Jawans clash with officers in army camp in Leh

Bhadra

Professional
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
11,991
Likes
23,758
Country flag
So the ruckus has been created by a peeping tom ! a barber ! people here are flogging the dead animal called "Sahayak" .. DODOs !!
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
The sahayak, witnesses told The Hindu, was dragged into the Beacon ground near the range, and beaten up. Major Ankur Tewari, Major Kapil Malik, Major Thomas Verghese, Major A.D. Kanade and Major Sharma himself joined in the beating, documents seen by The Hindu say
What document did the Hindu see?

The C of I has just been initiated.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
Section 37 in The Army Act, 1950 1

37. Mutiny. Any person subject to this Act who commits any of the following offences, that is to say,-
(a) begins, incites, causes, or conspires with any other persons to cause any mutiny in the military, naval or air forces of India or any forces co- operating therewith; or

(b) joins in any such mutiny; or


(c) being present at any such mutiny, does not use his utmost endeavours to suppress the same; or

(d) knowing or having reason to believe in the existence of any such mutiny, or of any intention to mutiny or of any such conspiracy, does not, without delay, give information thereof to his commanding or other superior officer; or

(e) endeavours to seduce any person in the military, naval. or air forces of India from his duty or allegiance to the Union; shall, on conviction by court- martial, be liable to suffer death or such less punishment as is in this Act mentioned.
Thanks for sharing. In letter, law is law, I agree.

It is interesting to know that when defining mutiny, they have used the term mutiny in the definition. Funny!

From the witnesses' account, it is clear the men of the 226 Field Regiment did nothing — until it became clear Ghosh had suffered significant injuries. Major Kanade, however, allegedly refused the men to move Ghosh to a medical facility, perhaps fearing it would lead to an internal inquiry on his conduct.
Still, does not look like mutiny to me. Even the Army says it's not a mutiny.


Slamming "misinterpretation" and "mischievous reporting", the Army also said, "The entire episode can at worst be seen as an isolated act of indiscipline. It can in no way be termed a mutiny."
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
So the ruckus has been created by a peeping tom ! a barber ! people here are flogging the dead animal called "Sahayak" .. DODOs !!
How do you know he was a peeping Tom? The report you posted suggests otherwise.

* On Thursday, as the firing practice was on, the regiment barber, identified as Suman Ghosh, is believed to have entered a major's tent. The sequence of events is unclear, but a version says that on seeing the officer's wife in the tent, Ghosh ran out in alarm. Following this, the wife allegedly created a furore.
Was it because the officers' wives were there in violation of the rules, and to escape punishment, they made this entire ruckus?


And why were all the officers rushing to protect their wives? Something is fishy here.

* Officers of the unit fled from the spot, some rushing to their wives. At least two wives are believed to have been "rescued" by personnel from the GREF camp, fearing the anger of the jawans. By evening, all the officers had been accounted for, with one having fled to an Army camp in Chushul.
Also, Ray Sir, kindly confirm, aren't barbers also part of the army?
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
The CO has been relieved of command. What an embarrassment; you get this opportunity once in your lifetime and to have it taken away in such a manner, what a shame. The officers in the unit lacked leadership qualities.
The newspapers tend to sensationalise, throw in some fancy terms to show that they are 'in the know' of how the Army works and hey presto! – they have a very knowledgeable story to give to the world!

If a CO is hospitalised, it is obvious that the second in command officiates, more so when there is a crisis going on in the unit.

He was 'relieved of command', then he would be attached to another unit! Has he been?

Only one name has appeared ... Sepoy Suman Ghosh....
Hmmm ... The rebellious Bengali Dada.. the argumentative Indian....
It appears the unit is mixed or all india composition..
Such things are common in those outfits..

It is time for their Colonel of the Regiment to disband that unit...

The CO and SM must be thrown into Spangur Lake....
Families in practice camp ???
That is their gunners professionalism..?

the buggers wanted to to fire from all guns in rarefied high altitude and that too simultaneously...
What has being a Bengali got to do with this?

I have commanded an All India mix and there were all sorts to include Bengalis. We did not have a mutiny or even insubordination. Therefore, it is not that it happens in units of All India mix. It has happened because of immature handling of the issue, and I maintain all this type of things that happen is because of poor grooming of officers.

