Just two days after a flag meeting between India and Pakistan over increased ceasefire violations along the Line of Control (LoC), a Junior Commissioned Officer (JCO) of the Indian Army was killed while thwarting an infiltration bid by terrorists in…

Arjun Sharma Our Correspondent

Just two days after a flag meeting between India and Pakistan over increased ceasefire violations along the Line of Control (LoC), a Junior Commissioned Officer (JCO) of the Indian Army was killed while thwarting an infiltration bid by terrorists in the Keri-Battal sector of Akhnoor in Jammu.

The incident occurred late Friday night when Army troops, using thermal imaging devices, detected movement close to the LoC in the sector. The alert troops immediately engaged the group of heavily armed Pakistani terrorists. During the exchange, Subedar Kuldeep Chand of 9 Punjab was severely injured and later succumbed to his injuries.

Jammu-based 16 Corps of the Indian Army stated, “GOC of White Knight Corps and all ranks salute the supreme sacrifice of braveheart Sub Kuldeep Chand of 9 Punjab. He laid down his life while gallantly leading a counter-infiltration operation along the Line of Control in the Keri-Battal area of Sunderbani on the night of April 11, 2025. His team’s valour and Sub Kuldeep’s ultimate sacrifice foiled an infiltration attempt by terrorists. We stand in solidarity with the bereaved family in this hour of grief.”

This incident follows a deadly blast in February this year in the same area, where two soldiers were killed in an IED explosion. The IED, planted by terrorists on a patrol route near the LoC, was detonated as soon as the soldiers approached it.

On Thursday, a brigade commander-level flag meeting was held at the Chakan-Da-Bagh crossing point in Poonch district. During the meeting, the Indian Army issued a stern message to its Pakistani counterparts, urging them to uphold the ceasefire agreement that was renewed by both countries on February 25, 2021.

Despite the meeting, tensions persisted on Saturday along the LoC. The Indian side heightened vigilance and launched a search operation to ensure no terrorist managed to infiltrate during the bid.

Meanwhile, Jammu and Kashmir Lt Governor Manoj Sinha and Army Chief General Upendra Dwivedi have paid their tributes to Subedar Kuldeep Chand. A solemn wreath-laying ceremony was held at military garrison Tanda in Akhnoor in the afternoon and later his mortal remains were despatched to his family in Himachal Pradesh for last rites, officials said.

106th anniversary of massacre is a time to reflect on how students suffered then, and how they perceive the event now

Madhav Nayar

Anniversaries serve as occasions for revisiting and re-examining major historical events. It’s an opportunity to consider their significance for the present generation and looking at history afresh. As the country observes the 106th anniversary of the Jallianwala Bagh massacre of April 13, 1919, it is perhaps pertinent to ask — how does this event speak to us today, particularly to young Indians? How do we recontextualise this event for the current generation of Indians?

For Tript, a young professional who has grown up in Punjab but works in Bhubaneswar, “Jallianwala Bagh has not only been a part of my history textbooks, but also cultural memory.” She says in addition to the school textbooks, she learnt about the tragedy from her parents and also through popular culture and films like ‘The Legend of Bhagat Singh’. “I recently visited the renovated memorial complex in Amritsar and saw the light and sound show. In its new avatar, though, the site seems to have lost its sanctity,” she adds.

According to Prannv Dhawan, a young lawyer, “Jallianwala Bagh evokes a fair degree of anti-colonial zeal because you tend to perceive the colonial state as a violent and uncivilised force. This turns the notion of the Empire as a civilising force on its head.” Another young advocate, Abhijeet Rawaley, corroborates this sentiment: “The Jallianwala Bagh massacre exemplified the absolute tyranny of colonialism.”

