Indian Army: News & Discussion

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Sanku » 10 Feb 2012 15:58

geeth wrote:To me, it appears that the SC bench simply wanted to save the Govt from embarassment.


The court did express unhappiness at the matter debated in public, so that much is clear.

Or else, how can they say UPSC record is the authoritative document, contradicting their own earlier judgement that matriculation certificate is sole document for determining age for service??


There is no judgement saying that -- the court only observed that there was a discrepancy between the two.

May be that was the reason why they were encouraging the Army Chief to withdraw, so that their verbal observations do not come out as an order, and become law.


You are right, they would be tied in knots in trying to clear the mess of which document to take.

However, they just did not want to go there.

AjitK
BRFite
Posts: 142
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:19

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby AjitK » 10 Feb 2012 16:00

The Court seems to have limited itself to the matter at hand:
The Supreme Court said Gen Singh's writ petition was not for determination of date of birth but for recognition of date of birth in official records.

Badar
BRFite
Posts: 410
Joined: 23 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Badar » 10 Feb 2012 16:01

geeth wrote:To me, it appears that the SC bench simply wanted to save the Govt from embarassment.

On the contrary. The SC seems to have allowed the COAS the figleaf of a withdrawal.

The interesting development now will be to see if VKS will serve out the remainder of his term or not. I give it even chances either way.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Sanku » 10 Feb 2012 16:03

AjitK wrote:The Court seems to have limited itself to the matter at hand:
The Supreme Court said Gen Singh's writ petition was not for determination of date of birth but for recognition of date of birth in official records.


Chiefs passport says 1951 as his DoB.


:rotfl:

What a joke. SC has let everyone down -- it has let people spout nonsense about service DoB and passport DoB.

A person has 100 different DoBs for different type of interactions with govt is it.

Ack thoo.

SagarAg
BRFite
Posts: 1164
Joined: 12 May 2011 15:51

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby SagarAg » 10 Feb 2012 16:04

To me it seemed like the judge already came with a preconceived state of mind on what to say. :-?

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Sanku » 10 Feb 2012 16:05

Badar wrote:
geeth wrote:To me, it appears that the SC bench simply wanted to save the Govt from embarassment.

On the contrary. The SC seems to have allowed the COAS the figleaf of a withdrawal.

The interesting development now will be to see if VKS will serve out the remainder of his term or not. I give it even chances either way.


Nah the only withdrawal that the court made was for itself -- why where they so queasy about washing the dirty linen.

Let them ask govt why his Chiefs DoB on passport in 1951.

This circumvention lets all the people run around and claim "orders" on behalf of SC because SC was afraid to open its mouth. Pathetic.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Sanku » 10 Feb 2012 16:06

SagarAg wrote:To me it seemed like the judge already came with a preconceived state of mind on what to say. :-?


Yes, they did not want to get into the issue.

Badar
BRFite
Posts: 410
Joined: 23 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Badar » 10 Feb 2012 16:06

Sanku wrote:Why was SC so queasy about the dirty linen. Let the dirty linen be brought out. Enough is enough.

Sanku, Please note that SC was ready to pass the judgment. VKS withdrew his petition not the government.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 10 Feb 2012 16:06

Sanku wrote:Nonsense Austin, SC has observed that it wants to chicken out. What is there to continue about that


Thats not the way I look at or most would look at it today.......SC observation is Fair and Just based on merit of the case. It was a mature judgement as well.

It clearly is a Red Letter day

Oh really, a scurrilous attack on character of Army chief is "high living" according to you?

I am really disappointed by lack of standards here.


To be honest i am more dissapointed by the General who dragged the GOI to the court ...i think he should have resigned and then taken the GOI to court but never mind he did what he thought was right.

I think the only persons who are hurt by the judgement is one who had their Ego's crushed ( i am not referring this to you )

Which means we should stop thinking for ourselves is it? Totally?


No you can always think and air your views .....some would agree some wont.

SC observation on Service DOB and Gen withdrawing petition makes it clear where the party stood before and where it stands now.

Oh really, what about the remarks by KC Singh that Manmohan had personally ordered his attack dogs loose on a good general who stood up to his shengians.

