Former CDS General Anil Chauhan’s fresh account of India’s strikes near Kirana Hills, close to Sargodha in Pakistan, during Operation Sindoor differs from India’s original public position articulated in May 2025.

Kirana Hills is associated with Pakistan’s nuclear programme. Speaking on Tuesday, at an event organised by Vivekananda International Foundation, the former CDS revealed new details about the 15-month-old confrontation between the two nuclear-armed neighbours. He said an Indian loitering munition had “accidentally” hit Kirana Hills while searching for Pakistani radars. 

General Chauhan, who retired on May 31, explained that India had sent numerous loitering munitions towards the Sargodha area. Kirana Hills is located about 10 km north of the Pakistani city. According to him, these munitions can loiter for roughly two hours while searching for a target. If they fail to locate one, they are designed to strike a target or designated area anyway.

General Chauhan said that one such loitering munition “must have come and hit one of those hills”.

His remarks represent a reversal of India’s official position in May 2025. At the time, Air Marshal AK Bharti, then Director General of Air Operations, dismissed the suggestion that India had struck the site. Responding to a question about reports that Kirana Hills housed nuclear installations, he said: “Thank you for telling us that Kirana Hills houses some nuclear installations. We did not know about it. We have not hit Kirana Hills.”

General Chauhan’s words now confirm, rather than deny, that a strike apparently occurred near or on a nuclear-linked site, even if it was unintentional. This marks a shift from India’s position in May 2025: from saying that Kirana Hills had not been hit to acknowledging that an Indian munition likely struck the hills, albeit unintentionally.

Back in May 2025, shortly after Operation Sindoor, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) ruled out a radiation leak or radioactive release from any nuclear facility in Pakistan.

However, the IAEA statement addressed only the question of radiation leakage. It did not establish whether a conventional strike had physically occurred near or at Kirana Hills. In other words, the statement neither confirmed nor denied that a strike had taken place; it only indicated that no radioactive release had been detected.

Against the backdrop of the IAEA statement and General Chauhan’s latest remarks, there have also been unrelated claims by US President Donald Trump that Washington helped avert a “nuclear war” between India and Pakistan. India’s Ministry of External Affairs has rejected that characterisation, maintaining that the conflict remained conventional. 

The IAEA’s “no radiation leak” statement and General Chauhan’s latest admission that a loitering munition likely struck Kirana Hills are therefore not necessarily contradictory. A conventional munition could have struck near or on Kirana Hills without breaching or damaging nuclear-related facilities in a manner that resulted in a measurable radioactive release.

General Chauhan’s remarks help close a year-old information gap, but they also raise important questions. Kirana Hills is associated with Pakistan’s nuclear programme, and even an accidental strike near such a site carries considerable strategic significance. In a nuclear-armed rivalry, uncertainty over whether nuclear-adjacent infrastructure has been hit — deliberately or accidentally — can influence threat perceptions, signalling and crisis behaviour.

General Chauhan’s comments about Kirana Hills also came alongside other revelations, including his assessment of Pakistan’s ability to verify Indian losses and his reference to India’s stated principle of “always delivering the last strike” in an escalation ladder.

In hindsight, some of his remarks may be intended not merely as a technical clarification but also to shape the retrospective narrative of Operation Sindoor: one in which India maintained the upper hand, controlled escalation and ultimately retained escalation dominance.

British engine free from any US restrictions on technology

India will receive a full transfer of technology (ToT) and retain the intellectual property rights (IPR) for the  engine being offered by British aerospace major Rolls-Royce to power the country’s under-development fifth-generation fighter aircraft, the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA). 

The core technology being offered to India by the UK is under an inter-governmental agreement (IGA) and is free from any US-imposed restrictions under the US International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), UK officials said. 

India is wanting ‘deep’ transfer of technology, including what is called the ‘single crystal blade’, a part of the engine, that does not heat up, allowing greater thrust.

The British offer is about India and Rolls-Royce designing an engine for India, a ground-breaking, fifth-generational engine with a 120-plus kilo newton thrust with scope of increasing the thrust to 145 kilo newton. In aviation circles, an engine with such power has not been developed, so far, for fighter jets.

Details of  the British offer have emerged days after the Rolls Royce and Reliance Industries Limited, on August 14,  announced a partnership to develop an indigenous combat engine for India’s under development fifth generation AMCA.

