Judgment ( 1. ) The petitioner has filed this petition against the order dated 21-5-2002 passed by the first respondent whereby the petitioners application claiming Samman Nidhi under Madhya Pradesh Swatantrata Sangram Sainik Samman Nidhi Niyam, 1972 (Rules for short) has been rejected. ( 2. ) The petitioner contends that on 15th August, 1942 with the declaration of Quit India Movement all the leaders of Indian National Congress were arrested. Pursuant to this a public meeting was held on 16th August, 1942 at Maharajabada, Lashkar, Gwalior. The police arrested various local leaders who addressed the said meeting. In order to protest the arrest of the local leaders, a protest march was organized by the students on 17-8-1942 in which petitioner with other student leaders participated. When petitioner and other student leaders were heading towards Maharajabada from Victoria College, Gwalior, the police intercepted, as the said march was declared unlawful, and in order to disburse the mob the police resorted to Lathi Charge and firing. In the process the police arrested nearly 40-50 members of the said procession including the petitioner. All of them were put under police lockup at Kotwali, Lashkar. The police registered Crime No. 110 of Samvat 1999 against the petitioner in Kotwali Police Station, Lashkar under Section 134 of the Gwalior State Penal Code. On the next date, the petitioner was released on his furnishing a personal bond. It is further stated that the said case was withdrawn by the Govt, vide order No. 10450, dated 17-10-1942. ( 3. ) The petitioner further contends that in view of the amendment of the definition of Freedom Fighter provided in Rule 2 of the Rules he is covered under the definition of Freedom Fighter and is entitled for the benefit of Samman Nidhi as provided under Rule 3 of the Rules. The petitioner relies on amended definition of Swatantrata Sangram Sainik which reads thus:- The entitlement of Samman Nidhi is provided under Rule 3. Rule 3 reads as under:- ( 4. ) In support of his contention that he was arrested on 17-8-1942 in connection with freedom movement the petitioner filed a certificate issued by Superintendent of Police, Lashkar, Gwalior, dated 14-4-1949. Rule 3 reads as under:- ( 4. ) In support of his contention that he was arrested on 17-8-1942 in connection with freedom movement the petitioner filed a certificate issued by Superintendent of Police, Lashkar, Gwalior, dated 14-4-1949. He also enclosed various certificates including the certificates of Member of Madhya Bharat Legislative Assembly, All Indian Constituent Assembly, All India Congress Working Committee, President Gwalior, Congress Committee, Certificate issued by the Chief Minister and the certificate issued by District Collector, Morena to substantiate his contention that he participated in the freedom movement and his name finds place in list of freedom fighters. ( 5. ) The petitioners application dated 7-2-2002 seeking Samman Nidhi was rejected by the first respondent on the ground that the petitioner did not file any document to show that he underwent the jail sentence, and that the petitioner cannot be said to be a freedom fighter on the basis of his custody by the police. ( 6. ) It is not disputed by the respondents that under the Rules, if a person was imprisoned between the year 1919 to 1946 in connection with freedom movement even for a day, he has to be treated as freedom fighter under Rule 2 entitling him for grant of Samman Nidhi under Rule 3 of the Rules. However, it is contended that the certificate issued by the Superintendent of Police (Annex- ure P-l) filed by the petitioner is of no help to him. The petitioner has not filed any documentary evidence that he underwent jail sentence. It is stated that having regard to word which finds place in Rules 3 and 3 of the Rules the arrest made by the police will not entitle the petitioner to claim the said benefit and in the circumstances the rejection of the petitioners claim was justified. ( 7. ) In reply to the aforesaid contention of the respondents, the petitioner contends that on the basis of Annexure P-l issued by the Superintendent of Police, Lashkar and other un-rebutted documents it can be held that the petitioner was arrested on 17-8-1942 in connection with freedom movement and he is a freedom fighter. The petitioner submits that the word "Kaid" as finds place in Rules 2 and 3 of the Rules, means Karadand, Karawas, Bandhan, Shart, Pratibandh as defined in Bhargavas Adarsh Hindi Shabdkosh. The petitioner submits that the word "Kaid" as finds place in Rules 2 and 3 of the Rules, means Karadand, Karawas, Bandhan, Shart, Pratibandh as defined in Bhargavas Adarsh Hindi Shabdkosh. In Bhasha Vibhag Dictionary the meaning of word Kaid is shown as confinement, imprisonment. In Allied Chambers Hindi English Dictionary Qaid has been defined as imprisonment, confinement, incarceration, bondage. In Bhargavas standard illustrated Dictionary of Hindi language Kaid has been defined as imprisonment, confinement, incarceration, bondage restraint, obstruction. ( 8. ) Having regard to the aforesaid certificate issued by the Superintendent of Police certifying that the petitioner was arrested on 17-8-1942 and an offence was registered as Crime No. 110/Samvat/99 and the meaning of the word Kaid the petitioners contention that he is covered under the definition of freedom fighter under Rule 2 of the rules and is entitled to receive Samman Nidhi under Rule 3 deserves to be accepted. The contention of the respondents that the petitioner having not remained in Jail and, therefore, he is not a freedom fighter and not entitled for the Samman Nidhi under Rule 3 has no merit. ( 9. ) In this view of the matter, the impugned order dated 21-5-2002 (Annexure P-8) passed by the first respondent is quashed. The petitioner is held to be entitled to receive Samman Nidhi. However, the said benefit shall be extended to the petitioner from the date of order in view of sub-clause (6) of Rule 3 and also in view of the Full Bench judgment of this Court in case of Jagannath Prasad Vs. State of M.P. and others [ 2001(3) M.P.H.T. 81 (FB) = 2001(2) MPLJ 542 ]. The said benefit be extended by the respondents in favour of the petitioner within 3 months from the date of production of copy of this order. The amount of arrears shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum till the date of payment. Future Samman Nidhi shall be paid regularly. ( 10. ) Petition is allowed. No order as to cost. C.C within 7 days. Writ Petition allowed.MOHAMMAD