ANGREJ KAUR versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

Citation: [2005] 3 S.C.R. 1140 · Decided: 03-05-2005 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
ANGREJ KAUR 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. 
MAY 3, 2005 
B 
[ARIJIT PASAYAT AND S.H. KAPADIA, JJ.] 
Constitution of India, 1950; Article 32 : 
A Constable of Border Security Force reported to be missing-Issuance 
C of Certificate by the authorities to the effect that the constable had died while 
on duty and family pension granted-Wife of the constable came to know of 
her husband being alive-Writ of habeas corpus-Held: Status report submitted 
by B.S.F./Authorities indicating the necessary steps taken by them and holding 
meetings with Pakistan authorities to find out whereabouts of the missing 
D constable-Though the Court is satisfied with the efforts made by the authorities 
so far, but they are directed to continue their efforts to find out the actual 
position expeditiously and intimate the petitioner, wife of the Constable and 
also to file status report for consideration by this Court. 
Husband of the writ petitioner was working as Constable in the 
E Border Security Force. He was reported to be missing while on duty. The 
authorities issued a certificate to the effect that the said Constable had 
died for all official purposes and granted family pension to his wife, the 
petitioner. Later, the petitioner came to know that her husband was alive 
and languishing in a Jail in Pakistan. She wrote to various authorities. for 
taking immediate steps to trace out her husband. She was not satisfied 
F with the efforts made by the authorities, hence, she filed a writ of habeas 
corpus before this Court. This Court directed the authorities concerned 
to submit a status report. 
On consideration of the status report submitted by the BSF 
G authorities, the Court 
HELD : Writ petition is disposed of with the direction that the 
authorities shall continue the efforts to find out the actual position and 
expeditiously intimate the petitioner, the results of the efforts/inquiries 
made by them. Status report indicating the latest development in the 
H 
1140 
ANGREJ KAUR v. U.0.l. [PASAYAT, J.) 
1141 
matter be filed and placed for further consideration by this Court. 
A 
[1143-Df 
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (C) No. 36 of2005. 
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India): 
Gaurav Jain and Ms. Abha Jain for the Petitioner. 
Amrendra Sharan, Additional Solicitor General, Hemant Shanna, Ms. 
Sushma Suri and Mrs. Anil Katiyar with him for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
ARIJIT PASA Y AT, J. This writ petition filed under Article 32 of the 
Constitution of India, 1950 (in short the 'Constitution') presents some unusual 
features. In mythology Sati Savitri's prayer ensured that her husband Satyaban 
escaped jaws ofdeath. Petitioner Smt. Angrej Kaur is the wife of one B.S.F. , 
Constable named Surjit Singh. Though he has been declared to have died in 
B 
c 
the Indo-Pak war in 1971, the petitioner on the basis of certain materials D 
believes that he is alive and is languishing in Kot Lakhpat Rai Jail, Pakistan. 
The factual scenario in the present petition as projected by the petitioner 
runs in somewhat similar lines and even at first flush may appear fictional. 
It is in essence prayer for writ in the nature of habeas corpus. Though 
technically it may appear to be unacceptable as the concerned person is E 
stated to be in custody in a Pakistan jail, yet the petitioner's human emotions ' 
refuse to accept this legal landline. 
First the factual background as projected by the petitioner needs to be 
noted. 
,p 
Surjit Singh was Constable in 57 Battalion ofB.S.F. and he was posted 
in Chhamb Sector on 3rd/4th December, 1971. Initially he was reported to be 
missing. A communication dated 26.7.1972 was received by the petitioner 
from the concerned authorities granting her family pension of Rs. 130 as 
Surjit Singh was reported to be missing. On 26.9.1974 the Commandant of 
the concerned authority issued certificate to the effect that for all official G 
purposes he had died on 4.12.1971 while on duty. A letter to this effect was 
also received by the petitioner. In spite of these infonnations, the petitioner 
believes that her husband is alive and she did not believe that he could have 
died. Her unfailing faith on the almighty made her believe that the infonnation 
was wrong. She awaited for infonnation about Surjit Singh being alive, as H 
1142 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2005) 3 S.C.R. 
A her prayers were coming from her heart. Her son Amrik Singh was hardly 
one year of age at t

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.