A stark example of the brutality of the British Empire, the Jallianwala Bagh massacre has been the subject of heated and vigorous historiographic debates, literary portrayals and representations, and a controversy over how it should be commemorated. But beyond the politics of commemoration, histories of colonial violence and anti-colonial resistance are narratives which resist any neat teleologies. The story of Jallianwala Bagh and its aftermath, through the testimonies and experiences of students of the time, is one such narrative which gets lost in the meta-narratives of colonial and nationalist histories. How did it impact students of the time? What were their perceptions of the event? How were their lives transformed in the aftermath of the Jallianwala Bagh massacre?

The writings and debates on the massacre have spanned microhistories of the event, works which have juxtaposed local history and memory against nationalist appropriation of the event. Commentary has focused on critiques of the renovated memorial complex among other aspects.

Zooming out a little, there is also a need to study the immediate contexts that preceded and followed the event. These include the context of what in colonial records has been referred to as the ‘Punjab disturbances’ and also the oppressive and draconian martial law regime which followed the massacre.

That students constituted one of the major classes which participated in the Rowlatt Satyagraha and ‘Punjab disturbances’ of 1919 is corroborated by the official report of the Political and Secret Department on Punjab Disturbances. The report goes on to say, “The evidence at present available appears to indicate that among the classes most deeply implicated are — Pleaders and their Munshis, College Students and Schoolboys (emphasis added), Traders, Members of Arya Samaj…”

The involvement of students in the Rowlatt Satyagraha and the ‘Punjab disturbances’ apart, there is evidence of testimonies of students of Khalsa College, Amritsar, on what transpired on the fateful day of April 13, 1919.

“On the 13th, I did not hear of any proclamation prohibiting public meetings. I went to attend the meeting at about 4 pm. When I arrived there, a Sikh gentleman was addressing the meeting. Then he sat down, and another gentleman whose name I do not know spoke for a short time… Shortly after, I heard the sound of firing, and people began to run on all sides. I did not see any soldiers, as there was a large number of people all around me. I kept sitting where I was. As soon as the first firing ceased, I took the opportunity to run away towards the mud wall to the east. When I was jumping over the wall, the firing began again, and I got a bullet on my right forearm.”

This testimony of Ratan Chand, son of Lala Gokal Chand, 17 years of age, a student of Khalsa College, is one among a handful of testimonies given by students that can be found in the report of the Congress Punjab Inquiry Committee (Volume II).

The historian VN Datta identified another student of Khalsa College, Deva Singh Cheema, who was wounded during the massacre. In a letter to the historian, Deva Singh admitted that he had visited the site of the massacre despite Principal Wathen’s warning to the contrary. Deva Singh also stated that their Principal had some inkling of the meeting at the Bagh turning disruptive, even violent.

The aftermath of the Jallianwala Bagh massacre saw martial law being declared in both Amritsar and Lahore. If one goes through the martial law orders and notices issued in 1919, the names of the students, along with their institutions and the quantum of punishment given to each, is indicated very clearly in these notices.

In all, 64 martial law notices were issued at Lahore, between April 15, 1919, and June 6, 1919. Out of these, seven notices i.e. notice numbers 7, 13, 16, 30, 36, 44 and 46, dealt exclusively with various kinds of punitive action recommended against the students of different colleges. Apart from general punishment announced for the students who were found guilty of “seditious activities”, specific punishments were announced by name for the students of King Edward Medical College, Dyal Singh College, Sanatan Dharam College, Forman Christian College and other educational institutions in Lahore.

These notices adversely affected the careers of around 254 students, as most of them had to pay heavy penalties, which ranged from imposition of fine to suspension for a year, but some even had to face expulsion or permanent ban on seeking re-admission. Of the total number of 254 students listed in these notices, 78 have not been named at all. Some of the students whose names figure in these notices were: Nanak Chand Kapur, Pran Nath, Shamsher Singh, Fahur-ud-din, Bhagwan Das, Dina Nath, Sher Singh, Manzur Hasan Khan, Durga Dutt, Din Dayal, Des Raj.

