Ex Nb Sub Pyar Singh vs UOI & Others on 9 September 2026

**ORDER**

**09.09.2026**

1. Under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act 2007, the Applicant has filed this OA praying therein to direct the Respondents to restore Service Pension of the Applicant wef 20.10.2015 along with interest on arrears @ 12% per annum and the cost of litigation.

2. The brief facts as enunciated by the Applicant are that initially he was enrolled in the Army on 01.06.1961 and was discharged from Service on 29.12.1981 for which he has been granted Service Pension for life. Thereafter, the Applicant re-enrolled in the DSC on 22.02.1984 where he was promoted to the rank of Nb Sub on 19.01.1995. While on leave, the Applicant was implicated in a criminal case for which he was convicted and imprisoned for life and could not join duty in DSC. The Applicant has been released on permanent parole wef 20.10.2015. After release on permanent parole, the Applicant took up case for restoration of his Service Pension but the Respondents paid no heed. The Applicant submits that he is the only bread earner of his family and is unable to maintain his family in the absence of service pension due to age restrictions. The Applicant made representations for restoration of Service Pension but to no avail. Therefore, the aggrieved Applicant has filed present OA.

3. The Respondents have filed a detailed Reply and while not disputing the basic facts presented by the Applicant, they have submitted that after discharge from Army Service on 28.12.1981, the Applicant was granted Service Pension for life. Thereafter, he was re-enrolled in DSC on 22.02.1984 in the rank of Havildar for an initial terms of engagement of five years and opted not to count his former service towards DSC Service. On completion of his initial terms of engagement, he was granted extension of service from 22.02.1989 to 21.02.1994 and further from 22.02.1994 to 31.05.1997, ie., upto the age of Superannuation of 55 years. He was promoted to the rank of Nb Sub wef 19.01.1995. He was admitted in MH, Ambala Cantt on 25.01.1995 for the diagnosis "Ischaemic CV Art Hemiparesis" and after treatment, he was granted Sick Leave from 26.02.1995 to 22.04.1995. After expiry of leave, the Applicant failed to report to MH, Ambala Cantt for review and remained absent. Therefore, he was declared a deserter wef 23.04.1995 by a duly constituted Court of Inquiry and, thereafter, dismissed from Service wef 16.05.2007 under Army Act Section 20(3) read with Army Rule 17 by the Order of Commander K&K Sub Area, Bangalore. Till his desertion, the Applicant had rendered 11 years and 60 days of qualifying service in DSC. As per the intimation received vide Zila Sainik Kalyan Karyalaya, Karadli letter dt 31.03.2016, the Applicant had been sentenced to life imprisonment and has been released on permanent parole. The Service Pension of the Applicant was withheld by Records, The Rajput Regiment under Rule 101 of Pension Regulations for the Army, 2008 (Part-II) due to the life imprisonment awarded to him. Earlier the Applicant had filed OA No 52/2023 before this Tribunal for restoration of his Service Pension from the date of its discontinuation along with the benefits under OROP Scheme which was disposed off vide this Tribunal Order dt 25.03.2025, however, the copy of the ibid Order has not been received by Records The Rajput Regiment. Now the Applicant has filed present OA for restoration of his Service Pension wef 20.10.2015, ie., from the date of his release on parole. The Respondents have submitted that as per Para 4 of Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 (Part-1), grant of pension is subject to future good conduct and the competent authority may, by order in writing, withhold or withdraw pension or a part thereof, whether permanently or for a specified period, if the pensioner is convicted for a serious crime or is found guilty of grave misconduct. In the present case, the applicant was sentenced to life imprisonment on being convicted in a murder case, therefore, his Service Pension was correctly suspended by the competent authority. Thereafter, the Applicant was released on permanent parole wef 20.10.2015 and was not acquitted of the offence committed by him by the Competent Court. On release from the imprisonment, in terms of Para 73.1 of DPPI 2013, the Applicant is required to submit an Application to his Pension Disbursing Authority (PDA) for onward submission to PCDA (P). In view of the aforesaid averments, the Respondents have reiterated that the OA is devoid of merit and deserves to be dismissed.

4. During the course of hearing, Learned Counsel for the Applicant placed on record a copy of Hon'ble AEI (RB), Lucknow Order dt 08.01.2021 in OA No 601/2018 in the case of Dhruvjit Singh Vs UOI & Ors and contended that the Applicant is entitled for restoration of Service Pension after release on permanent parole wef 20.10.2015.

5. We have heard Learned Counsels for both the parties and perused the material placed on record.

6. Perusal of records reveals that initially the Applicant had rendered more than 20 years of service in the Army for which he was granted Service Pension for life. At the time of joining DSC Service, the Applicant opted not to count his former Army service towards DSC Service and continued to draw Service Pension for his tenure in Army while serving in DSC Service. On completion of leave granted to the Applicant in April 1995, he failed to rejoin his duties in DSC. As such, he was declared a "Deserter" w.e.f. 23.04.1995. The Applicant never informed his unit or his PDA about his conviction and life imprisonment. After following due process, the Respondents have correctly dismissed the Applicant from Service being a Deserter on 16.09.2007 under Army Act Section 20(3) read in conjunction with Army Rule 17 and we see no reason to interfere with the same.

