Commando accused of spousal murder, Supreme Court firmly states ‘Operation Sindoor’ involvement provides no legal immunity
by Utsav RoyThe Supreme Court today denied relief to a Black Cat commando accused of murdering his wife, rejecting his claim to immunity based on his participation in Operation Sindoor, India’s retaliatory mission following the Pahalgam terror attack. When the Commando highlighted his role in the operation during the hearing of his Special Leave Petition seeking exemption from surrendering to the police, the court firmly stated that such involvement does not grant him any legal protection.
During the proceedings, the commando asserted, “I am a participant in Operation Sindoor. I am a Black Cat Commando,” referring to his affiliation with the National Security Guard, India’s elite counter-terrorism unit. However, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan sharply responded, “That doesn’t give you immunity. Regardless of your physical fitness, you alone could have strangulated your wife.”
The court expressed serious concerns about the brutality involved, with Justice Bhuyan highlighting the “gruesome manner” in which the wife was allegedly killed. He emphasized that this was not a case warranting exemption from legal procedures. Justice Vinod Chandran added that the High Court had already refused to grant any relief to the accused.
The commando faces charges under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code, which pertains to dowry deaths. His counsel argued that the sole allegation against him is demanding a motorcycle as dowry, supported by statements from two witnesses closely related to the deceased wife. The defense claimed these witnesses’ accounts were “highly discrepant.”
Despite these arguments, the Supreme Court refused to provide relief and issued a notice calling for the prosecution’s response to the Special Leave Petition. The court declined the prayer for exemption from surrender and scheduled the case for review in six weeks.
When the commando’s lawyer requested additional time to surrender, the court allowed a two-week period for compliance, signaling a strict stance on accountability regardless of the accused’s past military service.