'No Disability Pension For Brain Stroke Caused By Smoking' : Supreme Court Rejects Ex-Army Officer's Claim

The Supreme Court has dismissed the disability compensation claim of a former Army personnel, holding that a disability attributed to his habit of smoking around ten beedis a day could not be linked to military service.

Referring to Regulation 173 of Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 and paragraph 6 of the Guide to Medical Officers, 2002, the Court observed that “compensation cannot be awarded for any disablement or death arising from intemperance in the use of alcohol, 'tobacco' or drugs or sexually transmitted disease, as these are the matters within the member's own control.”

The bench comprising Justices Aravind Kumar and Prasanna B. Varale upheld the decision of the Armed Forces Tribunal, noting that the medical records clearly indicated the appellant was in the habit of smoking ten bidis per day.

“The appellant was in the habit of smoking bidis that too ten bidis per day and it is trite position of medical law that an ischemic stroke occurs when a blood clot or fatty plaque (atherosclerosis) blocks an artery leading to brain, restricting oxygen which reduces blood flow and causing brain tissue damage and the medical opinion categorizing risk factors includes high blood pressure (hypertension), smoking, diabetes, high cholesterol, i.e., dyslipidemia, obesity and atrial fibrillation.”, observed the bench.

The Court held that the disease of “Stroke Ischemic RT MCA TERRITORY” attributable to the appellant was neither attributable to service nor aggravated due to service conditions, warranting disability compensation under the Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961.

The Bench rejected the appellant's reliance on Bijender Singh v. Union of India & Ors. (2025), observing that the decision turned on entirely different facts. In Bijender Singh, the appellant was serving at the Siachen Glacier, a high-altitude posting, and this Court had declined to accept the Medical Board's opinion that the assessed disability of 15–19% was neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. In contrast, the present case involved no such circumstances, rendering the precedent inapplicable.

Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.

Cause Title: SAREVESH KUMAR VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 163

Click here to download order

Appearance:

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Kaushal Yadav, AOR Mr. Nandlal Kumar Mishra, Adv. Mr. Onkar Nath Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ritul Tandon, Adv. Ms. Naina Garg, Adv. Ms. Priyanka, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Satya Darshi Sanjay, A.S.G. Mr. Shubh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Shubham P. Mishra, Adv. Mr. Khushal Kolwar, Adv. Ms. Nikita Sethi, Adv. Mr. Divyam Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Satya Jha, Adv. Mr. Sudhakar Kulwant, Adv. Mr. Praneet Pranav, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Rekha Pandey, Adv.