The Supreme Court on Thursday, November 5, restored the freedom fighter's pension, known as Samman Nidhi, to Sushila Tripathi, the widow of late freedom fighter Ramakant Tripathi, holding that such claims must be decided on the basis of probabilities and not on strict proof, and that the authorities' approach must be practical, not hypertechnical.

Source: LiveLaw

A Bench of Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe set aside the Madhya Pradesh High Court Division Bench order that had interfered with the Single Judge's decision in her favour, and restored the Single Judge's order granting the pension from April 6, 1991, along with 6% interest, LiveLaw reported.

India Legal reported that the Court allowed Sushila Tripathi's appeal and held that the plea of delay and laches used to defeat the claim was unsustainable, emphasising that elderly claimants cannot be expected to produce documentary evidence of events that took place nearly half a century ago.

Source: India Legal Live

A claim rejected in 1991

Ramakant Tripathi took part in the Maihar State Praja Mandal Movement of 1945-46 and was lodged in Maihar Jail for 25 days in 1946. His claim for Samman Nidhi under the Madhya Pradesh Swatantrata Sangram Sainik Samman Nidhi Rules, 1972 was rejected by a non-speaking order dated April 6, 1991, by the State Government.

After her husband's death in 2016, Sushila Tripathi approached the District Collector, whose decision to deny the pension was upheld by the State government. She then filed a writ petition before the High Court. The Single Judge decided in her favour and directed the State to release the pension as a mark of honour, but the Division Bench held that the claim, made after 25 years, was barred by delay, laches and estoppel.

Allowing the appeal, the Supreme Court found that the Division Bench had overlooked material evidence on record, including the District Freedom Fighters List maintained by the Collector, which recorded Ramakant Tripathi's participation in the Maihar State Praja Mandal Movement of 1945-46 and his imprisonment in 1946.

"Not a bounty or dole"

"The standard of proof in a claim seeking freedom fighter's pension is not that of a criminal trial and the claim has to be adjudicated on the basis of probabilities and a claimant cannot be expected to produce documents of events half a century old," the Court said. "Because the pension acknowledges a debt owed by the nation, the claimant comes before the authority as one to whom something is owed, not as a supplicant seeking a favour."

The Court held that Samman Nidhi is a mark of honour and an obligation of gratitude rooted in the Constitution, not a bounty or dole. Because the State, not the claimant, holds the jail registers, police files and gazettes of the period, the burden of searching them falls on the State, it said. "The manner in which a claim is received, examined and decided is itself part of the recognition the Scheme confers. A delayed, indifferent, or hypertechnical process diminishes the honour, even where the pension is eventually paid," the Court observed.