With the names of a large number of senior officers surfacing in the list of flat owners in the Mumbai-based Adarsh Housing Society scandal, the image and prestige of the Army has never been so low in the past six decades.
What are the implications of this incident? Commanders with dubious and tainted pasts are unlikely to earn the respect of their command or inspire their subordinates. The very nature of military service calls for unimpeachable integrity. An officer with a propensity to succumb to greed or financial temptation is a grave threat to national security.
In particular, the actions of General Deepak Kapoor while occupying the chair of a service chief have irreparably damaged the image of Army Chief as an institution. His past handling of the tent scam in Udhampur-based Northern Command, differences with Lieutenant General H S Panag on the action to be taken against those held blameworthy and his subsequent role in the Sukna land scam are all still in public memory.
The very fact that a service chief wrote to the Maharashtra government seeking membership of a housing society is prima facie an indicator of his keenness to gain advantage to which perhaps he was not entitled. A subsequent offer by him to give away ownership and the assertion that he was unaware that the flats were meant for Kargil widows unconvincing.
There are five senior officers who held the post of the Colaba-based General Officers Commanding Maharashtra Area in the past. Their immediate superior, commander of the Pune-based Southern Command, also figures among the beneficiaries of the Adarsh Housing Society. This is not a mere coincidence but suggestive of conspiracy. Some of the other officers involved had occupied the chairs of Sub Area Commander Bombay or the Administrative Commandant. These posts are responsible for records and the security of the garrison.
Should senior commanders have taken advantage of the land allotted at concessional rates for Kargil widows? Some of the officers have made false declarations about their financial status. Also, the plot is located within the Colaba military station, so its proximity to a number of sensitive military installations raises vital security concerns.
More From This Section
The episode also raises the issue of double standards in the disposal of cases. The Sukna land scam related to tea garden land. It was triggered following clearance given by military commanders. In those transactions, the evidence about personal benefits gained by Lieutenant General Awadhesh Prakash and P K Rath was not so direct. Yet the authorities called for their trials by court martial. For the sake of equity, the case in hand calls for a more stern view.
Media reports suggest the pivotal role of Major General T K Kaul, Defence Estate official R C Thakur and Brigadier (Retd.) M M Wanchu in planning and executing the entire scheme. Their culpability may require detailed scrutiny.
A resume of disciplinary cases of the past decade would recall the expose of Major General P S K Chowdhry and M S Ahluwalia in the Tehelka sting operations. Shortly thereafter came the news of the trials of V K Arjuna and A K Lal for sexual misconduct. The commander of Bareilly-based infantry division Major General G I Singh was convicted for economic offences. These cases were quickly followed by the prosecution of Lieutenant General Surendra Sahni and P K Rath on serious charges. The courts martial of Major General Swarup and Lieutenant General Avadhesh Prakash are likely to assemble soon. In short, it has been an unending saga of corruption, shady deals and immoral behaviour.
The court of inquiry is the first step in military law disposal. It is convened and consists of officers of requisite integrity and experience. The terms of reference also need to be suitably crafted. Who took the lead in forming the society? Was adequate publicity generated about the venture to seek a wider response? Who were the original allottees? Can members now on the rolls satisfactorily account for the amounts they raised towards the cost of the flats? Did they conceal their actual income so as to fall within the permissible limit? Did they make any false declaration with regard to their eligibility by way of domicile status and so on? Were the service regulations on reporting acquisition of movable property duly followed? Were there any officers who became members of the society and later transferred or surrendered their status to others? This also should be checked to rule out the impression that a number of officers made quick gains by selling their allotments. All such questions need to be examined by the court of inquiry.
The jurisdiction under military law provisions extends for three years over an offender who has ceased to be subject to the Army Act. Thus, an officer who had retired three years ago can still be tried for an offence he committed while in service. The application of this rule would keep all those retired earlier beyond the reach of military law. However, they would still remain answerable to the law of the land.
The writer is Director, Amity Law School, Noida and the Army’s former Judge Advocate General