Did gen. v. k. singh get justice?

I feel Court would have said that Gen. has two DOB's one which is natural and the other which is for Service purposes citing reason of his high stature and leave a question mark ending the Judgment and it would now be for the Gen. to say satisfied or un-satisfied with would have been actual pronouncement of highest Court and take a call from there.


Now what has happened is that Gen. has first stirred the nest that also at belated stage and then in one stroke polarised larger public view by moving to highest Court and before verdict could have been passed he ordered withdrawing his motion as he guessed rightly what Bench would have remarked and that is exactly what Bench remarked.


It is a good tactical move he showed for history to remember him at the end.

If he had stirred the nest earlier then he would have been made a silent "shaheed" of the system much earlier, by not promoting him and instead promoting some of his junior in his place. He stirred up the matter only before retirement because in any case he was going to retire very soon, and there was no scope of insulting him by not promoting him and instead promoting one of his juniors. If one reads this matter in this link it becomes more clear https://www.firstpost.com/india/real-lesson-from-gen-singhs-defeat-system-always-wins-210191.html

What he has shown is nothing new, it has been happening with "ordinary" citizens of this country for many decades and still happening. Now it has been brought to limelight of something similar with someone appointed by the President of India.

Did gen. v. k. singh get justice?

no. i think so.

i feel he blackmailed to withdraw the case.

it might be that, mr singh took undue advantage somewhere in his past life for which he was blackmailed.

The Establishment had not clearly stated which was his DOB. The court itself observed in the beginning that the Establishment was ambiguous with regard to his DOB for purposes of service records. What was there in what the Establishment presented to make the court change its view.

The court instead of clearly disclosing what it thinks of the whole affair, it has left everyone guessing according one's of prejudices.

If you read the news reports, the court probably thought "wise go with the wind". Maybe this is the yardstick or meaning of justice these days. How many times courts in India have gone "against the wind"? Isn't "the wind" equal to the establishment or those in power who can wield carrot and stick? Read the judgments of courts during Emergency, probably you will get an idea.

Now Mr Singh complain about offer of bribe. It seems that both the parties, mr moily and mr singh hide something, It could be better better to decide the case by the SC. For what compulsion mr singh request to close his case filed by ownself? 

I am not a lawyer. But I don't think that a petitioner or complainant can arbitrarily withdraw his case. Why there was a change of opinion on the part of the court? Did the court also know something which was not disclosed to the public?

" Did the court also know something which was not disclosed to the public?"

- might be.

if the complainant desires to withdraw his petition, with the permission of court, the court may permit.
 

Please read the contents of the link I have posted in one of the posts above. If you read the words and the tone of the language used by Supreme Court you will understand everything.

Why would any reasonable and self respecting person like to continue with his case when insteading of hearing about matters of justice and law from court, starts hearing about something else? Then everything becomes self explanatory about what is happening.

Moreover everyone knows the past track of Supreme Court when dealing with matters connected with the desires of ruling establishment. I have given one such example in this thread https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/Art-142-coi-53881.asp about the decision of Supreme Court in A.D.M.Jabalpuer Vs Shukla. If one searches he may find many such more similar judgments.

Probably tthe following news item should give you an idea of what is going on:

The Congress is in a tizzy over defence minister AK Antony’s hurry to order a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) into army chief VK Singh’s allegations that he was offered a Rs14 crore bribe to clear the purchase of substandard Tatra trucks. The party fears that the probe may open a can of worms as the deal opting for Tatra trucks was signed in 1986 when Rajiv Gandhi was prime minister as well as defence minister. Businessman Rajiv Rishi who got the deal to purchase the high-technology Tatra trucks was believed to be a close friend of Gandhi.

Congress leaders are upset that Antony has handed over the bribe allegation case to the CBI without even discussing the issue with party colleagues in the absence of prime minister (PM) Manmohan Singh. He scribbled his directive on the press clipping mentioning the bribery charge and asked the defence ministry to pass the matter to the CBI.

“There is a proper way of ordering a probe. He could have consulted his senior-most colleague Pranab Mukherjee to set the terms and references for the probe,” a visibly upset senior minister told DNA.