The martial law regime was thus particularly hostile to students, with thousands of them from Lahore colleges even being forced to attend roll call before military officers four times a day for three weeks before their examinations.

The history of the Jallianwala Bagh massacre and its fallout from the vantage point of students deserves closer attention. The tragedy left a deep mark on the students who were witness to it, and the lives of countless students was altered by the events that followed it. It is a history of wounded bodies and jeopardised careers.

It is also a history of how brutally the colonial state snuffed out any dissent. As Professor Amandeep Bal, who is the Jallianwala Bagh Chair at Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, says, “The history of Jallianwala Bagh is a reminder for the current generation to be vigilant about its rights.”

This narrative is but a small slice of a complicated and contested history. However, it is a narrative which could possibly resonate with the young and serve as a point of reflection and inspiration for them. Recovering a history of student voices and experiences with respect to the Jallianwala Bagh massacre thus is perhaps one way in which that history can become more meaningful for the current generation of young Indians.

— The writer, a freelance contributor, did his Masters in history from SOAS

Also looks at procurement of para-droppable light artillery guns

Ajay Banerjee Tribune News Service

Keeping in mind the damage drones cause to tanks in the ongoing Ukraine-Russia conflict, the Indian Army is planning to procure full-scale ‘mock tanks’ to mimic the T-90 tanks in its fleet.

These ‘mock tanks’ will deceive drones into believing that real tanks are deployed. It is expected that surveillance by enemy drones would show ‘tanks’ being stationed. This has a two-pronged effect. First, the adversary can choose to attack these ‘mock tanks’ using the ammunition on the drones, and second, change the position of its own troops.

The use of ‘mock-ups’ is an old military tactic. Ukraine used it recently. India, too, has employed similar tactics in the past. However, advancements in technology now allow mock-ups to look very real.

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) has issued a Request for Information (RFI), the first step in the tendering process, seeking an unspecified number of ‘mock-ups’ of the T-90 tanks.

The RFI is open to both Indian private sector firms and public sector undertaking, with a clear mandate that the products must be ‘made in India’.

According to the technical parameters by the MoD, the ‘mock-up’ should generate noise and have thermal signature (heat exhaust) like a real tank. Sensors and drones of the adversary will pick up heat and noise signatures.

Additionally, the mock tanks must have same dimensional characteristics—height, width, ground clearance, slope of armour—as well as other external fittings such as radio antennas, wind sensors, and external fuel tanks.The MoD in its RFI said these ‘mock-ups’ will help preserve real tanks from drone attacks. They will be used in the terrain and environmental conditions as existing in the Indian subcontinent.

In a parallel development, the Army is also looking at procurement of light artillery guns. These guns are expected to be 105 mm, 37 calibre, and mounted on vehicles. The Army wants these gun systems can be deployed by dropping them with parachutes to a desired location.

The MoD has already given ‘Acceptance of Necessity’ for this requirement and is expected to issue a Request for Proposal to prospective vendors by June 1.

Forty-one years after the Indian Army captured Siachen Glacier, it is China, and not Pakistan, that poses a greater threat to Indian interests on the 76-km-long strategically located perma-frost in Ladakh. Siachen is situated like a ‘strategic wedge’ between Pakistan-occupied…

Ajay Banerjee Tribune News Service

Forty-one years after the Indian Army captured Siachen Glacier, it is China, and not Pakistan, that poses a greater threat to Indian interests on the 76-km-long strategically located perma-frost in Ladakh.

Siachen is situated like a ‘strategic wedge’ between Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) to its west and Shaksgam valley, illegally ceded by Pakistan to China in 1963, to its north. India lays claim to both areas. The eastern flank of the glacier abuts Depsang plains in Ladakh that form the Line of Actual Control (LAC) with China.

On Baisakhi day, April 13, 1983, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi okayed a military plan called ‘Operation Meghdoot’ to capture Siachen. A platoon of the 4th Battalion of the Kumaon Regiment was flown onboard helicopters to Bilafond La (a 17,880 feet high pass in the Karakoram mountains). The Indian flag was raised. Pakistan’s attempts to re-capture were repulsed.