Rolls Royce faces competition from Safran of France which has partnered the Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) under the DRDO – to make the 120 KN engine.

Rolls Royce makes any engine entirely on its own. One such engine engines powers the F-35B, the marine variant of the fifth-generation plane used by US and its NATO allies. The technology and experience exists and the Rolls Royce’s engine making is free from any ties into the American system. Only three companies make an entire engine – the Rolls Royce and two US companies – others need to source some parts from US.

UK officials Rolls-Royce bringing in  knowledge base and is targeting a roll out the  new engine by 2034. 

LeasingHigh-End Luxury Automobiles

The UK India collaboration stems from the ‘India-UK Vision 2035’ released in June last year. Defence is one of the five key pillars of that ‘Vision 2035’. A 10-year Defence Industrial Roadmap has been adopted. This targets to deepen collaboration in advanced technologies and complex weapons, supporting innovation and co-development, through cooperation programs such Jet Engine Advanced Core Technologies (JEACT).

The 120 kilo newton engine is to power the AMCA which is progressing. The Ministry of Defence has invited three companies to send in their Request for Proposal (RFP) for technical and commercial bids for the project.

The bidders invited for the  RFP are — Tata Advanced Systems Ltd (TASL), which is competing independently; a consortium led by Larsen & Toubro (L&T), State-owned Bharat Electronics Ltd (BEL), and Dynamatic Technologies Ltd; and another consortium of Bharat Forge, PSU BEML and Data Patterns. 

The winning partner will work with the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) under the Defence Research and Development Organisation to build five flying prototypes and one structural test aircraft. The shortlisted firms, selected based on their technical capabilities, will compete to build prototypes of the fighter aircraft.

None of the three invited to bid, are engine makers hence the need to source an engine.

Rs 472-crore project to augment existing capacity at Avadi, bridge annual overhaul gap and boost operational readiness

A new facility for overhauling Army tanks will come up at the Ministry of Defence-owned Vehicle Factory in Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, adding to the existing tank-overhaul capacity in the country.

Defence Minister Rajnath Singh and Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Mohan Yadav on Thursday performed the groundbreaking ceremony for the Rs 472-crore project, which is projected to have the capacity to overhaul 80 tanks annually and boost the Indian Army’s operational readiness. 

The facility will supplement the existing tank-overhaul capacity of the Heavy Vehicles Factory at Avadi, Tamil Nadu. The Army requires 230 tanks to be overhauled each year, while the Avadi facility currently has the capacity to overhaul 150 tanks. The new unit at Jabalpur will bridge this gap and help ensure that more tanks are overhauled annually and remain in war-fighting condition.

The Army has nearly 4,000 Russian-origin T-72 and T-90 tanks in its fleet, besides a smaller number of indigenous Arjun tanks.

The new overhaul facility will also create opportunities for MSMEs to supply mechanical, electrical, electronic and hydraulic components, assemblies and subsystems.

At the event, Singh described the project as a testament to India’s growing technological prowess and industrial capabilities. Speaking about the changing nature of warfare, he emphasised that while the nature of warfare was changing, the relevance of tanks had not diminished but evolved.

“There is a need to equip tanks with superior sensors and capabilities aligned with modern battlefield requirements,” he added.

“Modern warfare demands combined capabilities rather than dependence on a single platform,” the minister said. Tanks, infantry, artillery, drones, air power, surveillance and precision weapons together form an integrated combat system, a concept demonstrated by the Indian Army through its ‘Integrated Battle Group’. 

The Vehicle Factory, Jabalpur, is under the Defence Public Sector Undertaking Armoured Vehicles Nigam Limited (AVNL).

What is tank overhaul?

Army tank overhaul refers to a comprehensive maintenance and refurbishment process in which a tank is inspected, repaired and restored to a fully operational condition. It is distinct from routine servicing or field repairs and involves much deeper maintenance.

Tank systems such as the engine, transmission, running gear, tracks, sprockets, gun and turret systems, electrical and electronic systems, and hull components are separated for individual inspection.

Each component is checked against technical specifications to determine wear, damage or degradation, including barrel wear, engine hours, armour integrity and suspension condition.

Worn or damaged components such as engines, gearboxes, tracks, optics and weapon systems are repaired, reconditioned or replaced with new or refurbished parts.

