Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition for Freedom Fighter Pension Due to Lack of Documentary Evidence. Claim for Sanman Pension as underground freedom fighter in Hyderabad Mukti Sangram rejected for failure to produce contemporaneous records.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD
  • 40
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Shivram s/o Rama Lokhande, filed a writ petition challenging the order dated 9.10.2012 passed by respondent no.2 (Freedom Fighter's High Power Committee) rejecting his claim for Sanman Pension as an underground freedom fighter. The petitioner claimed to have participated in the Hyderabad Mukti Sangram during 1947-48 as an underground worker, performing activities such as campaigning against the Nizam, distributing pamphlets, collecting funds, supplying arms, providing meals, sharing secret information, arranging attacks on police, cutting trees on government land, and arranging meetings. He claimed to have worked under veteran freedom fighters Wamanrao Lokhande and Khanderao Khalse and taken training at Jambhora Camp. The respondents rejected the claim on the ground that the petitioner failed to produce contemporaneous documentary evidence to support his claim of underground activity. The Court, after hearing arguments, upheld the rejection, holding that the burden of proof lies on the claimant to produce contemporaneous records, and mere oral statements or certificates from other freedom fighters are not sufficient. The petition was dismissed.

Headnote

A) Freedom Fighter Pension - Sanman Pension - Eligibility - Documentary Evidence - The petitioner claimed Sanman Pension as an underground freedom fighter for participation in Hyderabad Mukti Sangram (1947-48). The claim was rejected by the High Power Committee for lack of contemporaneous documentary evidence. The Court held that mere oral assertions and certificates from other freedom fighters are insufficient; the petitioner must produce contemporaneous records to prove underground activity. (Paras 2-6)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to Sanman Pension as an underground freedom fighter for participation in the Hyderabad Mukti Sangram.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Writ petition dismissed. Order dated 9.10.2012 rejecting claim for Sanman Pension upheld.

Law Points

  • Freedom fighter pension
  • burden of proof
  • documentary evidence
  • contemporaneous records
  • Hyderabad Mukti Sangram
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2017 LawText (BOM) (03) 86

WRIT PETITION NO. 7598 OF 2013

2017-03-03

S.V.Gangapurwala, K.L.Wadane

Shri S.R.Choukidar h/f Shri V.S.Panpatte for petitioner, Smt. M.A.Deshpande for respondent nos. 1 and 4, Shri Bhushan Kulkarni for respondent nos. 2 and 3

Shivram s/o Rama Lokhande

The State of Maharashtra, Freedom Fighter's High Power Committee, Desk Officer, The Collector, Jalna

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging rejection of claim for Sanman Pension as underground freedom fighter.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought quashing of order dated 9.10.2012 and grant of Sanman Pension.

Filing Reason

Claim for Sanman Pension rejected by respondent no.2 for lack of documentary evidence.

Previous Decisions

Order dated 9.10.2012 by Freedom Fighter's High Power Committee rejecting claim.

Issues

Whether the petitioner is entitled to Sanman Pension as an underground freedom fighter for participation in Hyderabad Mukti Sangram.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that he participated in Hyderabad Mukti Sangram as underground freedom fighter and performed various activities. Respondents argued that petitioner failed to produce contemporaneous documentary evidence to prove underground activity.

Ratio Decidendi

Claimant for freedom fighter pension must produce contemporaneous documentary evidence to prove underground activity; oral assertions and certificates from other freedom fighters are insufficient.

Judgment Excerpts

The petitioner assails the order passed by respondent no.2 dated 9.10.2012 whereby claim of the petitioner for grant of Sanman Pension as underground freedom fighter is rejected.

Procedural History

Petitioner filed claim for Sanman Pension; rejected by Freedom Fighter's High Power Committee on 9.10.2012; petitioner filed writ petition in High Court.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition for Freedom Fighter Pension Due to Lack of Documentary Evidence. Claim for Sanman Pension as underground freedom fighter in Hyderabad Mukti Sangram rejected for failure to produce contemporaneous records.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Second Appeal in Property Injunction Suit — Condonation of Delay Principles Reiterated. First Appellate Court erred in rejecting application for condonation of delay by applying strict standards instead of liberal approach ...