In the absence of terms and references, the party fears that the CBI may dig up minute details of the deal and sully Rajiv Gandhi’s name.

The Bofors ghost continues to haunt the Congress to date and now, the CBI probe may end up naming Gandhi by probing Gen Singh’s charge that substandard Tatra trucks were bought for exorbitant prices over the years. Though respected in the party for his integrity, Antony may now face the high command’s ire for ordering a probe without examining its implications. “He may be saving himself from facing the wrath of the opposition, but he has made the first family of the ruling party vulnerable,” Congress leaders told DNA.

Sources said Gen Singh’s interview in a newspaper in which he made the bribery allegations enraged Antony so much that he called up the defence secretary from his Parliament house chamber itself and asked him to order a CBI probe. “He did not even call for the files to examine the deal,” sources said.

Congress loyalists are working overtime to ensure the CBI limits its inquiry to the army chief’s bribe allegations and that Rajiv Gandhi’s name does not crop up in connection with the Tatra trucks deal.

Insiders, however, said the defence ministry letter has called for a “comprehensive probe” and therefore, the CBI will be forced to unearth details from the day the proposal to buy Tatra trucks was made. The probe may also cover how the supplies took place over the years and if any special favour was accorded to its manufacturer over and above the offers made by other competitors. Interestingly, the deal for Tatra trucks was made around the same time when the Bofors deal was inked.

Meanwhile, the government has decided not to touch Gen Singh unless he creates a new problem. Some members of the Congress and the opposition, particularly the JD(U), have sought the army chief’s dismissal following Wednesday’s DNA report about him having written a letter to the PM mentioning the army’s lack of preparedness for war. The PM chaired a meeting on Wednesday and rejected demands to sack the army chief.

Congress spokesperson Rashid Alvi said such issues need not be debated in public. He, however, said Antony’s statement declaring India’s full preparedness to take on any eventuality was encouraging and answered all doubts raised by the army chief’s leaked letter.

Reference: https://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_vk-singh-bribe-row-congress-fears-probe-may-implicate-rajiv-gandhi_1668703

In his note, the Army Chief has claimed that the Annual Confidential Report (ACR) of a senior Army officer who was on deputation to the SFF was downgraded by Lt Gen Dalbir Singh — who was then Major General — because the officer did not “succumb’’ to pressure of a cartel which wanted to sell parachutes to the force. The Army Chief has not named this officer but has said that he received a representation from him.

When contacted by The Indian Express, Banerjee confirmed he had written such a letter to the Defence Minister last year. He said: “I had received a response from the Ministry of Defence that the allegations would be inquired into but I have not heard from the Government ever since.’’

Reference: https://www.indianexpress.com/news/chief-drops-a-new-scam-bomb-asks-cbi-to-probe-serving-lt-gen/929729/2

This report claims that sources involved in tracking sensitive developments claim that a senior minister of the UPA government was the mastermind of the April 4 front page item in a daily newspaper about a suspected coup attempt. The sources claim that the minister is connected - through his close relative - with the defense procurement lobbies https://www.sunday-guardian.com/investigation/senior-minister-sutradhar-of-coup-report

One of the commentataors in the above report claims that the concerned minister behind story is PC and his son linked with Tatra.

Also this report gives another perspective of what might be actually going on that day: https://www.indianexpress.com/news/troop-movement-may-have-been-cover-against-sacking-hints-lt-gen-panag/933282/

Lt Gen Panag’s five tweets:

5/5: Night of Jan 16th: A Pre-emptive demonstration with a Cover Plan to pre-empt likely impending decision!

4/5: Units/fmns undertaking Deception or Demostration ops do not know the real aim. Cover Plan gives credibility. Sr Cdrs know the real aim.

3/5: Demonstration in mil terms implies to show/demonstrate something to alter enemy decision making. Done as a credible operation.

2/5: Cover Plan in mil terms implies to give a credible cover to operations undertaken to deceive the enemy.

1/5: Pre emption in military terms implies acting before the enemy does to upstage him from implementing his strategy, plan or operation.