian Army just like their father late Major G Ganachari of 5 Jammu and Kashmir Rifles (JAK RIF).But tragedy struck very early in life as Abhimanyu and Abhinav lost their father Major G Ganachari while they were just 10 and 7 years old respectively. But Major Ganachari had already inspired his sons for a life in the armed forces which his wife Sunanada Ganachari ensured that boys got the best.

The Indian Army posted the inspirational story of the Ganachari brothers on Instagram after the dream of Abhimanyu and Abhinav came true on June 8, 2019, when they stood among the 459 cheerful faces with stars on their shoulders during the pipping ceremony at IMA Dehradun.

From childhood they had seen their father in uniform, seeking inspiration, but tragedy struck when the officer died in 2003, leaving behind his wife, Sunanada with Abhimanyu and Abhinav still in school. After his death, things were not easy as his wife had to face financial challenges along with providing the best for her sons, read

A serving Brigadier, who was then a Major of 5 JAK RIF, stepped in to guide them through rough sails, helping them to find a secure job and settle pension claims. He stayed in touch with them through the years to help them realise their dream, said the Army.

The second tragedy struck when Sunanada died in June 2014. Abhimanyu was in his final term at IMA and Abhinav about to join an engineering college, but still very determined to join the Armed Forces.

Six months later, Abhimanyu got commissioned into the Corps of Engineers in December 2014. Meanwhile, Abhinav continued to resolutely pursue his dream, with the serving Brigadier, who had continued to look after their interests, arranging for his training and counselling.

His tenacity and perseverance came to fruition when he took commission into 18 BIHAR on June 8, 2019, fulfilling his mother’s dream and the brothers in life truly became ‘Brothers in Arms’.

“The success story of the Ganachari brothers truly reflects the steely resolve of Army families to develop even in the face of adversities, thanks to the environmental grooming and a very strong regimental ethos which continue to remain the backbone of Indian Army,” read the post.