I know you dont like the Congress but this is not MMS or Congress versus VKS issue ....MMS infact behaved in a very dignified manner on this case and have mentioned that court verdict will be accepted.

I would says give verdict to the Govt where its due.

.Austin what is so terribly wrong with you :?: . There has been no judgement. Isnt that obvious. They have said that they are not going to speak on date of birth since the General accepts he does not want to seek longer tenure so talking about date of birth is not relevant and the matter stays dismissed without listening.


Well look at the SC observation on this matter and you will see what SC had to say on Service Record and why Army Chief had to withdraw its petition else SC would have given its judgement.

SagarAg
BRFite
Posts: 1164
Joined: 12 May 2011 15:51

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby SagarAg » 10 Feb 2012 16:08

You stated yourself Badar ji there was eventually no judgement. :mrgreen:

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Sanku » 10 Feb 2012 16:09

Badar wrote:
Sanku wrote:Why was SC so queasy about the dirty linen. Let the dirty linen be brought out. Enough is enough.

Sanku, Please note that SC was ready to pass the judgment. VKS withdrew his petition not the government.


Yes, but only after SC said that it does not want to discuss the real issue under discussion. With SC shouting from the roof top that they did not want to go into the matter, what remained?

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Sanku » 10 Feb 2012 16:09

SagarAg wrote:You stated yourself Badar ji there was eventually no judgement. :mrgreen:


I don't think the anti VKS camp which has been engaging in character assassination is really bothered about facts.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 10 Feb 2012 16:10

Sanku wrote:Austin I challenge to you show the bolded statement by the court in form of a decision.



http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/army ... 72910.html

# Recognition of Gen Singh's date of birth as May 10, 1950 by Army does not suffer from perversity and is not grossly erroneous: SC
# Gen Singh has to abide by his commitment and honour his letters of 2008 and 2009 accepting the date of birth as May 10, 1950: SC
# No prejudice was done to Gen Singh and government has full faith in him: SC
# Singh's writ petition was not for determination of date of birth but for recognition of date of birth in official records: SC


Read more at: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/army ... 72910.html

nelson
BRFite
Posts: 988
Joined: 02 Mar 2008 21:10

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby nelson » 10 Feb 2012 16:10

VKS has been arm twisted to take back the writ. Else, may be, they would have made him to eat it!

Edit: Since it is getting patently OT, i will not go in to merits of my post. But i believe it is true.
Last edited by nelson on 10 Feb 2012 16:14, edited 1 time in total.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 10 Feb 2012 16:12

nelson wrote:VKS has been arm twisted to take back the writ. Else, may be, they would have made him to eat it!

:shock:

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby merlin » 10 Feb 2012 16:16

ASPuar wrote:
Austin wrote:Finally all the jurnos who did their job in a fair and professional manner Sandeep Unnithan , Vishnu Som Raj Chengeppa and many others who have put on a fair report when so many were playing dirty games also stands vindicated. Kudos to them.


:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

What are you talking about?


He's sure smoking something powerful. For defending lowlifes like the worthies I won't even mention he goes on my ignore list.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Sanku » 10 Feb 2012 16:22

Austin wrote:
Sanku wrote:Nonsense Austin, SC has observed that it wants to chicken out. What is there to continue about that


Thats not the way I look at or most would look at it today.......SC observation is Fair and Just based on merit of the case. It was a mature judgement as well.

It clearly is a Red Letter day


What SC observation? There are tons of observation, that remark is quite vacuous.

Oh really, a scurrilous attack on character of Army chief is "high living" according to you?

I am really disappointed by lack of standards here.


To be honest i am more dissapointed by the General who dragged the GOI to the court ...i think he should have resigned and then taken the GOI to court but never mind he did what he thought was right.


What double standards Austin, you are standing for low lifes who attack the character of a good man, and after the vilification campgain during which people like you who did not say a word against the attack dog tactic -- you have the cheeks to say "why did Gen go to court"

Where was your sense of goodness when he was being pilloried before he went to court.

Sad Austin, very sad. Not expected from you. You have failed to live up to basic standards of fair play.