The dispute

After the India-Pakistan war of 1947-48, the Karachi Agreement of 1949 approved a ceasefire line (CFL) between India and Pakistan. The 1965 and 1971 Indo-Pak wars ended in agreements at Tashkent and Shimla, respectively. However, on ground, the Line of Control (LoC) beyond Point NJ 9842 — a reference point on the map — is undefined.

The 1949 agreement said, “From Point NJ 9842, the ceasefire line (CFL) will run northwards to the glaciers.”

India and Pakistan differ on what is ‘northwards to the glaciers’. Islamabad claims the LoC should go north-east and end at Karakoram Pass dividing Ladakh in India and Xinjiang under Chinese control. Post April 1984, Indian troops are stationed along the watershed of the Saltoro Ridge in the Karakoram mountains that runs ‘northwards’ of Point NJ 9842.

PLA FACTOR

The Indian Army has, in the past, war-gamed a scenario that the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) of China can attempt to make a westward thrust through Depsang plains along the LAC in eastern Ladakh.

The PLA’s possible military objective could be to cut off the vital 255-km Darbuk-Shayok-Daulat Baig Oldie (DSDBO) road to restrict Indian access to the Karakoram Pass. Militaries of India and China were involved in a deadly clash alongside the Galwan river in June 2020, just 8-10 km east of the DSDBO road.

Also, the PLA could possibly attempt to seize the 20,000 feet high Saser La, which is west of Depsang and it opens a route to Sasoma and further westwards to the Siachen base camp.

Indian defensive positions have been accordingly ‘militarily tailored’ to hold back the PLA with tanks, artillery guns, latest systems, besides additional troops. The Indian assessment is that PLA can be thwarted if it tries this westward thrust.

On the western flank of Siachen, in PoK, the Chinese, under the guise of road and dam builders, have made an entry. China’s Karakoram Highway, part of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, runs close by.

Glacier’s importance

Saltoro Ridge is dominated by the Indian Army and overlooks the Gilgit-Baltistan area of PoK. On the eastern flank, the Indian military guards the routes that provide access to Siachen via the Depsang plains in Ladakh. The northern part of the glacier, ringed by very high peaks, dominates the Shaksgam valley.

De-militarisation

Pakistan had suggested de-militarisation. It was discussed at Track-II diplomatic channels, but without any agreement. From the Pakistan side, the approach to the Saltoro Ridge and the Siachen Glacier is vulnerable as the Indian Army occupies the heights. From an Indian perspective, vacating anything is not possible.

Pak designs

Ambiguity on the alignment of the LoC allowed Pakistan to play its own game. Between 1972 and 1983, it permitted foreign expeditions on the Siachen Glacier and the surrounding peaks, with Pakistani army officers accompanying them.

In India, things happened by coincidence — in 1977, two German mountaineers requested to trek up the 24,600 feet high Mamostong Kangri on the south-east edge of Siachen. India did not give permission, Pakistan did. The location of the Mamostong glacier spurred India into action as it is closer to Depsang in India than to Pakistan.

Col Narinder (Bull) Kumar led the first mountaineering expedition in 1978; the Indian Army did two similar expeditions in 1980 and 1981 before Operation Meghdoot was launched.

The court of Additional Sessions Judge Surinder Pal Kaur rejected the anticipatory bail application of a cop, who is one of the accused in the Colonel Pushpinder Singh Bath assault case. Inspector Ronnie Singh, the applicant, claimed that he had…

The court of Additional Sessions Judge Surinder Pal Kaur rejected the anticipatory bail application of a cop, who is one of the accused in the Colonel Pushpinder Singh Bath assault case.

