Is the surgical strikes for real or just a face saving attempt by India ?

At a press briefing on Thursday, the Indian DGMO has claimed of conducting surgical strike alongside the LoC.

While addressing the media DGMO Lt. Gen Ranbir Singh has claimed of causing casualties to the ‘targeted terrorists’. The claim arises numberless questions. For example, what are the total number of casualties inflicted by the Indian army?
What are the names of those “terrorists” India has killed?
Why not expose their faces In front of the world?
If there is any single “terrorist” caught, why not divulge him before the media?

Was it that the Indian DGMO was too excited to express his vindication in the press briefing that he forgot to do his homework or was it that it was a mere violation of the LoC ceasefire, which India does every now and then and claimed it as a “surgical strike” to evade from the increasing humiliation because of its decreasing credibility due to the repeated failures to led down Pakistan internationally.

Pakistan’s military media wing ISPR has dismissed India’s claim of Surgical Strike in these words:
‘’There has been no surgical strike by India, instead there had been cross border fire initiated and conducted by India which is existential phenomenon. As per rules of engagement same was strongly and befittingly responded by Pakistani troops.
The notion of surgical strike linked to alleged terrorists bases is an illusion being deliberately generated by Indian to create false effects. This quest by Indian establishment to create media hype by rebranding cross border fire as surgical strike is fabrication of truth. Pakistan has made it clear that if there is a surgical strike on Pakistani soil, same will be strongly responded’’

There has been no surgical strike by India,instead there had been cross border fire initiated and conducted by… https://t.co/OxIPiMbaLZ

— ISPR (@ISPR_Official) September 29, 2016

Moreover South Asia’s leading Multimedia News Agency ANI has also pronounced India’s claim as void.ANI news was later removed by Times of India, from its site.