I think the only persons who are hurt by the judgement is one who had their Ego's crushed ( i am not referring this to you )


The problem Austin, that this is a ego issue for some sort of people who buy attack dogs. For others it is a matter of institutional behavior, of doing the right thing to a good man.

About morality and integrity.

WOrds which still mean a lot to some of us.


SC observation on Service DOB and Gen withdrawing petition makes it clear where the party stood before and where it stands now.


Oh no it does not -- I accuse you of putting words in SC's mouth.


Oh really, what about the remarks by KC Singh that Manmohan had personally ordered his attack dogs loose on a good general who stood up to his shengians.

I know you dont like the Congress but this is not MMS or Congress versus VKS issue ....MMS infact behaved in a very dignified manner on this case and have mentioned that court verdict will be accepted.


Sidestep. KC Singh said that Manmohan and congress have let loose their attack dogs. This is supported by a large number of people, do you call this dignfied behavior.

And of course Man mohan will accept the court verdict, does he have a choice, he was forced to accept Thomas verdict, the 2G verdict, in all the manners he gracefully accepted the verdict.

Kindly dont make a virtue of having something rammed down the throat.

I would says give verdict to the Govt where its due.


Yes, on its musharraf.

Well look at the SC observation on this matter and you will see what SC had to say on Service Record and why Army Chief had to withdraw its petition else SC would have given its judgement.


Yes, SC observed that it did not want to entertain the matter. That is very sad. They side stepped the issue.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Sanku » 10 Feb 2012 16:23



No thanks I have had enough of Su-su. They can keep it in India today.

Sachin
Webmaster BR
Posts: 8092
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Undisclosed

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Sachin » 10 Feb 2012 16:26

Austin wrote:# Gen Singh has to abide by his commitment and honour his letters of 2008 and 2009 accepting the date of birth as May 10, 1950: SC

nelson, I remember debating this point with you. That is the General have in writing given that his YoB can be taken as 1950. This was when it was time for the promotions etc. And what we discussed here was that, the General may have been pressurised to give it. The general himself stated that he agreed with this a "gentlemen's agreement" since the worthies then said it can be corrected later.

I feel that the General was not able to prove the point that he gave in because of pressure or intimidations etc. This would sound as if the General was in full agreement that the YoB can be 1950, and was happy in getting promoted twice considering 1950 as YoB. Gentlemen's agreements etc. any way do not get validity in the courts.

My only crib is that the Army officials who coerced Gen. V.K Singh to get his YoB changed has gone scott free, with even their names not appearing in any official record.

Badar
BRFite
Posts: 410
Joined: 23 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Badar » 10 Feb 2012 16:29

nelson wrote:VKS has been arm twisted to take back the writ.

:shock: :shock:

sagarAg wrote:You stated yourself Badar ji there was eventually no judgement.

The SC made its opinion most clear. It gave VKS the opportunity to withdraw (which his team promptly took) before the SC made the adverse opinion a judgment.

sanku wrote:Yes, but only after SC said that it does not want to discuss the real issue under discussion. With SC shouting from the roof top that they did not want to go into the matter, what remained?

So the Babus/Politicians/Judges etc are all out to get the good general eh?

merlin wrote:He's sure smoking something powerful.

Surely that was unnecessary merlin.

nelson
BRFite
Posts: 988
Joined: 02 Mar 2008 21:10

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby nelson » 10 Feb 2012 16:32

@Sachin
The line that IT carries and you are quoting does not form part of the order. As I said earlier this is not the end of it and nobody has gone scott free, as yet.

My fulmination is that we will get to know of it in the sequel to Henderson Brooks Bhagat report.

kunalverma
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 86
Joined: 07 Sep 2011 22:01

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby kunalverma » 10 Feb 2012 16:33

It's a complete cop out! SC says you should go with the wind, wow! So now SC has given VKS to do what the previous guys did - feather his own nest! I'm not too surprised, for VKS couldn't possibly win against the GOI, but for the SC to let down the Chief, the Army and the Country is a real shame!

eklavya
BRFite
Posts: 1880
Joined: 16 Nov 2004 23:57

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby eklavya » 10 Feb 2012 16:34

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-16977641

The court said the recognition of the date as 10 May 1950 "does not suffer from perversity and is not grossly erroneous".


