For the best experience, open
https://m.greaterkashmir.com
on your mobile browser.

2006 fratricidal incident at CM’s residence | HC uphold dismissal of CRPF man

On April 3, 2006, at about 7:45 pm, Constable Anand Kumar Singh left the Sentry Post with his rifle, rushed to the company office and fired a few rounds at Inspector Mohan Shyam.
01:22 AM May 12, 2024 IST | GK LEGAL CORRESPONDENT
2006 fratricidal incident at cm’s residence   hc uphold dismissal of crpf man
High Court of Jammu and Kashmir
Advertisement

Srinagar, May 11:  The High Court of J&K and Ladakh has upheld the dismissal of a paramilitary CRPF personnel for his failure to “stop or shoot” his colleague who had carried out fratricidal killings of his colleagues at the Chief Minister’s residence in 2006.

Advertisement
   

Observing that such men have no place in a “brave force” like CRPF, a bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar dismissed as “devoid of merit” the petition of Om Parkash of Jaipur, Rajasthan.

Advertisement

In his plea, Prakash had challenged an order dated 23.10.2006 issued by Commandant 4th Bn CRPF whereby he had been awarded a penalty of dismissal from service in terms of Section 11(1) of CRPF Act, 1949 besides the order dated 17.04.2004 issued by the DIG CRPF as an appellate authority - whereby his appeal against the order of his dismissal from service had been dismissed.

Prakash had further challenged the order dated June 17, 2008, issued by the Revisional Authority —Inspector General of CRPF - whereby his revision petition had also been dismissed.

Advertisement

On April 3, 2006, Om Prakash was detailed on Sentry duty in Morcha No 11 at the Chief Minister’s residence, Jammu from 6 pm to 8 pm.

Advertisement

On the same day, from 3 pm to 5 pm, Constable Anand Kumar Singh was detailed on Sentry duty in Morcha No 3 at Chief Minister’s residence, Jammu.  Head Constable Joginder Jha had made a complaint against Constable Anand Kumar Singh about his slackness in duty and reported the matter to Inspector Mohan Shyam. Accordingly, the Officer Commanding reprimanded Constable Anand Kumar Singh and advised him to remain alert while on duty, failing which, he would be sent to Battalion Headquarters for further disciplinary action.

Advertisement

On April 3, 2006, at about 7:45 pm, Constable Anand Kumar Singh left the Sentry Post with his rifle, rushed to the company office and fired a few rounds at Inspector Mohan Shyam.

Advertisement

He also fired at Head Constable H N Pandey which led to his death.

Thereafter, Constable Anand Kumar Singh reached  Morcha No 11 where the petitioner was standing on sentry duty and he enquired from the petitioner about Head Constable Vipin Kumar.  He also told him that the company would be smashed away by him and that he would kill all of them. Constable Anand Kumar Singh proceeded towards the company mess and shot dead Head Constable Yogender Jha and escaped from the camp through Gate No 11 where the petitioner was detailed on sentry duty, where-after, he surrendered before Police Station, Peer Mirtha, Jammu.

While the case of the petitioner is that he has not committed any dereliction of duty while manning Morcha No 11 at the relevant time, the respondents claim that the petitioner has been found remiss in the performance of his duty, since he failed to stop the assailant Constable Anand Kumar Singh by firing upon him, despite being fully armed at the relevant time. It is the case of the respondents that the petitioner has shown cowardice and slackness in his duty, even though he had ample opportunity to stop or shoot Constable Anand Kumar Singh.

“In the instant case, as already stated, the petitioner is negligent in performing his duties as a sentry in a vital location like CM’s residence. If the security personnel posted at the residence of a high constitutional functionary like CM are allowed to go scot-free for their remissness, it would amount to compromising the security of the Chief Minister,” the court said. “A security personnel, who has no courage to face an armed colleague, who has gone astray, particularly in a place like CM’s residence, has no place in a brave force like CRPF. Such people do not deserve to be part of such a valiant force which has sacrificed hundreds of its soldiers and officers while fighting against enemies of the nation. The punishment imposed upon the petitioner by the respondents can, by no stretch of imagination, be termed as ‘disproportionate.’

Advertisement