I saw a feature yesterday on TV – Natgeo or something like that on the IAF. Six trainee pilots were taking turns to fly an AN 32 and were being graded and one of them would be allowed to fly a Su! The AOC or was it the Station Cdr came up to the dias and started announcing the result as if he was judge one of these reality shows. The last name and then waiting for that dramatic effect to say who would be the winner and hence also the second chap! The chap who won punched the air and all those things that you see at a Futbal Mundial when a chap nets the winner. And it was all on the tarmac with a dais!

Now, if you want to make military professionalism a modern reality show, then you sure are asking for trouble!

The Subedar Major must have been a dolt and risen to the rank by doing ji huzoori. And that is another trait that is being encouraged in the Forces. It is only those who are insecure and are professionally incapable who love these Ji Huzoors and more so, since they too belong to this category! The Subedar Major has failed in doing his duty or he is hand in glove with these mutineers!
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
Re: Army officers, jawans involved in scuffle in Ladakh

14 Corps Commander strikes deal with angry soldiers, defusing crisis — but hard questions remain
Early on Saturday, highly-placed military sources told The Hindu, Leh-based 14 Corps Commander Lieutenant-General Ravi Dastane finally hammered out a deal with the soldiers — a deal which promises officers who used beatings against enlisted men will be punished, in return for the soldiers relocating to their base at Thiksey.
One does not do a 'deal' with his subordinates.

If indeed a 'deal' was done, it proves my point that the Army has become a civilian, and worse still, a political organisation.

Doing deals is abdicating the functions of command.

Forty-eight hours after troops of the Ladakh-based 226 Field Regiment staged a revolt against officers they said were responsible for the brutal beating of an enlisted man, the Army is facing hard questions about whether its colonial-era institutions are generating a crisis within its ranks.
It is that this colonial system that has held the Army where it is.

It is a very handy whipping boy for those who are confused and want to act know alls!

Wherever egalitarianism and modernism has been practised, it has come a cropper.

Today the manner in which the Army is gone, there is no Regimentation, no bonding - all in the name of modernisation and keeping with the times.prompted by fancy psychological terms coined by the new fancy organisation created called some Organisation addressing the psychological aspect. Medicos and scientists who have no hands on experience in routine and operational existence of units! Paper Tigers on the prowl!

Just see how the Army is functioning. One incident, the CArty, CCArty, Div Cdr, Corp Cdrs all have 'rushed' to the spot. In short, not allowing anyone to function and find the cause and instead breathing down over each others' neck! And the Defence Ministry wanting an immediate report! It shows the muddle headed approach which is more to ensure that one's own bacon is protected and make the whole issue murkier! Soon some scientific chap will be coopted for the psychological aspect and the merry go round will be complete. End result - more confusion - more stupid impractical rules announced and thing totally made from bad to worse!

Now, taking it that the orderly was a Peeping Tom, one does not beat him up. Law should take its course. Had the Subedar Major being worth his salt, which it is obvious he isn't, he would have handled the issue and SMs are not known to handle issues with a velvet glove!

That jawans can raise slogans and go around with a loudspeaker indicates what I am saying. The Army, because of this egalitarianism and political type of mollycoddling or brushing issues under the carpet so as to present a good picture of the unit, has allowed such most unsoldierly habits to breed.

What nationalistic slogan were they raising? The poor sods did not realise how they are letting the Nation that has faith in them and their discipline down? That they are making a national shame indelibly marked in the history of the Nation? Again, it shows how the ways of the political party has gripped the rank and file and none have addressed this dangerous malaise so that their own careers are not ruined!

Officers, not Gentlemen?
The societal ethos is responsible and more than that the foolish politics mode of functioning oriented, non hands on approach, over charged and misplaced ambitions, fancy scientific advice compared to the earlier gut reaction honed by experience and grooming, is responsible.

As one of my COs had said - 'Hafars, not Officers is what we are becoming!'.


.
Simmering class tensions

Earlier this month, the Army announced it was considering doing away with the colonial-era institution of the sahayak, or batmen as they were earlier known — trained soldiers who are assigned to serve as valets.

