A military hospital should be a place where every rupee is used to save lives. At 166 Military Hospital in Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK), critical healthcare funds were diverted through a procurement system manipulated for private benefit.
Maj Gen Devendra Arora served as commandant of the hospital from 2018 to 2020. During this period, ₹11 crore intended for pharmaceutical reserves and life-saving medical equipment was diverted into private revenue channels. Such misuse would not represent a minor administrative lapse; it would directly affect soldiers, medical personnel and patients relying on essential supplies.
Maj Gen Arora misused the hospital’s decentralized procurement authority to manipulate purchases for personal financial gain. Competitive bidding requirements were bypassed through falsified Proprietary Article Certificates, while standard medical items were classified as single-source products to award contracts directly to selected vendors. The SGCM subsequently convicted Maj Gen Arora on 16 charges and sentenced him to cashiering and one year of rigorous imprisonment. Yet the punishment was not immediately implemented because of statutory confirmation procedures and stay orders issued by the Armed Forces Tribunal. This delay raises questions about accountability when senior officers are convicted of offences involving public resources.
The human cost of such misconduct cannot be reduced to financial figures. Medical officers accept a responsibility to protect life, while military commanders are entrusted with ensuring that hospitals remain properly equipped. Diverting funds from medicines and life-saving equipment therefore undermines both institutional duty and patient welfare. Procurement budgets and local resources have repeatedly become avenues for private gain, extending from senior command levels to local administrative structures.
Restrictions on media reporting in IIOJK have further limited public examination of military and civilian administrative malpractice. When access to information is constrained, misconduct becomes harder to document, victims struggle to seek accountability, and senior officials can remain insulated from meaningful scrutiny.
The Arora case therefore concerns more than one officer or one hospital. It illustrates how weak oversight, manipulated procurement rules and delayed enforcement can damage military credibility and deprive people of essential services. For Kashmiris, the consequences are both economic and human. Genuine accountability requires transparent procurement, independent scrutiny and timely enforcement of judicial decisions, regardless of an officer’s rank or institutional position.
—The writer is contributing columnist, based in Rawapindi.
