Army vs soldier: Delhi High Court halts retirement of Naib Subedar, seeks mobile tower data to verify a ‘failed’ firing test

The interim order came after the petitioner, Naib Subedar Ramakant Singh, categorically denied being present at the unit in Naugam, Jammu & Kashmir, for mandatory firing tests that the Commanding Officer of his unit, Colonel Anand A Shirali, claimed he failed.

The bench of Justice V Kameswar Rao and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora was hearing the writ petition (Civil) filed by Naib Subedar Ramakant Singh against the Union of India. The petitioner appeared in person in the courtroom, while Colonel Shirali and Subedar Ranveer Singh (both part of the screening board for his service extension) joined virtually.

Colonel Shirali informed the court that Naib Subedar Ramakant Singh had participated in the day-and-night firing test conducted on August 2, 2025, at Naugam, J&K. When he did not qualify, he was granted a second chance on August 4, 2025. According to the officer, the petitioner scored even lower in the re-test and was accordingly disqualified and not recommended for extension of service.

Subedar Ranveer Singh, who was on the screening board, categorically confirmed before the court that Ramakant Singh was physically present on both dates and had taken the firing tests.

The petitioner gave a completely different account. He stated that he was undergoing Leader Management Training at Bareilly from May 31, 2025, to July 11, 2025. Immediately thereafter, he proceeded on sanctioned leave from July 13, 2025, to August 11, 2025, and remained at his hometown in Dinapur, District Ghazipur, Uttar Pradesh. He asserted he never visited his unit in Naugam, J&K, during this period.

To substantiate his claim, the petitioner referred to multiple visits to a bank in Ghazipur for cash deposits and KYC updation during the leave period. He also disclosed his active mobile numbers and clarified that one of the mobile number appearing on his old bank passbook has not been used by him since 2015.

After recording the contradictory versions, the court observed that the truth regarding the petitioner’s presence could be verified through mobile location data. It therefore directed the Registrar General to requisition the CDR and Cell Tower Location Charts of the three active mobile numbers for the entire period from July 13, 2025, to August 11, 2025, from the respective service providers and place them on record.

The bench also made it clear that the interim protection against discharge was being granted only because the petitioner’s physical presence was required for further proceedings and that “no equity shall enure to the petitioner” if the petition is eventually dismissed.

The petitioner was asked to sign a copy of the order in court as an acknowledgement of the correctness of the statement recorded.

The matter has been rescheduled for March 19. Until then, Naib Subedar Ramakant Singh will continue in service.

The case highlights a rare situation where an Army screening board’s official record of a soldier’s participation in a qualifying test is being directly challenged by the soldier himself on the strength of leave records, bank transactions, and mobile location evidence. The outcome will depend heavily on the cell tower data that the court has now called for.