Advanced Search Results

N.R. Ajwani Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Service

Acts : Army Act, 1950 - Sections 18, 19, 63, 69, 117(3), 154, 160(4) and 165; Army Rules, 1954 - Rules 17, 23, 23(5), 82(3) and 147A; Indian Official Secrets Act, 1923 - Sections 3, 3(1) and 5; Army Pension Regulations, 1961 - Regulations 3 and 22; Constitution of India - Articles 1, 11, 14, 19(1), 19(5), 21, 31(1), 33, 53, 74, 74(1), 77, 154, 163(1), 226, 309, 310, 310(1), 311, 311(2) and 356; Air Force Act, 1950 - Sections 18 and 19; Air Force Rules, 1969 - Rule 16; Railway Establishment Code - Rules 148, 148(3), 149 and 149(3); Government of India Act, 1919 - Sections 96B; Constitution of India (Fiftieth Amendment) Act, 1984

Reported in : 95(2002)DLT770

Division Bench of this Court. In that case the President passed the Order under Section 18 of the Air Force Act, 1950 dismissing Hazara Singh from service with immediate effect. The main argument addressed was that as Hazara Singh had … was also invalid. This matter came up before the Constitution Bench wherein the validity of Rules 148(3) and 149(3) which superseded the former was considered by the Supreme Court. The question posed by the Supreme Court was

Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Ex. Sqn. Ldr. R. Sood

Court : Delhi

Subject : Service

Acts : Air Force Act, 1950 - Sections 19, 37, 121 and 122(1); Air Force Rules, 1969 - Rules 14, 14(2), 14(7), 16, 16(2) and 17; Army Act - Sections 19 and 122; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 147, 149, 365 and 304; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 197(2); Constitution of India - Sections 311(2)

Reported in : 2008(102)DRJ52

the Armed Forces. The respondent was dismissed from service by the Central Government under Section 19 of the Air Force Act, 1950 read with Rule 16 of the Air Force Rules, 1969 by issuing an order dated 22nd September, 1993. … Mohinder Singh. A criminal case was also filed by the police under Sections 147, 365, 304 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code against the respondent and others, which was finally decided on 12th January, 1990.

Jodh Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 32, 136, 226 and 227; ;Army Act, 1950 - Sections 69 and 354; ;Ranbir Penal Code (IPC), 1989 Smvt. - Sections 97, 300 and 302; ;Probation of Offenders Act - Sections 3 and 4; ;Army Rules, 1954 - Rules 23(3), 149 and 151 to 165; ;Evidence Act - Section 105; ;Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Section 97; ;Navy Act, 1957; ;Air Force Act, 1950

Reported in : 2000CriLJ2393

dealt with the special provisions contained in the Army Act, 1950 or the Navy Act, 1957 or the Air Force Act, 1950 and not by the normal Criminal Procedure Code. The said Navy Act is a complete code by itself … a mandatory provision has been violated. One may usefully refer to Rule 149 of the Army Rules. The High Court should not have allowed the … Martial for the commission of offence of murder of Lance Nk. Partap Singh.4. The petitioner was chargesheeted under Section 69 of the Army Act for committing a civil offence under Section 302 of the Ranbir Penal Code.

inder SaIn Bakshi S/O Bakshi Anant Ram Vs. Union of India, Through Sec ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : ServiceConstitution

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 197, 309, 310, 310(1), 311, 311(2), 372(1) and 447; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 9; The Civilians in defense Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1952 - Rules 1, 3, 4, 8, 9, 24, 25, 26 and 31; Government of India Act, 1935 - Sections 240, 240(3) and 241; Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules - Rules 49 and 55; Railway Establishment Code, 1959 - Rules 148(3) and 149(3); Indian Navy (Discipline) Act, 1934; Army Act, 1950; Indian Air Force Act, 1950; Civil Service Regulations - Regulation 197-A - Schedule - Articles 442 and 443; Motor Vehicles Act - Sections 43-A