When the birth certificate says 1951, how can 1950 not be erroneous?

It said the general should "abide by his commitment and honour his letters of 2008 and 2009 accepting the date of birth as 10 May 1950".


Looks like it does not matter to the court that those statements were given under duress / threat of harm to his career if he stated any date other than 1950. The court does not care what would have happened if the General had insisted on 1951 in 2008 and 2009.

The court said the date had been fixed when the general joined the services and it questioned why he had not sought to correct it.


Again, the court just disregards the fact that the AG branch, which is the record keeping branch, has 1951.

In summary, from my perspective

1) Total victory for the government and the conspirators

2) Gross miscarriage of justice

3) Opening of the flood gates (indeed judicial sanction) for the politicisation of the armed forces

Sad day for India.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 10 Feb 2012 16:36

Sanku wrote:No thanks I have had enough of Su-su. They can keep it in India today.


Exaclty what do you believe in its not IT personal observation but its SC observation.

The other option is to wait till SC observation are made public and if news report are to be believed it had its own tough question for the Army Chief.

It sad to see the whole Army versus GOI issue had to be fought out this way but finally we have something good coming out of it and Law of Land giving it some Just and Fair meaning to it.

I know you wont agree but lets leave it here.
Last edited by Austin on 10 Feb 2012 16:39, edited 1 time in total.

SagarAg
BRFite
Posts: 1164
Joined: 12 May 2011 15:51

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby SagarAg » 10 Feb 2012 16:36

Badar wrote:The SC made its opinion most clear. It gave VKS the opportunity to withdraw (which his team promptly took) before the SC made the adverse opinion a judgment.


There is a difference between giving opinion and giving judgement. SC is not there to give opinions it there to give JUDGEMENT. I have a opinion. You have a opinion. Where is the judgement ?

EDIT: SC really played its card cleverly here and it worked perfectly.
Last edited by SagarAg on 10 Feb 2012 16:39, edited 1 time in total.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 10 Feb 2012 16:38

Badar wrote:The SC made its opinion most clear. It gave VKS the opportunity to withdraw (which his team promptly took) before the SC made the adverse opinion a judgment.


True and you have hit the nail ...thats a correct statement you have made.

SagarAg
BRFite
Posts: 1164
Joined: 12 May 2011 15:51

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby SagarAg » 10 Feb 2012 16:54

The opinion of SC (judgement for some) on this issue will definitely have a deep, intimidating and a long lasting effect on any issue relating to a difference between GoI and our Armed forces in future.
Thanks to Gen. Singh we were able to get a glimpse of what politics goes on.
I sincerely hope in future our personnel in armed forces stand there ground on what is right and raise their voice for it if they believe something wrong has been done. :)

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7737
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby rohitvats » 10 Feb 2012 17:25

All I can say is that this is a sad day for the country and the IA.

However, let is be made clear that this does not in anyway vindicate the "articles" by cretin and lifafa masquerading as journalists.

geeth
BRFite
Posts: 1195
Joined: 22 Aug 1999 11:31
Location: India

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby geeth » 10 Feb 2012 17:35

As I read the statements coming from the lawyer later, it appears to me that it is a stage show set up between the SC, the General and Govt, after the initial observation of the court a week back. The Govt could not afford adverse remarks from the court (which would have led to the resignation of Antony). Hence, overall, it is a compromise facilitated by SC by allowing both parties to withdraw from stated position

Overall, it is a loss to the Army and the nation. Gain for Govt.

nelson
BRFite
Posts: 988
Joined: 02 Mar 2008 21:10

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby nelson » 10 Feb 2012 18:46

@Geeth
It is true. The loss to the Army may not be perceptible today. But, IMO, this will contribute to the next military victory of this country and its cost.
Already the men in uniform are in cocoons. This order will further drive them in.

nelson
BRFite
Posts: 988
Joined: 02 Mar 2008 21:10

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby nelson » 10 Feb 2012 18:50

If at all it was anything about honour, there is no way that VKS can continue in his post, after the snub in the SC today.