The 30,000-odd men serving as sahayaks are expected not just to ensure that their officers' uniforms are in order and their personal comfort cared for, but ferry their children to school and help with their spouses' shopping.

The batman system was long abandoned in the British Army, from where India drew it; even Pakistan dropped the institution in 2004. In India, however, it remains in place — a major cause of humiliation for men enlisted to serve their country.

It isn't only the institution of the sahayak, though, that is a cause of friction: India's two-class Army, divided rigidly between sahibs and men, ill-reflects the social realities of the country today.

For its part, the officer corps is ill-equipped to deal with a changing world. In a recent article, scholar Srinath Raghavan pointed out that the Army recruits officers "at a much younger age than most other democracies."

Colonial-era culture

Their subsequent in-house education submerges young men to the military's colonial-era culture, leaving them ill-equipped to understand the changed values and aspirations of the soldiers serving under their command.

"In the first decades after Independence," a retired officer told The Hindu, "enlisted men came from backgrounds which led them to unquestioningly accept feudal attitudes and values. The officers were also products of the same feudal landscape. It doesn't exist any more — but the institutions remain."
On the issue of oderlies/ sahayaks/ helpers/' buddies.

Apart from being personal valets and the persona,l security in combat, they are also the 'eyes and ears' of the officer.

They are not supposed to do shopping, take the children out.

However, what happens is that such a sahayak remains over years as a 'shahayak' and becomes a part of the family and become a part of the family. That is where they act as a part of the family and do these chores. Should not happen, but it is not unknown. However, peeping toms is a new one. I am sure the Defence psychologists will come out stating that the IA should be provided with 'comfort women'.

After all, scholar Srinath Raghavan would know more than everyone else! He is a scholar. Let him hand around a day as a Jawan and let us see what he has to say.

I also love the media's way of causing a seed of doubt, by quoting 'unnamed sources' or 'retired army officer'!!
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
Pmaitra,

When collectively people do not obey a command, it becomes a collective insubordination or mutiny as far as the Army Act goes!
 

spikey360

Crusader
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
3,453
Likes
6,391
Country flag
Sad to see that in the end, the cause winds down to women.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
How do you know he was a peeping Tom? The report you posted suggests otherwise.
In the Hindu article, it says that the chap walked in without knocking while the lady was showering.



Was it because the officers' wives were there in violation of the rules, and to escape punishment, they made this entire ruckus?
No, it would apply to all ranks.


And why were all the officers rushing to protect their wives? Something is fishy here.
Psychologists more so the Defence psychologists would term that as 'societal; herd mentality' caused by 'self preservation'! Or such equal crap!



Also, Ray Sir, kindly confirm, aren't barbers also part of the army?
Yes, they use to be Non Combatants (Enrolled) but are now classified as full fledged soldiers.


Surprising that a barber could be a shahakyak since there are not many and haircuts required are many!
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
Sad to see that in the end, the cause winds down to women.
No it is lack of faith and bonding.

Orderlies don't ever misbehave. In fact , they are like 'Family'.

In fact, my orderly who had retired came to attend my daughter's wedding as his right. Indeed it was.

The way he was bossing with the civilians who were given the decoration, shamiana and catering, they wondered if he is an uncle of mine, who had been away from Bengal for long since he did not know the language!

The way he managed to take over and conduct the marriage 'army style' brought much appreciation about my organisational skill as an Army chap. Unfortunately I burst their bubble. I told thenm that the whole show was that of my wife and my erstwhile orderly!

As I said they are the "Family".

I cannot think of them otherwise.
 

Manas7

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
324
Likes
251
Army officers can't have personal slaves in the form of Sahayaks. This 2012 and Sahayak system is totally out of date.

I've relatives in the army. I know what Sahayaks do, what they work is , a male servant would do in the household. The respect they get is entirely dependent on the officer's family. My relatives generally treat their Sahayaks with compassion ,but from the outside you know he is basically a servant.

Its also against the idea of having a lean and mean tech oriented army .
 
Last edited:

spikey360

Crusader
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
3,453
Likes
6,391
Country flag
Army officers can't have personal slaves in the form of Sahayaks. This 2012 and Sahayak system is totally out of date.

