The Supreme Court of India, while hearing a matter concerning disability pension, has clarified that a claim for disability pension cannot be sustained where the disease or disability arises out of a soldier’s personal habits and has no direct nexus with military service.
The Court observed that if an illness or disability is the consequence of an individual’s personal conduct, the Government or the concerned department cannot be held liable to grant disability pension.
The said order was passed by a Division Bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Prasanna B. Varale while dismissing the appeal filed by Sarevesh Kumar.
According to the facts of the case, the appellant was serving in the armed forces and, during the course of his service, suffered from a disease described as “Stroke Ischemic RT MCA Territory.”
Counsel for the appellant contended that the disease occurred during the period of service and was aggravated by service conditions. It was argued that the ailment could not be disassociated from military service.
The Counsel relied upon Bijender Singh vs Union of India & Ors., a decision in which disability suffered during a tenure at the high-altitude Siachen Glacier was judicially recognized as service-related owing to the demanding environmental conditions of the posting.
However, the Court rejected the contention, observing that the said precedent was different on facts. In Bijender Singh, the appellant had been posted at the Siachen Glacier, a high-altitude area, from May 1988 to September 1988, and the disability was directly linked to the service conditions. In contrast, in the present case, the Medical Board had clearly opined that the appellant’s ischemic stroke was attributable to continuous smoking. The medical records specifically indicated that the appellant was in the habit of smoking approximately 10 bidis per day.
The Court underlined that,
“…..the disease of “Stroke Ischemic RT MCA TERRITORY” was not attributable to service nor aggravated on account of service.”
After analysing the medical position, the Court further observed that,
“….an ischemic stroke occurs when a blood clot or fatty plaque (atherosclerosis) blocks an artery leading to brain, restricting oxygen which reduces blood flow and causing brain tissue damage and the medical opinion categorizing risk factors includes high blood pressure (hypertension), smoking, diabetes, high cholesterol, i.e., dyslipidemia, obesity and atrial fibrillation.”
The Court also endorsed the reliance placed by the Armed Forces Tribunal on Regulation 173 of the Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 and paragraph 6 of the Guide to Medical Officers, 2002, which stipulate that compensation cannot be granted for disablement arising out of alcohol, tobacco, or drug or sexually transmitted disease, as these fall within the individual’s control.
In view of the medical evidence and the opinion of the Medical Board, the Court concluded that the appellant’s disease was neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. It reiterated that the State cannot be saddled with liability for ailments arising out of personal habits.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court declined to interfere with the order of the Tribunal and dismissed the civil appeal.
Case: Sarvesh Kumar vs Union of India & Ors
Date of Order: 12.02.2026
See the Order: Sarvesh Kumar vs Union of India & Ors
