P.S. Patwalia, J. - (1.) Plaintiff filed a suit for declaration to the effect that she is entitled to special pension and employment given to the terrorist affected families as her husband was a victim of terrorist activities. She alleged that her husband Mukhtiar Singh was serving in the Punjab Police as Head Constable and on 7th January, 1992 his dead body was recovered in the area of village Meeran Kot. On that basis, a case under Section 302/34 Indian Penal Code under Section 3/4 of the T.D.A. (P) Act was registered. The case was tried and ultimately the accused were acquitted on 19th August, 1993. It is the admitted position that after the death of Mukhtiar Singh, plaintiff has been awarded family pension but her case for special family pension given to the terrorist affected families was rejected. She accordingly filed the suit from which this regular Second Appeal has arisen the trial court examined the matter and recorded the following findings : "The onus to prove these issues is upon the plaintiff. In the said case the plaintiff is seeking declaration to this effect that she is entitled to special pension as given to terrorist effected family because her husband Mukhtiar Singh who was an employee with Punjab Police has died in a terrorist encounter. Whatever evidence the plaintiff has led that revealed that the dead body of Mukhtiar Singh was found in minor canal and FIR No. 11 of 1992 under Section 320/34 Indian Penal Code and 3/4 of T.D.A. Act was got registered. Even the plaintiff has summoned the file of Criminal case which is got attached with it. The accused Sukhwinder Singh and Narinder Singh were acquitted in that case. Now the question arises that independent evidence the plaintiff has led to prove this fact that her husband Mukhtiar Singh had been killed by terrorist in an encounter. There is worth no evidence on the file from which the conclusion can be drawn that Shri Mukhtiar Singh deceased had died in terrorist encounter. Merely regarding his death an F.I.R. was registered does not mean that he had been got killed by the terrorists in an encounter. Moreover, in civil case one is to lead an independent to prove the stand. However, during the course of arguments much stress is made by the Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff that Sh. Mukhtiar Singh was given commendation certificate while fighting with the extremists as well as cash prise in the year 1988. The awarding of Commendation certificate and the prise etc. does not mean that had been got killed by terrorists in an encounter. Not only this PW-3 examined by the plaintiff stated this thing in his cross-examination that Mukhtiar Singh was involved in terrorists activities and his service record was not good." The said finding of fact has been affirmed by the Additional District Judge, Amritsar.
(2.) Having gone through the matter, I am satisfied that the appellant's case was examined by the courts below on the basis of the evidence produced by her but she failed to prove that her husband was a victim of terrorist activities. Accordingly, I find no ground to interfere with the findings recorded by the courts below and the Regular Second Appeal is, therefore, dismissed in limine. Appeal dismissed.;