I've relatives in the army. I know what Sahayaks do, what they work is , a male servant would do in the household. The respect they get is entirely dependent on the officer's family. My relatives generally treat their Sahayaks with compassion ,but from the outside you know he is basically a servant.

Its also against the idea of having a lean and mean tech oriented army .
You are absolutely in disdain of the brotherhood, the sense of fraternity that prevails in the armed forces when you state that the sahayak is equivalent to a personal slave. Everyone in the army are brothers and no true soldier thinks of his brothers as slaves. IMHO, the sahayak system was one which could bring better bonding and sense of discipline in the army. I would even go as far as to say that the country needs conscription and I would gladly be a sahayak in the residence of my superior officer if the country needs me to be so.
And also, you'd get a lean mean machine only when everyone is able to do everything. If you do away with sahayaks, there would be civilians in their positions who wouldn't be able to combat? Where does your leanness go then? Furthermore, one can never know for sure if you have a spy in your midst or not.
 
Last edited:

sayareakd

Mod
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
17,734
Likes
18,951
Country flag
well first of all arrest all the persons involved, court martial them all.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
If the soldier was a 'peeping Tom,' it was clearly his fault; if the major's wife was there in clear violation of the rules, that was the major's fault, if the soldier ran away after seeing the major's wife, as the other report suggests, then it is not his fault, if the Commanding Officer saw the mood of the soldiers and scolded the majors publicly, then it was his fault, but then again, the majors were also at fault, even a greater fault, for beating someone up and then refusing medical assistance.

Army Act or not Army Act, if it is true that the soldiers waited patiently long enough and then lost their cool, then how can this be mutiny? It weren't the soldiers who resorted to violence first, it were the majors. This cannot be mutiny. The Army also says it is not mutiny. The soldiers had every opportunity to loot the weapons and go berserk, but instead, they stuck to using sticks.

I was earlier unsure, but now I think this strict hierarchical BS of the 'batman' system has to be done away with. Now I see why Stalin sent so many of the Tsarist officers to the gallows. In the long run, it only helped foster equality. The sooner we get rid of this imperial practice, the better. The other thing that needs to be weeded out of the Indian Army is the ethnicity based nomenclature of regiments. Two evils still lingering since the days of the British Empire.
 

venkat

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
907
Likes
203
chicoms and pakis must be having mouthul of laughter and the pakis even acknowledged it with ceasefire violation. This is what happens when soldiers give away their lives fighting the enemy and some of their ex- top brass ,babus and politicos found swindling!!!! The volcano has erupted!!!!
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
Livefist: Big Fist-Fight At Border Unit Shocks Army (Updated)

Misinterpretation and mischievous reporting to sensationalise the incident by some sections of print and electronic media need to be dispelled. Main issues are as under:

(a) The entire episode can at worst be seen as an isolated act of indiscipline. It can in no way be termed as mutiny.

(b) No arms and ammunition have been used by anybody. The armoury has not been captured by the troops as is being wrongly reported.

(c) The Court of Inquiry will identify the complicity of the officers and men. However, nobody has been removed, dismissed or suspended.

(d) Col P Kadam, the Commanding Officer was not assaulted by other officers, as has been wrongly reported. The CO as well as Maj AK Sharma and Sepoy Suman Ghosh who suffered superficial injuries, have been given medical treatment.

(e) The situation is well under control.
 

Bangalorean

Ambassador
Joined
Nov 28, 2010
Messages
6,233
Likes
6,853
Country flag
Why does everyone seem to have reached a conclusion that he was a "peeping tom"? I don't think there is any evidence that he went into the tent with the knowledge that the woman was inside. On the contrary, it has been reported that he was shocked and "ran out" when he noticed that the woman was inside.
 

Bhadra

Professional
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
11,991
Likes
23,758
Country flag
If the soldier was a 'peeping Tom,' it was clearly his fault; if the major's wife was there in clear violation of the rules, that was the major's fault, if the soldier ran away after seeing the major's wife, as the other report suggests, then it is not his fault, if the Commanding Officer saw the mood of the soldiers and scolded the majors publicly, then it was his fault, but then again, the majors were also at fault, even a greater fault, for beating someone up and then refusing medical assistance.

