ANTIQUATED INDIAN LAWS

Kargil jawan fights army

- Sacked for getting 'AIDS', soldier goes to court

New Delhi, Aug. 29: An army jawan who had braved bullets in 1999 to flush out Pakistani infiltrators in the high altitudes of Kargil is battling it out again. Not on the front, but in the Supreme Court where his adversary is his former employer - the Indian Army, which has sacked him for contracting "AIDS". The Centre has also refused to sanction any pension benefits on the ground that the soldier's disease couldn't be blamed on his official duties. The trooper - "invalidated" out of service in October 2000 after an army medical board said his was a case of AIDS (HIV infection and disseminated tuberculosis) - insists that at best he had HIV, which too was attributable to the conditions in Kargil. He has also contended that under the national AIDS policy, HIV-infected people can continue in their jobs and it was only those with full-blown AIDS who can't. A bench headed by Justice T.S. Thakur recently directed the government to conduct a fresh medical test on the jawan to determine whether he had AIDS or HIV. The armed forces tribunal (AFT), Lucknow, had earlier concurred with the jawan's plea that the defence ministry couldn't ignore the AIDS policy and should reinstate him with all benefits. In its 2010 order, the AFT noted that the jawan - sacked after a four-year-seven-month service period - had produced a report from the Government Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital, which said he had HIV but his condition had not reached the stage of AIDS and he was "otherwise healthy". The tribunal said the armed forces "cannot divorce itself" from the national AIDS policy. But the army dragged the jawan to the court by filing a special leave petition. It said the AFT's "entire approach" appears to have been "influenced" by the HIV policy "rather than the service rules". Under army rules, a jawan has to put in at least 17 years to be entitled to pension. The tribunal's entire approach was thus "erroneous", the Centre said in its appeal. An army source said normally, being infected with HIV was not enough ground for dismissal. "There must be something more in this case. It's not possible to comment without going through the details."

NEW DELHI:  In what could impact Bollywood actor Sanjay Dutt's case, the Supreme Court today said an important point had been overlooked while another convict was sentenced for similar charges.
 
The observations were made on a petition by Sanjay Dutt's close friend, Yusuf Nulwala, who, like him, was convicted in the 1993 Mumbai blasts.
 
Both were sentenced to five years in jail for illegal possession of weapons under the Arms Act. 


In his petition, Yusuf Nulwala has argued that an AK-56 rifle is "not an automatic weapon" according to Indian law, so his sentence cannot be more than three years in jail. As he had already served three years, he should be released, his lawyer said.
 
The Court said, "Everyone overlooked this aspect. Trial court and this Court... Also review was dismissed. Now you have option of filing curative petition. File curative."
 
In 2007, Mr Dutt was cleared of conspiracy charges in connection with the blasts that killed 257 people and injured over 1,000. But he was found guilty of illegal possession of an AK-56 rifle and a pistol. He had served 18 months, but was out on bail, fighting the conviction until a court in March 2013 ordered him back to jail in Pune.
 
If the court accepts Nulwala's contention in a curative petition then it could automatically impact Mr Dutt's case. The Bollywood star will have to file a separate petition quoting Nulwala's petition.