IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15622 of 2005 SHIV SAH, aged about 84 years, son of Late Kailash Sah, resident of village- Bara, P.S. Bikram, Distt.- Patna. . . . . . . . Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Home Secretary, Old Secretariat, Patna. 2. The Chairman, Freedom Fighter Advisory Committee, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Joint Secretary, Incharge, Freedom Fighter Division, Department of Home, Old Secretariat, Patna. 4. The Joint Secretary, Freedom Fighter Division, Ministry of Home Affairs, Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi. 5. The Deputy Secretary, Deptt. Of Freedom Fighter Division, Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi. 6. The Under Secretary, Deptt. Of Freedom Fighter Division, Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi. . . . . . Respondents. For the Petitioner : Mr. Binay Kr. Pandey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ranjeet Sinha, AC to SC10 For Union of India : Mr. Gopesh Kumar, C.G.C. ----------- 7/ 23.02.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Union of India as well as State. The petitioner prays for quashing the order dated 7th April, 2000 passed by under Secretary, Union of India, Ministry of Home, whereby his prayer for grant of Freedom Fighters Samman pension was rejected and the Union of India refused to sanction pension on three counts. Firstly; that the date of having its absconded has been written later on. Secondly; No document / certificate has been produced to show that petitioner has absconded or that he was declared absconder or that there was any award on his name; thirdly that there is some contradiction in certificate granted by the Freedom Fighters namely Jay Narayan Singh and Hari Nandan Singh. The petitioner submits that the grounds on which the Freedom Fighters pension has been rejected are nonest in eye of law. He submits that it would appear from paragraph-4 of the counter - 2 - affidavit filed on behalf of the State that a criminal case was lodged against the petitioner and warrant of arrest was also issued. It has been further stated in the said counter affidavit, that petitioner remained under ground and absconded from 15.10.1942 to 15.10.1943. The non-availability of Court certificate of G.R. case no. 437 (10) of 1942 and the personal knowledge certificate of the prominent freedom fighters were forwarded to the Union. Besides this, the verification certificate of the Court, which was received in the office of the District Magistrate vide letter no. 1165 dated 13.03.1989 was also forwarded to the Central Government. The petitioner in its reply has filed reply to the counter affidavit. In paragraph 4 he stated that his name appeared at serial no.- 2 in the F.I.R. of Bikram P.S. case no. 29 dated 18.08.1942 in which charge-sheet bearing no. 72 dated 04.09.1942 under Sections 144, 147, 148 / 34, 295 and 126 of the I.P.C. was submitted against all the accused persons named therein. This position is obvious from the record and certified copy issued by the Collectorate in the year, 1952 itself, which was never denied by the respondent State Government as well as Central Government. Learned counsel submits that out of 15 named accused of the aforesaid F.I.R. four persons, who were sanctioned Freedom Fighters Samman Pension are now dead. Out of remaining 11 persons, three of them are still getting Freedom Fighters Samman Pension. Further more, one more person has been subsequently allowed Freedom Fighters Samman Pension, whose name figured at serial no.1 of the accused column. The petitioner - 3 - states that his name too figured in column no.2 of the charge-sheet as absconder. Further more, there is no conflict in certificates granted by the two prominent Freedom Fighters, which in turn confirm that petitioner has absconded, as a case was instituted against him. Counsel for the Union of India states that the recommendations of the State Government would not be binding and the claim of the petitioner was rightly rejected by the Union Government. After having heard the counsel for the parties, it would appear that an F.I.R. and subsequently charge-sheet was filed against the petitioner, in the year 1942, in which he was declared an absconder. Quite a number of such persons, who were named and declared absconder in the same charge-sheet, were accorded Freedom Fighters Samman Pension. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gurudayal Singh Vs. Union of India reported in 2002 (1) PLJR SC 230, which was also a case of Freedom Fighters Samman Pension, observed that a hyper technical approach should not be adopted in refusing the claim of the Freedom Fighters, who had given the best part of their life for the country half a century back. The date of the period of absconding subsequently written in the application cannot be a ground for rejecting the grant of Freedom Fighter Pension, if the fact in issue cannot be disputed. In this view of the matter, I direct the respondent nos. 4 to 6 to consider the claim of the petitioner for grant of pension, as many persons, named in the same F.I.R., were granted Freedom Fighters - 4 - Pension. The concerned respondents will pass the necessary orders within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order along with representation, if any filed by the petitioner, giving the names of such persons, who were granted Freedom Fighters Pension. The impugned order is set aside and matter is remitted for consideration afresh. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)