Weapons sale racket: Court irate over getting Captain’s affidavit

NEW DELHI - The Supreme Court Friday pulled up the central government for filing an affidavit sworn by an army Captain on the “serious issue” of the sale of weapons allotted to defence personnel by some army officers to arms dealers and private people.

“This is an issue that concerns national security. A number of senior army officers are involved in it and a Captain-rank officer is filing an affidavit on behalf of the ministry of defence,” said the apex court bench of Justice B. Sudarshan and Justice S.S. Nijjar, asking the ministry to file a proper affidavit sworn by a high-ranking officer.

Additional Solicitor General Vivek Tankha told the court that the affidavit was based on facts and it was sworn by an army Captain because the entire case was being dealt by the army on behalf of the ministry.

The court took a serious view of the case when it was told that most of the army officers in Rajasthan who have been found guilty of selling non-service pattern (NSP) weapons to arms dealers and private persons were being dealt with administratively and were being either censured or transferred. The NSP weapons can be retained after retirement but cannot be sold.

The affidavit said that based on media reports, a court of inquiry was ordered by the Army’s South Western Command Sep 8, 2007. Its report, submitted Sep 25, 2008, revealed that the persons involved are a mix of serving and retired army personnel.

The army personnel involved in the sale of their NSP weapons include commissioned officers and junior commissioned officers. These personnel who bought weapons from army for personal use sold them without taking sanction of the competent authority which is a mandatory requirement.

There are a total of 46 officers (including ten retired) involved in the scandal including Colonels, Lt. Colonels, and Majors.

The petitioner, advocate Arvind Kumar Sharma told the court that officers as high ranking as Brigadiers and Major Generals were involved and there was an attempt to cover up the whole matter.

He said that even an Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer was involved and was being shielded by the Rajasthan government.

The court witnessed some heated moments when Tankha accused Sharma of pursuing the case for publicity. Taking umbrage at the charge, Sharma offered to withdraw the petition.