The Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld a decision by the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) granting Liberalised Family Pension to the widow of Major Sushil Kumar Saini, who died of a heart attack while on duty inside a bunker on the Indo-Pak border during Operation Rakshak.
Major Sushil Kumar Saini was posted along the international border under Operation Rakshak. On the intervening night of May 12–13, 1991, he had inspected border posts in his area and was later informed about the apprehension of 25 Bangladeshi nationals attempting to cross over to Pakistan. After receiving the report and commending his subordinates, he went to sleep in his bunker. He was later found unconscious and declared dead at the military hospital in Amritsar. The cause of death was recorded as acute myocardial infarction (heart attack).
Initially, his wife, Anuradha Saini, was granted ordinary family pension. The authorities had concluded that the officer’s death was neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service.
Anuradha Saini challenged this classification before the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT), Chandigarh, which in March 2023 held that her husband’s death was attributable to military service and occurred during the performance of bona fide military duty in a notified operational area. The AFT ruled in her favour, directing that she be granted the Liberalised Family Pension, a higher category of pension awarded in cases where personnel die in the line of duty.
The Union government challenged the AFT’s decision before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, arguing that the officer had died while sleeping inside a bunker, which could not be considered as “duty” or as falling within the scope of a notified operation.
A division bench comprising Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi and Justice Vikas Suri dismissed the Centre’s appeal and upheld the AFT ruling. The bench placed reliance on the findings of the Court of Inquiry, which had concluded that Major Saini’s death was both attributable to military service and occurred during the performance of duty under Operation Rakshak, a government-notified operational deployment.
The court held that the facts brought on record clearly established that the officer died while discharging his duties in an operational area and hence the case fell under Category E(1)—deaths occurring during operations specially notified by the government from time to time.
The bench noted:
“Once the said fact has been conceded, it cannot be said that the death of the respondent’s husband did not happen while performing duties in an operational area…”
It also took note of the officer’s prior history of hypertension and the stress associated with handling a sensitive infiltration incident hours before his death.
The High Court affirmed that the widow was entitled to Liberalised Family Pension, and the earlier denial on grounds that the death was unrelated to military service was unsustainable. The judgment reaffirms that even non-combat deaths in operational zones, if attributable to service duties, warrant enhanced pensionary benefits.