Army Act or not Army Act, if it is true that the soldiers waited patiently long enough and then lost their cool, then how can this be mutiny? It weren't the soldiers who resorted to violence first, it were the majors. This cannot be mutiny. The Army also says it is not mutiny. The soldiers had every opportunity to loot the weapons and go berserk, but instead, they stuck to using sticks.

I was earlier unsure, but now I think this strict hierarchical BS of the 'batman' system has to be done away with. Now I see why Stalin sent so many of the Tsarist officers to the gallows. In the long run, it only helped foster equality. The sooner we get rid of this imperial practice, the better. The other thing that needs to be weeded out of the Indian Army is the ethnicity based nomenclature of regiments. Two evils still lingering since the days of the British Empire.
Ha Ha Ha ..... so for you, the crux is "why Stalin sent so many of the Tsarist officers to the gallows" .. you would have been foremost instigator and calling for gallows !!
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
Army officers can't have personal slaves in the form of Sahayaks. This 2012 and Sahayak system is totally out of date.

I've relatives in the army. I know what Sahayaks do, what they work is , a male servant would do in the household. The respect they get is entirely dependent on the officer's family. My relatives generally treat their Sahayaks with compassion ,but from the outside you know he is basically a servant.

Its also against the idea of having a lean and mean tech oriented army .
I presume a PA to a Minister is also a slave and so is the peon of the DM and the orderly to the SP.

I assure you the Sahayak is treated better.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
If the soldier was a 'peeping Tom,' it was clearly his fault; if the major's wife was there in clear violation of the rules, that was the major's fault, if the soldier ran away after seeing the major's wife, as the other report suggests, then it is not his fault, if the Commanding Officer saw the mood of the soldiers and scolded the majors publicly, then it was his fault, but then again, the majors were also at fault, even a greater fault, for beating someone up and then refusing medical assistance.

Army Act or not Army Act, if it is true that the soldiers waited patiently long enough and then lost their cool, then how can this be mutiny? It weren't the soldiers who resorted to violence first, it were the majors. This cannot be mutiny. The Army also says it is not mutiny. The soldiers had every opportunity to loot the weapons and go berserk, but instead, they stuck to using sticks.

I was earlier unsure, but now I think this strict hierarchical BS of the 'batman' system has to be done away with. Now I see why Stalin sent so many of the Tsarist officers to the gallows. In the long run, it only helped foster equality. The sooner we get rid of this imperial practice, the better. The other thing that needs to be weeded out of the Indian Army is the ethnicity based nomenclature of regiments. Two evils still lingering since the days of the British Empire.
What is mysterious is that were the women also staying in tents, wherein there are no doors as such and instead there are flaps. The so called 'bathroom' is a small 40 lb tent that is just behind. It can't be that the lady was bathing with flaps open. I thought they were staying at the GREF camp. GREF camps are proper barracks and rooms!

The CO should not have admonished the officers in front of troops. That is never done since it reduces the authority of the officers.

Beating is a crime as per Army Act - Ill treating a Subordinate is the wording.

The soldiers should have never lost their cool. They should have taken up the issue with higher authorities. In short, what they did is take law into their own hands. It is obvious that they have taken weapons or else where is the problem of entering the unit and arresting them?

Collectively breaking the military protocol is mutiny as per the Army Act, no matter who started it.

If the Batman system goes, then it will be a sloppy army. Spit and polish gives a sense of aura that is essential. What are medals for or the ranks on the shoulder? That could also go so that no one knew who is who and all would be equal. Interestingly, the Chinese army has brought back all these trappings of authority and valour!

Is a DM or a Police officer entitled to orderlies or help? Just visit them and see what is going on. Or visit a Ministers or an IAS chap's house. In short, it will find a backdoor entry and it will be worse.

Community based Regiments build up spirit. Like anything else in life, it has pros and cons. BTW, this Regt which has ruined the reputation of the Army is not a Community based unit. So, nothing is perfect and nothing can be predicted.

It is because we are shedding old traditions and become 'sexed up' with fancy scientific and egalitarian theories and practice that we are having all these issues.

Do read Philip Mason's "A Matter or Honour" to understand what makes the Indian Army click and he has handled the issue most fairly including berating the British for any practices.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top