The Punjab and Haryana High Court has reserved its verdict in a public interest litigation (PIL) that sought to declare the 26 tourists killed in the Pahalgam terror attack as "martyrs". The court remarked that “this is not the time” to raise such a demand and hinted at the sensitive nature of the issue amid ongoing national concerns.
The case was heard by a division bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel. The PIL was filed by Ayush Ahuja, a practicing lawyer, who urged the court to recognize the victims of the tragic attack as martyrs and further asked for Pahalgam to be declared as a memorial site — “Memorable Martyrs/Shaheed Hindu Valley Tourist Place.”
Read Also:- Delhi High Court Orders Rs.8 Lakh Compensation to Man Who Lost Leg After Falling from Overcrowded Train
“Does declaring them a martyr fall under Article 226? Please provide one precedent. This is an administrative matter and a question of policy, and should be left to the executive to decide. Can we do it?”
— Chief Justice Sheel Nagu
In response to the court's query, Ahuja argued emotionally that the victims were innocents who were “shot on the head by terrorists in the name of religion”, and that they faced their fate “like a soldier”.
Read Also:- Pending Investigation Without Chargesheet Cannot Stop Promotion: AP High Court
However, Assistant Solicitor General (ASG) Satya Pal Jain, representing the Union of India, strongly opposed the plea. He stated that the petitioner lacked understanding of the government's ongoing actions in response to the attack.
“The petitioner has no idea what the Government of India is doing. The Home Minister reached Srinagar on the same evening… we are at the verge of war with the other nation... this is not the time to raise such issues, we are prioritising other things.”
— ASG Satya Pal Jain
The Chief Justice responded by noting that even in the case of soldiers, awards and official recognition are not immediately granted.
“Even if some soldier dies, they must be considered for an award, but it is not given immediately — it takes time, usually at least one year.”
— Chief Justice Sheel Nagu
Read Also:- Supreme Court Rejects PowerGrid's Plea to Recover Rs.24 Crore Transformer Cost Through Tariff Hike
After hearing all sides, the court reserved its decision and stated that an order would be passed in due course. The matter remains pending for final judgment.
The PIL has sparked wider discussions about how the nation honors victims of terrorism and whether courts have the power to grant such designations or if it is solely within the domain of the executive.
Title: Ayush Ahuja v. Union of India
