The ugly incident in Kishtwar The Excelsior 01 Jul 2026
https://www.dailyexcelsior.com/the-ugly-incident-in-kishtwar/
The ugly incident in Kishtwar The Excelsior 01 Jul 2026
The recent army-civil administration clash in Kishtwar could have been avoided had parties involved displayed maturity. A small incident, especially when egos of individuals are involved, can damage carefully built working relations between institutions. Kishtwar is a region prone to terrorist incidents and hence is essential that all government agencies operate in unison. This implies displaying maturity and patience.
The incident in Kishtwar involved a few civilian vehicles, under control of the army, transporting family members of a local Rashtriya Rifles battalion. The road was narrow and in a poor state of maintenance, hence movement was slow. There was also a temple which drew large crowds and slowed traffic. All this combined, led to delay in movement of the District Collector (DC) of Kishtwar, who was coming in the opposite direction.
Angered at the delay, the DC ordered his ARTO (Assistant Regional Transport Officer) to impound vehicles operated by the army, solely because they delayed his movement. The situation could have become embarrassing for the DC, had armed soldiers accompanying the vehicles refused to obey his directions and hand them over. They handed them over to avoid a situation, but what followed was illogical.
When the unit approached the local police station to request their release, the ARTO refused and directed the police to lock the gates denying them entry into their premises. This was against the law as the vehicles were neither involved in criminal nor terrorist activities nor an accident. They were held only because the ego of the DC was bruised as he was delayed by a few minutes. Is this how government officials are expected to act.
The DC was possibly expecting a senior army official to call him and request him to release the vehicles, thereby assuaging his bruised ego, but it did not happen. This added to his anger. On his directions, local police authorities refused to engage with army representatives, who came to end the misunderstanding, despite excellent police-army working relations.
This, once again, was an immature act. It is not that the police were unaware of those who had come, having met them many times before and possibly even operated alongside them. The army had no option but to open the gates with force and attempt a reconciliation. The matter could have still ended but for a police individual who decided to take matters into his own hands and threatened to open fire. This, for anyone, especially the army, is the last straw and led to the altercation.
Being the administration, the police filed an FIR against the army, including those who were not present, assuming they would have given directions. The same police would never accept a counter FIR by the army, as it would involve their people. The incident, which started because the ego of the DC was hurt, has been now blown out of proportion.
The incident will have ramifications beyond the region. Anti-army overground workers across the Union Territory, would exploit the situation and spread fake news on social media claiming the army mistreated civil and government officials. They would also paint the army as brutal and high-handed.
A cause for such incidents being on the rise is that army officials give undue importance to local government officers, solely to maintain military-civil relations, rather than treat them as per protocol. This makes local officials assume that they can behave irrationally and still not be questioned. It is time this is set to rest.
The media would be fed one-sided inputs from the civil administration, painting the army as ruffians. The army, on its part, would keep a low profile, avoid sharing their side of the incident, claiming joint investigation is under progress. The ego bruised DC, whose irrational decision led to the incident, would never come into the picture, while action of others would be under scrutiny in any investigation. Unless the DC is forced to justify his actions, he will continue to believe that he is above the law.
What is important is that the army hierarchy must interact at the state level and ensure that the FIR is quashed. Simultaneously, the hierarchy must hold the hand of the Commanding Officer and his men, rather than compel them to take the first step towards reconciliation. The army needs leaders who stand by their subordinates, whenever they act in good faith. A right response by the hierarchy would be a confidence booster for those operating in high pressure counter insurgency environments.