No. 9777 of 2009 Ex. Sube - Armed Forces Tribunal

Behera. When a soldier runs amock he can take very irrational decisions and
Subedar Paramjit Singh had at the risk of his life attempted to tackle the
situation in the best possible manner as he thought appropriate. Learned
counsel also argued that the duties of Commander at all levels have been
clearly identified and it is not in dispute that the Petitioner was the Platoon
Commander of Gnr/Opr Suresh Chandra Behera. Therefore, he not only had
a moral but also a legitimate and specific duty to take actions against persons
who are under his command. Not controlling the situation when a critical
incident like this has occurred can lead to great confusion, as has been stated
by a number of witnesses, and can even lead to the other soldiers on the post
firing indiscriminately and injuring each other. Furthermore as has been stated
by most of the witnesses, if it was felt that there had been a Fidayeen Attack
on the post there are specific orders as to how to tackle this situation. These
orders included that soldiers are to take their weapons and occupy battle
positions and thereafter assess the situation and act according to the
directions of their Commander. In such circumstances, if the Commanders
themselves hide and do not pass any instruction then it can be catastrophic.
It has come in the evidence of one of the defence witnesses i.e. Ram Bilas
(DW-5) that “Had a JCO given me a direct order to shoot Gnr/Opr Suresh
Chandra Behera I would have done so, if not on the body at least on his legs
so as to incapacitate him.” This testimony has not come from any of the
prosecution witnesses but from a defence witness. This only highlights the
importance of specific orders being given by the Commanders, and how the
situation could have been controlled.
TA No. 168 of 2010 [W.P.(C) No.9777 of 2009] Page 12 of 23