When he went to the court he carried this risk along. And after what happened today there is nothing that can hedge that risk. If he continues in 'organisational interest' then he is more blameworthy than ever before.

Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Pranav » 10 Feb 2012 19:02

A victory for the corrupt.

I think VKS should have stood his ground and allowed the Court to give an adverse judgment. We have seen Supreme Court judges collaborating with the emergency. I don't think it would have detracted from VKS' stature.

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby merlin » 10 Feb 2012 19:08

VKS has no option but to resign. Sad day for the country and IA (and the services in general). If even the SC cannot give justice there is no one to turn to.

kunalverma
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 86
Joined: 07 Sep 2011 22:01

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby kunalverma » 10 Feb 2012 19:08

It's a sad day not so much for VKS but the judiciary! Once the smoke and fire dies down and the order (not judgement) looked at, todays proceedings will reflect very badly on the learned judges!
On 3 Feb they seemingly give a rap to the GOI for in their opinion, the Statutory Complaint was dismissed by going against the principles of natural justice! Today, the GOI starts the proceedings by withdrawing the rejection order on the Statutory Complaint, thereby, in my opinion, making the Statutory Complaint a pending document. Then what the hell did they do? By saying they didn't want to get into details, they've virtually given the GOI the safety net to reject the as yet unrejected Statutory Complaint on any flimsy grounds as long as they don't come from the AG. What utter rubbish - doesn't this 'vitiate the principles of Natural justice?

Sanjay
BRFite
Posts: 1224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Chaguanas, Trinidad

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Sanjay » 10 Feb 2012 19:09

I do not know if the moderators will permit a purely legal perspective from me on this. Please let me know if this will be permitted. Thanks

Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Pranav » 10 Feb 2012 19:13

merlin wrote:VKS has no option but to resign. Sad day for the country and IA (and the services in general). If even the SC cannot give justice there is no one to turn to.


One should wait until the SC rules on Swamy's appeal on the EVM case, hopefully before 2014. If that fails, then extraordinary steps will be required to restore democracy.

Badar
BRFite
Posts: 410
Joined: 23 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Badar » 10 Feb 2012 19:16

Sanjay wrote:I do not know if the moderators will permit a purely legal perspective from me on this. Please let me know if this will be permitted. Thanks

I would be most interested to hear your views.

svenkat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4725
Joined: 19 May 2009 17:23

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby svenkat » 10 Feb 2012 19:46

It is with trepidition I post here.The General went to SC to vindicate his honour.And the judges ruled on technical point.

Can one 'argue' like this on the battle field?One is reminded of Gauss' observation in the context of proofs-'Not a lawyers proof where1/2 +1/2=0.'

Sometimes we make too much of the SC.They too come from the same society.One is reminded of the aphorism of US Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson. "We are not final because we are infallible, but we are infallible only because we are final."

One just marvels at the insights of the ancient sages on power,justice,dharma.

The only issue here was the age certificate IMVHO.Was it genuine?If so,the General has been harassed for long.If it was false,that should have been exposed and VKS should have been humiliated.Thats what a soldier expects in my naive imagination.

My 2 paise rants.

nelson
BRFite
Posts: 988
Joined: 02 Mar 2008 21:10

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby nelson » 10 Feb 2012 19:51

^Good one, Venkat.

schowdhuri
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 15 Dec 2010 12:24

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby schowdhuri » 10 Feb 2012 19:58

Regarding the Pune bridge brawl, specifically for the gentlemen who claimed there were big boards marking that it was no entry for two-wheelers:
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/after-armycop-clash-bigger-road-sign-that-cant-be-missed/907742/

Sincer there was also a discussion on whether cops can lie in wait for unsuspecting victims, it seems that is only allowed if you (or your father) is not IAS.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-12-07/mumbai/30485155_1_traffic-constables-traffic-cops-traffic-police

Also, constables are not supposed to collect fines, as per Pune Police's own website, and as per the the Police themselves the constables seem to have been wanting to collect a fine - what gives???
Last edited by schowdhuri on 10 Feb 2012 20:06, edited 1 time in total.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 37 guests