सन्मम जयते

7. On the issue of forfeiture of pensions when an individual is sentenced to imprisonment by court, Para 73.1 of DPPI 2013 reads as under:- *"73.1. If a pensioner is convicted by any criminal court of serious crime or found guilty of grave misconduct, his pension is liable to be forfeited. Should the Pension Disbursing Authority become aware of any case in which a pensioner is sentenced to imprisonment or is found guilty of grave misconduct, he should forthwith report the matter to the Principal Controller of Defence Accounts (Pensions), with a copy of the order of conviction and sentence for reporting the matter to competent Administrative Authority so that he may be able to serve a show cause notice to the pensioner before his pension is withheld/ suspended. On release of the pensioner from imprisonment, the Pension Disbursing Authority will obtain an application from the pensioner for restoration of pension and submit it to the Principal Controller of Defence Accounts (Pensions), with a report together with the following documents:-*

*(i) A copy of the judgment of the Court by which the pensioner was tried and convicted and if an appeal was made, a copy also of the judgment of the Appellate Court.*

*(ii) A memo showing the dates from and to which the pensioner was actually in prison, to be obtained from the Superintendent of the Jail from which the prisoner was released.*

*(iii) A list giving particulars of previous convictions, if any, against the pensioner to be obtained from the Deputy Commissioner or Collector of the District.*

(iv) A memo showing the character on discharge from service, length of service and the date from which pensioned as well as the regimental number of the pensioner as shown in the Descriptive Roll.

(v) A memo showing the date of arrest and the period the pensioner was under Police custody as an under trial prisoner prior to the date of conviction."

8. With regard to restoration of pension, paragraph 103 of Pension Regulations for the Army, 2008 (Part-II) reads as under:- "103. A pension withheld in whole or in part may be restored in full or in part by the competent authority in consultation with the State Government or Administration concerned and with the Principal Controller of Defence Accounts (Pensions) and the civil authorities, if necessary, in other cases. In the case of pensioner undergoing imprisonment any action under this Regulation shall only be taken on his application after release but in no case, shall pension be sanctioned for the period of imprisonment in jail for a serious crime."

सत्यमेव जयते

9. On the issue of restoration of Service Pension, relevant portion of AFT (RB), Chandigarh Order dt. 10.09.2013 passed in OA No 159/2013 in the case of **Chander Singh Vs UOI & Ors** is reproduced here-under:- "Although the petition is entitled to be allowed simply on the grounds that neither show cause notice was issued to the petitioner nor order in writing was passed by the competent authority for the suspension of the pension of the petitioner, yet a conjoint reading of para 82(a) and 82 (b) makes it abundantly clear that the pension during the period of imprisonment will not be payable. However, the pension may be restored after the release of the pensioner from custody. The word used in the Regulation is 'Release' and not 'Acquittal'. These are two entirely different words having different meanings. One cannot be equated with the other. If the word 'Release' is equated with the word 'Acquittal' then it would mean that if the hearing in the appeal does not take place for 20 years, the petitioner will not get the pension for 20 years till his acquittal. That cannot be the intention of the framers of the Regulations. Word 'Release' has consciously been used in para 82(b) which means if a person is released on bail, his pension should be restored. Para 82(b) deals with a different situation which we need not elaborate in this case."

10. Relevant portion of AFT (RB), Lucknow Order relied upon by the Applicant in the case of **Dhruvajit Singh (Supra)**, reads as under:- "8. .... The interpretation given by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Chandigarh does not seem to have been modified or annulled by any higher forum and, therefore, it has the binding effect. In the circumstances, we have no option except to allow the present Application. Admittedly, Applicant has been granted bail in a pending Criminal Appeal and in pursuance of the order passed by the Hon'ble High Court, he has been released from jail. Since, he is not incarcerated in jail at the moment and released on bail, he seems to be entitled for restoration of pension, in view of the law settled by the Chandigarh Bench. Otherwise also, the law is bad since pension has been stopped without serving show cause notice or without providing opportunity of hearing to the Applicant.

9. Accordingly, the OA is allowed. Any decision or order passed with regard to stoppage of pension is set aside. The Respondents shall restore the payment of pension to the Applicant with immediate effect from the date he has been released from jail in pursuance of the order of bail granted by the Hon'ble High Court. The Applicant shall be entitled to payment of interest at the rate of 8% with effect from the date of release which is 13.11.2017 along with arrears of pension."

11. It is not in dispute that he was in receipt of Service Pension for the Services rendered in the Army and the same was discontinued due to non-submission of life-certificate as the Applicant was in Jail. It is not clear as to when he was imprisoned as no details about the same have been furnished by neither the Applicant nor the Respondents. It is required to be ascertained as the Applicant 'deserted' wef 23.04.1995 and the reason for desertion has been stated to be his imprisonment. It is also not clear if he was convicted and imprisoned in April 1995 or later and why was his pension stopped wef July/Aug 2005, as no pension is payable for the period the pensioner is in prison and the pension is subject to future good conduct of the pensioner. It has been observed that the Applicant has been released on permanent parole vide Order dt 20.10.2015 by Superintendent, Central Jail, Bharatpur. However, he has not been acquitted of the charges for which he was sentenced to life imprisonment. From the above provisions of Pension Regulations, it is clear that he is not entitled to any pension during the period, he was in imprisonment and further as per Regulation 8(a), the continuation of pension is subject to future good conduct.

12. In view of above, we direct the Competent Authority that if the Applicant makes a fresh representation/application within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Order, the Competent Authority shall consider the case of the Applicant afresh with regard to restoration of his pension in terms of the entire gamut of circumstances leading to stoppage of his pension, extant rules and regulations, the fact that he has only been released on permanent parole and not acquitted of the offences for which he was sentenced to life imprisonment and the ibid judgments passed by the Hon'ble Regional Benches of the Armed Forces Tribunal in the cases of **Chander Singh** and **Dhruvajit Singh (Supra)** within a period of four months from the date of receipt of such a representation/application.


सत्यमेव जयते

13. The OA is disposed off, accordingly. Pending Miscellaneous Application(s), if any, also stand disposed off.

14. No order on costs.


Sd/- xxx

Sd/- xxx

(SANJIV MITTAL) MEMBER (A)

(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR) MEMBER (J)


Ssy/-