Overhauls can also be used to integrate upgrades, including improved fire-control systems, modern communication equipment, night-vision systems and engine upgrades.

A security team comprising state police personnel reached the ambush site on Friday morning and retrieved the bodies

The bodies of four Naga civilians killed in an ambush in Manipur’s Kangpokpi district were retrieved on Friday morning, a day after the attack, officials said.

The four were killed and another person injured when armed assailants attacked a vehicle in an isolated area between Makui Ashang and Thanamba Naga villages around 8.30 am on Thursday, they said.

One of the deceased was the principal of a private school.

Security forces had attempted to retrieve the bodies on Thursday evening but could not reach the site due to an alleged blockade and disruptions at a village along the route, officials said.

A security team comprising state police personnel reached the ambush site on Friday morning and retrieved the bodies, which were being taken to Senapati district headquarters, they said.

On Thursday night, a large number of people gathered at Senapati district headquarters and staged a protest, demanding that the bodies be brought to the Naga-majority district.

Meanwhile, village volunteers fired several rounds in the air as a mark of respect when the bodies reached Thonglang Atongba in Kangpokpi district, officials said.

Following the killings, Chief Minister Y Khemchand Singh chaired a high-level security meeting and directed security forces to identify, arrest and take action against those involved in the attack.

The United Naga Council (UNC), the apex body of the Naga community in the state, accused two militant outfits—Kuki National Front (P) and Kuki Revolutionary Army (KRA) — of being involved in the ambush.

The deceased have been identified as Tadsongbou Ringkangmai, the founder and principal of a private school, M Wijunamai, Anil Wijunamai, and Wisobou Charenamai, the chairman of the Chawangkining Village Authority. The injured person has been identified as Gaikamang Ringkangmai.

All five victims belong to the Liangmai Naga community.

India will purchase the Javelin, an anti-tank missile, from the US. The missile is fired by troops on the ground and can target tanks, armoured vehicles, and fortified positions of the adversary at distances up to 5 kms. The Javelin system is an advanced, medium-range, fire-and-forget anti-tank guided missile. 

The United States Embassy in India on Friday welcomed the Indian Army’s signing of a Letter of Offer and Acceptance (LOA) for the purchase of the Javelin anti-tank guided missile system through the US.

In November last year, the US Defence Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) announced the sale of the Javelin to India via a notification, stating that the US State Department had approved the sale of 100 Javelin missiles, one fly-to-buy round, 25 command-launch units, training aids, simulation rounds, spare parts, and full lifecycle support.

US Ambassador to India Sergio Gor posted on X saying, “This agreement reflects a defense partnership that is growing deeper, more capable, and more consequential.”

The Javelin agreement demonstrates the depth of U.S. support for the Indian Army and creates new opportunities for defense industries of both countries to work together, Gor said.

The Javelin is used by the U.S. Army, U.S. Marine Corps, and numerous international customers and is designed for use against a wide array of targets, including armored vehicles and fortified positions. The Javelin system is produced in partnership between two US companies – RTX and Lockheed Martin.

The landmark signature also opens discussions on mutually beneficial co-production and additional opportunities to strengthen the defense industrial bases of both countries, the US Embassy statement said.

The Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) has held that the spouse being employed in a foreign country is reasonable grounds for a soldier to seek premature retirement on compassionate grounds.

A nursing assistant in the Army Medical Corps (AMC) had applied for premature retirement from the Army on compassionate grounds in September 2024 after rendering 14 years of service. His request was turned down by the Army in view of deficiency of manpower, organisational constraints and service exigencies.

He contended before the AFT that due to service restrictions and existing domestic problems and difficulties he was not able to look after his family, comprising old and ailing parents, his wife who is working as a nurse in Qatar and three children, nor able to enjoy his married life.

He averred that his wife does not have a good relationship with his parents due to inter-caste marriage and she visits once in a year to meet him and their elder child. He added that his wife is threatening to divorce him if he does not leave the service due to the problems faced by her after the birth of twin girls.

He pointed out that his six-year old son currently resides with his parents at his native place and it is difficult for his elderly mother to look after him as she also has to take care of his bed-ridden father. His education was also getting affected.

The soldier claimed that faced with difficulties of his wife being in service overseas and threatening divorce, the ill health of his parents and upbringing of his children, he was unable to perform his military duties effectively.