Inspector Ronnie Singh, the applicant, claimed that he had been falsely implicated in the case. Following the court’s directions, the investigating officer of the Chandigarh Police today appeared before the judge and submitted the detail of the probe conducted so far.

After due deliberation, the court rejected the anticipatory bail application of the accused inspector, said advocate Harinderpal Singh Verma, counsel for Colonel Bath.

Earlier, Ronnie Singh had applied for a reprieve from the Punjab and Haryana High Court. He had claimed that he, along with a police team, had conducted a raid near Rajindra Hospital in Patiala following an intelligence input regarding a wanted drug trafficker.

“During this operation, he encountered individuals consuming alcohol in public and obstructing access to the hospital. Upon being politely asked to clear passage, these individuals, including Col Pushpinder Bath and his son, reacted aggressively, assaulted the petitioner and created public nuisance,” the petitioner had alleged, adding that the incident was captured on CCTV and had been corroborated by eyewitnesses.

The attack on Colonel Pushpinder Singh Bath and his son took place near Government Rajindra Hospital on the night intervening March 13 and 14.

The incident reportedly stemmed from a parking dispute at a roadside eatery. Colonel Bath and his son sustained injuries.

CLICK LINK BELOW

https://esmcorner.com/10-csd-benefits-updates-every-veteran-must-know/#google_vignette

Nearly two centuries after Dogra General Zorawar Singh led his audacious campaign into Tibet in 1841, the Indian Army today hosted a symposium to commemorate the numerous military campaigns carried out in high-altitude. Unconnected to events of 1840’s, the Indian…

Ajay Banerjee Tribune News Service

Army Chief General Upendra Dwivedi (fourth from left) at event to honour Dogra general Zorawar Singh. The portrait in the background is of General Zorawar.

Nearly two centuries after Dogra General Zorawar Singh led his audacious campaign into Tibet in 1841, the Indian Army today hosted a symposium to commemorate the numerous military campaigns carried out in high-altitude.

Unconnected to events of 1840’s, the Indian Army and China today hold strategic positions in the icy heights along both sides of the Line of Actual Control (LAC).

Titled “General Zorawar Singh: Up, Close and Personal,” the symposium was held at the Manekshaw Centre in Delhi Cantonment. It was jointly hosted by the Jammu and Kashmir Rifles and the Centre for Land Warfare Studies (CLAWS). Speakers at the event emphasised how Zorawar’s high-altitude campaigns across the Himalayas laid the foundation for principles later adopted in ‘mountain warfare’ by Indian forces.

A few years prior to the Tibet campaign, General Zorawar, in 1834, had extended the limits of the Dogra kingdom by capturing Ladakh, then part of the Sikh Empire headquartered in Lahore.

In 1839, Zorawar Singh turned his attention to Baltistan, the Lahore Durbar and Dogra King Gulab Singh were okay with it.

By February 1840, Dogra forces under Zorawar Singh had moved into Baltistan, then ruled by Ahmed Shah.After fierce combat, the Dogras captured Skardu and surrounding valleys by June 1840.

In April 1841, Zorawar Singh launched his expedition into Tibet, reaching the northwestern edge of Nepal by September.

The British were getting edgy over this progress.

In October 1841, the British Government wrote a letter to Lahore Darbar asking that forces led by Zorawar Singh need to withdraw from Tibet , resulting in a scheduled withdrawal from Tibet on December 10, 1841—ultimately halting what could have been a march toward Lhasa. The British, did capture Lhasa in 1904 only to give it up three years later

These high-altitude battles laid the groundwork for future administrative and strategic cohesion in the region with India.

Today, at the event General Zorawar Singh’s pivotal role in shaping the boundaries of the modern-day state of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh was highlighted.

At today’s event, Indian Army Chief General Upendra Dwivedi was the the Chief Guest. He released two military history books during the ceremony, “The Warrior Gurkha” by Madhulika Thapa, daughter of Param Vir Chakra awardee Lt Col Dhan Singh Thapa (1962 Sino-Indian War) and “A Kashmir Knight and the Last 50 Years of the Princely State of J&K” authoured by Lt Gen Ghanshyam Singh Katoch (Retd).

