Court Rules Fraudulent Claims of Family Deaths in Militancy Incident Cannot Escape Recovery Despite Delay; Petitioner Failed to Prove Deaths, Recovery from Salary Validated
In a significant judgment dated September 30, 2026, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court (Srinagar Bench) dismissed the writ petition filed by Nazir Ahmad Mir, a Border Security Force (BSF) personnel, challenging the recovery of Rs. 6 lakhs paid to him as ex-gratia relief on the ground of alleged deaths of six family members in militant violence. The court upheld the validity of recovery proceedings, holding that the ex-gratia relief was obtained fraudulently and that no person can retain benefits procured through deception even after a long lapse of time.
The petitioner had contended that his family members were killed in 1993 in militant violence at village Shalla Bathu near the Line of Control (LoC) and that the ex-gratia relief sanctioned by the government in 1997 was after proper inquiry. He argued that the recovery order was passed without due opportunity and that the allegation that his family members were alive and residing in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK) was uninvestigable by Indian authorities, rendering the recovery illegal.
The court, presided over by Justice Rajnesh Oswal, examined the facts and records, revealing several discrepancies and contradictions in the petitioner's claims. The incident, allegedly occurring in 1993, was only reported to the police in 1997, with no FIR registered at the time of occurrence. Death certificates were issued four years after the incident. Crucially, no bodies were ever handed over to the petitioner, and the petitioner remained silent for years before claiming relief.
A government inquiry and police investigation established that the family members had actually migrated to PoK, and the ex-gratia relief was sanctioned based on false information, facilitated by collusion between the petitioner and certain officials. The court noted that the petitioner gave shifting versions regarding the incident's date and nature, and he failed to provide credible evidence to prove the death of six family members.
The respondents had conducted an inquiry, affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. The petitioner appeared before the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Kupwara, and his statements were recorded. The court found no violation of natural justice in the recovery proceedings.
Invoking settled legal principles and precedent judgments, including the Supreme Court's observations in Vishnu Vardhan v. State of U.P. (2025 SCC Online SC 1501), the court reiterated that "fraud vitiates all proceedings," and no claim obtained by fraud can be sustained regardless of the passage of time. The principle of finality of litigation cannot be used to shield fraudulent claims.
Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition, validating the recovery of the Rs. 6 lakhs from the petitioner's salary in installments, emphasizing that justice demands recovery of amounts obtained by deception to prevent unjust enrichment.
This judgment serves as a stern reminder that fraudulent claims for government compensation, even if discovered after a long lapse of time, will be subject to recovery, and courts will not protect wrongful gains.
Bottom Line:
Ex-gratia relief obtained on false claim regarding death of family members can be recovered even after long lapse of time, as fraud vitiates all proceedings; where petitioner failed to establish deaths, gave contradictory versions, and had been afforded opportunity during inquiry, recovery from salary was upheld.
Statutory provision(s):
Land Revenue Act, 1908 (recovery provisions), Principles of Natural Justice, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (Order VI Rule 4 - particulars of fraud in pleadings)