The Army had contended that in his present rank, the soldier was liable to serve till March 2034 and given his trade of nursing assistant, any deficiency in this cadere would result in compromising the life and limb of patients and it may affect optimal functioning of a military hospital.

Further, to address the adverse impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on recruitment in the Indian Army, restrictions were imposed by the competent authority on grant of pre-mature retirement. 

The Tribunal’s Bench comprising Justice Suresh Kumar Gupta and Maj Gen Sanjay Singh ruled on August 19 that considering all aspects of the matter, that is improved post-Covid pandemic situation and the soldier’s apprehension that his marriage may not survive if he does not leave the Army, his request for premature retirement should be reviewed and reconsidered by the competent authority.

New Delhi must strategise to enforce stability in its neighbourhood

Admiral Arun Prakash retd

The Mecca Joint Defence Agreement signed by Türkiye, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan on August 7 continues to be in the spotlight. Against the backdrop of the ongoing US/Israel-Iran conflict, its geopolitical and military ramifications are being closely examined in the context of West Asia. For India, however, strategic prudence demands that this pact be viewed through the lens of Operation Sindoor. 

Following India’s May 2025 missile strikes against Pakistan’s terror infrastructure, the latter avoided a prolonged, conventional escalation by engaging in high-intensity drone and electronic warfare before seeking an early ceasefire. During this conflict, while the bulk of Pakistan’s hardware and technical support came from China, Türkiye’s supply of unmanned aerial vehicles and electronic warfare devices underscored Ankara’s willingness to back Islamabad against New Delhi. Four months after Op Sindoor, Pakistan formalised a mutual defence pact with Saudi Arabia, guaranteeing that aggression against either country would be considered aggression against both.

On the diplomatic front, Pakistan, notwithstanding its severe domestic  political fragmentation and fragile economy, has adroitly leveraged recent security crises into political capital. Its alignment with Washington and its high-risk role as a key mediator between the US and Iran have demonstrated Islamabad’s knack for exploiting its geopolitical weight.

India’s post-Uri surgical strikes (2016) and post-Pulwama airstrikes (2019) showed that while New Delhi could call Pakistan’s nuclear bluff, it had yet to re-establish effective conventional military deterrence. The destruction inflicted on Pakistan’s military by Op Sindoor was intended to project “deterrence by punishment”, but before its efficacy could be confirmed, the Mecca Agreement may have disturbed the balance of power in the subcontinent and given encouragement to hotheads in Islamabad.

India’s strategic planners must now formulate doctrines and acquire capabilities tailored to this emerging reality. Deterrence relies on certitude: India’s response must guarantee punishment so swift and so severe that neither of its two adversaries (China and Pakistan) ever doubts the cost of provocation and the accompanying loss of face in the international arena.

Rebuilding credible conventional deterrence will require heavy investment in creating war reserves for extended conflicts by quickly absorbing technological, logistic and operational lessons from the Ukrainian and Iranian battlefields. Awaiting urgent redressal is our government’s flawed and lethargic decision-making mechanism that has resulted in severe capability gaps in recent decades. Examples: the progressive erosion in the IAF’s combat aircraft strength; the inordinately delayed development of an indigenous jet engine that will impact its 5th- and 6th-generation aircraft projects; imposition of the ill-conceived and debilitating Agniveer recruitment/training scheme on the military; slippages in the Navy’s diesel submarine and aircraft carrier projects, and many others.

India’s uniquely hazardous security predicament is embodied in having two nuclear-armed adversaries as well as strained relations with others in the neighbourhood. Moreover, while its own defence-industrial base may take a decade or more to reach maturity, it remains substantially import-dependent. The ongoing geopolitical turmoil should leave us under no illusion that dependence on external sources for military hardware can be perilous for national security. 

Thus, the urgent question that needs New Delhi’s focus is not whether India can prevail in a two-front confrontation, but how it can find a “breathing spell” of stability/tranquillity to allow uninterrupted progress towards technological self-reliance. The threats posed by China and Pakistan are qualitatively different, and each deserves the closest attention of our highly regarded diplomatic corps.

For Islamabad, Kashmir is not merely a territorial dispute; it serves as a pivot on which the military establishment’s domestic credibility rests. A settlement of Indo-Pak disputes by eliminating the so-called “existential threat” posed by India would demolish the military’s raison d’être. As for Beijing, it views the unresolved Line of Actual Control as a strategic lever to keep India geopolitically boxed into South Asia. The settlement of territorial issues would permit India to bring strategic focus on maritime capabilities and the Indo-Pacific, where China is most vulnerable.

