The ‘Martyrdom’ of Lt Col E K Niranjan: Noble Sacrifice or Error?

‘The Telegraph’ has questioned the honours bestowed upon Lt. Col EK Niranjan, who died in the Pathankot attack.

The mortal remains of NSG Lt Col Niranjan, who lost his life in the Pathankot attack, were brought to his Bengaluru residence. (Photo: PTI)

The Telegraph newspaper has asked a politically incorrect question in its editorial on Thursday. Did Lt. Col. EK Niranjan, the NSG bomb squad commander and only officer to be killed in the Pathankot attacks, deserve the honour of being a martyr?

The Quint’s reporters, Venkatesh, Aakash, Partho and Sohini made the Telegraph’s article the subject of debate, addressing whether or not Lt. Col. EK Niranjan truly was a martyr. You can listen to the debate here.

Watch The Quint’s periscope session.

<p>Niranjan was the head of the bomb squad, but during the combing operation to clear the area of explosives, he was not wearing a blast-shield uniform. He fell victim to a simple booby trap planted by the terrorists. Niranjan also chose not to use specialized equipment like remote-controlled robots to move a dead body. Owing to this act of bravado, or stupidity, he lost his own life and had five of the soldiers with him seriously injured. Yet the last rites of Niranjan were performed with full State honours, with thousands paying their respects to him. No one is asking the question: does he deserve to be honoured?</p>

Editorial in <i>The Telegraph</i>

Lt Col Niranjan. (Photo courtesy: Shiv Aroor’s Twitter page)

The piece goes on to question the alertness, readiness and training of our special forces thrown for operations at forward bases like the one at Pathankot.

On Wednesday, the paper carried an article that questioned why Niranjan was carrying a smartphone, which are strictly not allowed in the course of a live operation and why he did not follow standard operating procedures such as wearing a bomb disposal suit.

The armed forces as a whole, and soldiers killed in action are justifiably placed on a pedestal by the Indian public. The media too, often follows suit. The article and the editorial have asked, tough provocative questions intelligently.

There is, of course, a valid and popular counter-view. A person who joins the armed forces knows that he may die in the line of duty. The impulse to risk your life just because a superior officer ordered you for an abstract and noble idea like patriotism is not always guided by cold reason. In battle and its aftermath, is it reasonable to expect all ‘standard operating procedures’ to be followed?

An Indian army soldier is silhouetted against the setting sun as he stands guard outside the Indian air force base in Pathankot. (Photo: AP)

Lt. Col. EK Niranjan was heading a bomb squad. His job was to lead men to defuse explosives. It takes more than bravery to do that job. It also takes bravado. If we expect young men and women to join our armed forces and forego their lives for our security, we must celebrate those who die on the front-lines, even if the circumstances of their death point to an error in judgement.

At The Quint, both sides of the debate have strong supporters. There are some of us who believe that it is the job of the media to question and probe, and the editorial does just that. Others believe that young men who chose to put their lives on the line, rather than pursue success and wealth as civilians, deserve to be honoured. They also believe that the circumstances of their sacrifice should not be questioned.

Where do you stand? Send us your views on Facebook and Twitter or leave them in the comments section below.