Reported in : AIR1969Delhi220

estimates and nto subject to the Army Act, 1950, the Indian Navy (Discipline) Act, 1934, and the Indian Air Force Act, 1950, who is in the whole time employment of the Government of India under the Ministry of defense. In … statement, viz., that in matters at defense personnel the jurisdiction of the Civil Courts is impliedly barred under Section 9, Civil Procedure Code. (This appears to have been raised by way of amendment to the written statement … case, the Supreme Court was considering the validity of Rules 148(3) and 149(3) of the Railway Establishment Code, (1959) Vol. I. Strong reliance was placed

Mangal Singh Bhatti Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Kerala

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Navy Act, 1957 - Sections 78, 78(1) and 78(2); Navy Regulations - Regulations 28, 30, 149 and 151; Army Act, 1950; Air Force Act, 1950; Criminal Courts and Court Martial (Adjustment of jurisdiction) Rules, 1978 - Rules 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 192, 209, 240, 246(1), 252, 254, 255(1), 255(2), 256(1), 257, 475 and 475(1); Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 549

Reported in : 1993CriLJ3070

Code and, the Army Act, 1950 (46 of 1950), the Navy Act, 1957 (62 of 1957) and the Air Force Act, 1950 (45 of 1950) and any other law, relating to the Armed Forces of the Union, for the time … ordered investigation on 29-5-1992 of the case afresh as required by Regulation 149 of Regulations, Navy Part II. Thereafter on 30-5-1992 the sailor was released … Commanding Officer, INS Venduruthy, for trial under the Navy Act, 1957, and in accordance with the provisions of Section 78 of the Navy Act, 475 of the Cr.P.C. and the Criminal Courts and Court Martial (Adjustment of

S. Sundarajan Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 141 and 226; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 491; Air Force Act, 1950 - Sections 189; Air Force Rules, 1950 - Rules 14, 15 and 48(B)

Reported in : AIR1970Delhi29; 1970CriLJ213; 6(1970)DLT1; AIR 1970 Del 29

Matched in: Citation AIR1970Delhi29; 1970CriLJ213; 6(1970)DLT1; AIR 1970 Del 29

Balbir Singh and anr. Vs. State of Punjab

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Air Force Act, 1950 - Sections 4, 9, 72, 124 and 125; Leave Rules - Rule 9; Criminal Courts and Court Martial (Adjustment of Jurisdiction) Rules, 1952 - Rules 3 to 6; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - +, 1973 - Sections 475; Army Act, 1950; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 34, 302 and 325

Reported in : 1995(43)BLJR343; 1994(4)SCALE904; (1995)1SCC90; [1994]Supp5SCR422; 1995(1)LC275(SC)

- jurisdiction - Sections 302 and 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 72, 124 and 125 of Air Force Act, 1950, Section 475 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and Criminal Courts and Court Martial (Adjustment of Jurisdiction) Rules, 1952 -

Extra Judl.Exec.Victim Families Assnandanr Vs. Union of India and Anr

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

court inherently lacked jurisdiction to try the accused. This Court considered the provisions of Section 72 of the Air Force Act, 1950 (corresponding to Section 70 of the Army Act), Sections 124 and 125 of the said Act (corresponding to … challenge to a finding of guilt by a Court Martial for an offence punishable under Section 304 and Section 149 of the IPC. The contention of the petitioner was that the Court Martial had no jurisdiction to try

The State Of Sikkim Vs. Jasbir Singh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Central Government to make rules consistent with the CrPC and the Army Act, Navy Act 1957 and the Air Force Act 1950 and any other law relating to the Armed Forces of the Union, as regards the cases in which … a General Court-Martial, pursuant to which the petitioner had been found guilty of charges under Section 304 and Section 149 of the IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of six years and cashiering. The first question which was

Air Cmde Mrigendra Singh, Vsm Vs. Union of India, Represented by the S ...

Court : Guwahati

Subject : Education

records were sought for by respondent No.8 purportedly in exercise of his powers under Section 108 of the Air Force Act, 1950, though he does not, according to the petitioner, have such an authority. The obtaining of the call records … the Court of Inquiry throughout, i.e., from the commencement of the proceedings until the end of the proceedings. 149. In short, the violation of the right, which has been conferred on a person by Rule 156(2), same