India cannot match China’s defence spending or technological prowess overnight, but it can manage the border to avoid unintended escalation. Achieving this demands three priorities: active diplomatic and military contact, relentless infrastructure building, and a forward-leaning military posture that will ensure that — unlike the past — any future Chinese incursions incur painful costs. On this front, the goal is steady stabilisation for the long haul.

With regard to Pakistan, India should maintain a firm military posture and a zero-tolerance policy on terrorism, while quietly exploring back-channel diplomacy to test whether the Generals can be incentivised to shun cross-border terrorism. With senior RSS leaders such as Mohan Bhagwat and Dattatreya Hosabale signalling support for people-to-people dialogue, such outreach is unlikely to trigger domestic backlash and could pave the way for a viable modus vivendi on the western front. 

This dual-track approach rests on a clear strategic calculus: while Pakistan remains bogged down by economic distress, tensions on the Durand Line and ethnic unrest, its enhanced international standing and newly minted security alliances could embolden renewed adventurism. India must strategise to enforce stability in its neighbourhood.

IAF Chief backs theatre commands, but cautions against ‘pre-baked’ model

Indian Navy Commodore-Rank Officer Sentenced to 7 Years’ Rigorous Imprisonment, Fined ₹75 Lakh in Corruption Case

AFT upholds ‘severe displeasure’ against Brigadier in Poonch civilian deaths case

Su-30 pilot battled catastrophic failure, extreme g-forces to land safely, gets Shaurya Chakra

Lt Gen Nair takes over as Colonel of Punjab Regiment

Iran says world has accepted it has defeated US

IAF Cheetah helicopter evacuates Indian-origin US citizen from 15,000-foot glacier in Ladakh

Indian Army raises ‘Baaz battalion’ for drone operations along Pakistan front

Bangladesh open to joining Saudi-Pakistan-Turkiye defence pact: Ministers

Maldives’ largest infra project advances with India’s support after final segment of Thilamale Bridge is installed

Militant arrested in Manipur for ‘involvement’ in 2021 ambush on Assam Rifles convoy

NEXT PAGE

India capable of becoming global shipbuilding hub: Rajnath

Who is Mihir Ahuja aka Baldy in ‘Operation Safed Sagar’? From -25°C shoots to Kargil War’s MiG-21s

India decides no boarding pass stamping at airports for international travellers from September 1

Chinese robots beat Usain Bolt’s 100m world record at Beijing games

Cargo vessel sinking tragedy: 3 ships deployed to intensify search of 22 crew members off Odisha coast

Kitney murge bhun diye?’: The chilling testimony of Amritsar’s Jagdish Kaur that brought Sajjan Kumar down

Rs 72,000 crore drone pipeline: 3 Indian defence stocks riding the fast-track surge

Partition of 1947: How the Indian Army Was Divided Between India and Pakistan

The Indian Air Force Chief, Air Chief Marshal AP Singh, on Saturday said the IAF was “not against” carving out geographically defined operational joint commands for the armed forces. He, however, cautioned against implementing a “pre-baked” model “picked up” from another country. 

The IAF Chief’s remarks are the first official statement since former Chief of Defence Staff Gen Anil Chauhan, before demitting office in May this year, submitted a collective proposal on behalf of the three services to carve out such “joint commands”, referred to by the military as “theatre commands”.

“The idea should be to have a graded, step-wise approach to avoid disruption of operations,” the IAF Chief said while speaking at the Air Vice Marshal Harjinder Singh (retd) Memorial Lecture, hosted by the Air Force Association in Kanpur. The association is a body of retired IAF officers.

The IAF Chief said a step-wise transition would ensure minimal disruption, adding that the military could not afford to shake up the system at a time when the operational tempo remained high.

Though the IAF Chief did not mention it, a key issue will be the division of IAF assets. Some strategic assets could be controlled from Delhi to ensure seamless operations across theatres.

He stressed the importance of identifying actual shortcomings before building a structure tailored to India’s specific security needs. 