Three Indian lawyers and a former High Court judge are among those tasked with the editorial oversight of the international military law journal.

The Forces Law Review (FLR), the first international military law journal, was unveiled on April 9 at the Commonwealth Law Conference in Malta, which saw the attendance of Punjab and Haryana High Court advocate Major Navdeep Singh among others.

Sharing the news of the unveiling of the opening volume of the Forces Law Review- the first ever international military law journal, a unique global academic collaboration between the National Institute of Military Justice, Washington DC and Centre for Constitution & Public Policy, University institute of Legal Studies, Panjab University, Chandigarh.

Test paves way for its induction into IAF, says Ministry of Defence

Ajay Banerjee Tribune News Service

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has successfully conducted a ‘release trial’ of 1,000 kg ‘long-range glide bomb (LRGB), Gaurav.

The tests were carried out over three days, from April 8-10, from an Indian Air Force fighter jet, the Sukhoi 30-MKI.“The weapon was integrated to multiple stations in different warhead configurations, with the land target on an island. The trials successfully demonstrated a range close to 100 km with pin-point accuracy,” the Ministry of Defence said.

The trials have paved the way for induction of the weapon into the IAF, the ministry said.

Defence Minister Rajnath Singh in a post on X complimented the DRDO, IAF and industry for the successful development trials of Gaurav. He said “the development of Gaurav will further enhance the capabilities of the armed forces to a great extent”.

The system has been realised with the support of development-cum-production partners – Adani Defence Systems and Technologies, Bharat Forge and various MSMEs.

Gaurav was first tested in August last year.

Once the bomb is launched from air, the glide bomb steers towards the target using highly accurate hybrid navigation scheme with a combination of GPS data.

Gaurav has been designed and developed indigenously by the Research Centre Imarat, Hyderabad.

The bench says the high courts should order CBI probe only in cases where the material prima facie warranted an investigation by the agency

The Supreme Court has set aside an order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court which transferred the probe in a case to the CBI, and said such directions should not be routinely passed.

A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran said the high courts should order Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe only in cases where the material prima facie warranted an investigation by the agency.

“The high courts should direct for CBI investigation only in cases where material prima facie discloses something calling for an investigation by the CBI and it should not be done in a routine manner or on the basis of some vague allegations,” it added.

The top court went on, “The ‘ifs’ and ‘buts’ without any definite conclusion are not sufficient to put an agency like the CBI into motion.”          The apex court’s verdict came on an appeal challenging the high court’s May 2024 order.

The bench said an FIR was lodged in Panchkula in October 2022 alleging the accused impersonated an inspector general (IG) of the Intelligence Bureau and threatened the complainant to transfer Rs 1.49 crore into his account.

The FIR alleged that the complainant, who had a pharmaceutical business, was coerced by the accused to work with his associates and faced extortion for money.

The complainant moved the high court seeking the transfer of probe from the state police to the CBI.

The high court allowed the plea following which the accused moved the apex court.

In its April 2 verdict, the apex court said “vague and bald” allegations were made in the petition filed before the high court.

The main ground, it said, the complainant alleged in the high court was the police officials were acquainted with the appellant and they could also be involved in the case.

The bench said these claims of the complainant were not substantiated at all.

It referred to a top court judgement to say CBI investigation should not be directed in a routine manner or only because allegations were against the local police.

The bench said the high court was perhaps moved by the assertions made by the complainant that local police officers, who would conduct the probe, were of lesser ranks and that the matter allegedly involved some high-ranking officials.These allegations were vague and moreover, the commissioner, Panchkula, had constituted a three-member special investigation team under the chairmanship of an assistant commissioner of police for investigation, the court noted.

While allowing the appeal, the bench set aside the high court order.