Cautioning against adopting imported military models, he said: “The Air Force has been insisting to let us look at it objectively. Look at what is ailing us; we need to fix what is not right with us, and not have something that is pre-baked, picked up from somewhere and used.”

On the way forward, the IAF Chief said there was a need to create a structure suited to India’s requirements. “We need to form an organisation chart in a manner that we need. Some other country may have some different requirements,” he said.

At the IAF headquarters, a “composite team” is examining the issue. The setting up of theatre commands is under discussion at the highest level.

“I am sure the government, whenever a decision is taken, will take the right decision based on all inputs that are given to the government,” he added.

Theatre commands are military formations with geographically defined areas of operation, headed by a military commander who exercises control over war-fighting assets, including aircraft, helicopters, guns, tanks, equipment and manpower.

The proposed theatre commands comprise three distinct entities: the western theatre, focused on Pakistan, which is expected to be headed by an IAF officer; the northern theatre, focused on China, which is expected to be headed by an Army officer; and the maritime theatre command, which is expected to be headed by a Navy officer

The Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) has upheld the ‘severe displeasure’ awarded to a Brigadier commanding a Rashtriya Rifles (RR) Sector in the Poonch region of Jammu and Kashmir over a 2023 incident in which three civilians died during interrogation following the ambush of an Army column. Four soldiers were killed in the attack, two of whom were beheaded. 

In an order pronounced on August 20, the AFT’s Chandigarh Bench, comprising Justice Sudhir Mittal and Lt Gen Ranbir Singh, observed that the officiating commanding officer (CO) of the RR battalion had directed a company commander to use “slightly harsh” methods on suspects to extract information.

The Bench further observed that the RR Sector Commander, Brigadier P Acharya, had himself displayed anger, assaulted a suspect and failed to influence officers directly under his command to exercise restraint. 

A Court of Inquiry (COI) was convened by Headquarters 16 Corps in December 2023 to investigate the circumstances surrounding the  deaths of the three civilians in the area of responsibility of 48 RR, which functioned under 13 Sector RR commanded by Brig Acharya.

Upon completion of the inquiry, a show-cause notice was issued to Brig Acharya in April 2024 asking why administrative action should not be taken against him for: (a) failing to exercise proper command and control during the interrogation of civilians in December 2023, (b) using physical force against civilians, (c) failing to stop the use of excessive and unlawful force that resulted in the deaths of three civilians and (d) failing to issue clear directions to officers under his command regarding the handling of civilians.

After considering his reply, the General Officer Commanding (GOC), 16 Corps, Nagrota, awarded the officer a ‘severe displeasure’ in July 2024, effective for two years. Brig Acharya subsequently challenged the order before the AFT.

Among the Company Operating Bases (COBs) of 48 RR were Dera Ki Gali (DKG), Mastan Dhara and Bafliaz. According to court records, one of the company commanders, Maj Pankaj Singh, sought permission from the officiating CO, Maj Raj Kumar, to conduct night firing on December 21, 2023. The request was approved.

Vehicles for the movement were provided by COB Bafliaz, and the firing team reached DKG at around 1.30 pm. At 3.37 pm, a call was received from COB Bafliaz reporting that the vehicles returning to Bafliaz had been ambushed. The CO informed the Sector Commander, following which troops and an ambulance were dispatched. Among the casualties recovered from the site were the bodies of two beheaded soldiers.

A search-and-cordon operation was subsequently launched. At about 10.30 pm, the Sector Commander sent a list of suspects to the CO. The CO was directed to de-induct from the cordon on the morning of December 22, after which several suspects were rounded up and taken to COB Mastan Dhara. Interrogation of the suspects commenced, and three of them subsequently died, according to court documents. 

Death& Tragedy

In his petition before the AFT, Brig Acharya stated that he was informed on the night of December 21 that he had been removed from command. A signal dated December 22 from Army Headquarters attached him to Headquarters 25 Infantry Division, and the COI was convened the following day.

“In a situation as exists in the instant case, troops involved in follow-up operations faced a dilemma. Having lost their brothers-in-arms, and that too in a brutal manner, made 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,” the Bench observed.

“In the conflict between human emotions and requirements of discipline, which is in large measure based on the law declared by the Supreme Court, human emotions must yield,” it added.

The Bench held that there was no illegality in the action taken by the Army authorities and no violation of due process, as alleged by the petitioner. It, therefore, ruled that no judicial interference was warranted.