Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-13-2002
Reported in : 2003(1)SLJ237(Delhi)
..... that the petitioner never admitted his guilt nor did he plead guilty to the charge. next that though the petitioner was served with a charge sheet under section 39(a) of the army act, 1950, but was not given any opportunity to take help of a legal practitioner as the trial was of criminal nature. this lapse itself vitiates the trial. ..... act and under the command of the officer holding the court, except an officer, junior commissioned officer or warrant officer. ..... of learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner was not attested in the army i.e. he was not confirmed and was a recruit only and could not be subjected to summary court martial, we find no force in this as section 120(3) of the army act, 1950 provides that a summary court-martial may try any person subject to this .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-15-2002
Reported in : 2002(64)DRJ379
..... that in the particular circumstances of this case the respondent is not 'liable to be tried' by a court-martial.section 122(1) of the army act, 1950, provides that no trial by court-martial of any person subject to the army act for any offence shall be commenced after the expiry of the period of three years from the date of the offence. ..... detention as done by the hon'ble supreme court in bhim singh's case.(c) issue writ order or direction of appropriate nature striking down the provisions of section 153, 154 and 160 of the army act 1950.(c-1) issue writ order and direction of appropriate nature to quash the orders dated 30.10.1996, order 30.10.1996 invoking ..... offence, the trial is not vitiated. it was held:'8. the next point which was unsuccessfully urged before the high court was in the context of section 122 of the army act of 1950 which prescribes a period of limitation of three years. the high court did not accede to the submission in this behalf having regard to the law enunciated .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-13-2002
Reported in : 101(2002)DLT267; 2003(1)SLJ171(Delhi)
..... the aforesaid decision with regard to scope of section 19 of the army act and rule 14 of the army rules, and section 45 of the army act, we may notice these provisions:section 19 of the army act, 1950:'19. termination of service by central government.- subject to the provisions of this act and the rules and regulations made there under ..... officer with or without pension or gratuity; or (b) compulsorily retire him from the service with pension and gratuity, if any, admissible to him.' section 45 of the army act, 1950: '45. unbecoming conduct- any officer, junior commissioned officer or warrant officer who behaves in a manner unbecoming his position and the character expected to ..... who behaves in a manner unbecoming his position can be removed from service under section 19 of the army act, 1950, read with rule 14 of the army rules, 1954 without being tried by a court martial under section 45 of the army act, which specifically deals with the subject of unbecoming conduct of an officer. before .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-22-2002
Reported in : 2002(64)DRJ854
..... passed by the gcm and (b) in the alternative to permit the respondents to pass appropriate orders on the question of sentence in exercise of the powers vested under section 163 of the army act, 1950, after modifying the court's previous order dated 10.5.1999. this application was vehemently opposed by the petitioner herein in the apex court. a perusal of the ..... fact that hon'ble supreme court had declined to direct the petitioner to present himself before the gcm without his reinstatement. the relevant provision is section 2(2) of the army act 1950 sates that every person subject to this act shall remain so subject until duly retired, discharged, released, removed, dismissed or cashiered from the service. it is certainly arguable that the respondents ought .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Sep-30-2002
Reported in : 2003(3)SLJ463(Delhi)
..... to the post of havildar, he could not have been inflicted with the impugned punishment.(ii) the charges leveled against the petitioner purported to be under section 63 of the army act, were mala fide having regard to the backdrop of the case.(iii) the commandant had no jurisdiction to convene the district court martial.10. reliance in ..... on 15th february 1997 (saturday) and 16th february 1997 (sunday) where for no reason has been assigned.(vi) although in terms of section 133 of the army act, the provisions of the evidence act are applicable, it would appear that the cross-examination was done by court and the petitioner was not permitted to call his own defense witness ..... , the petitioner after his arrest on 27th july 1996 was attached to a different field regiment for his trial by a summary court martial.27. sections 116 and 120 of the army act read thus:'116. summary of court-martial.--(1) a summary court-martial may be held by the commanding officer of nay corps. department or detachment .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-21-2002
Reported in : 2002VAD(Delhi)148; 97(2002)DLT756; 2003(1)SLJ111b(Delhi)
..... the petitioner was dismissed from service in view of the enquiry report of the same date. but later, on a post-confirmation petition made in terms of section 106 of the army act, the sentence of dismissal was modified to that of discharge on humanitarian grounds by order 29th april 1993.4. the writ petition has been filed questioning the ..... which begins from rule 106.27. it further appears that it had been recorded therein that he had also earlier been convicted once for an offence under section 39(b) of the army act for a similar offence.28. it cannot be, in the absence of any authentic material, said that the petitioner was forced to give a certificate on ..... he never raised a question that he was injured. such a contention had been raised for the first time in the writ petition. in his post-confirmation petition under section 164 of the army act, he stated thus:' however, while i was on leave at my home-town, moondhi, district kangra, himachal pradesh i fell ill on february 26, 1992 and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-03-2002
Reported in : 2002IVAD(Delhi)265; 2002(64)DRJ810
..... awarded to the petitioner is not contemplated in respect of the charges which were brought against the petitioner before the summary court martial. sections 39(a) and 48 of the army act are the provisions under which the petitioner was charged before the summary court martial. he has pointed out that under these provisions the ..... india, : 1988crilj158 it was held that irrationality and perversity were recognised grounds of judicial review.8. the controversy revolves about the interpretation of sections 71, 72 and 73 of the army act. the same are reproduced below:'71. punishment awardable by courts-martial.- punishment may be inflicted in respect of offences committed by persons subject to ..... would not sit in the judgment of the summary court martial. he has further contended that from a conjoint reading of section 39(a) 48, 71, 72 and 73 of the army act, summary court martial could have awarded the punishment of dismissal from service. he has further contended that from the previous records .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-25-2002
Reported in : 2002VIAD(Delhi)619; 97(2002)DLT796; 2002(64)DRJ347
..... , 1941 to 22nd march, 1945 can be counted as on active service, the learned single judge examined the various provisions of the indian army act, 1911 as well as the pension regulations for the army. it was concluded that the deceased could not have been deprived of the benefits of service rendered between december, 1941 and march, 1945. ..... he was given medical treatment and examined by the medical board on 5th february, 1953. on the recommendations of the medical board, the deceased was discharged from the army on 17th june, 1953. it was opined by the medical board that he was suffering from toxic psychosis (following malaria mt) and his disability was assessed at 40 ..... 1941. he remained in temporary service till 21st march, 1945. he was re-enrolled as a combatant hawaldar storeman under the combatization scheme and continued to serve in the army till his discharge on 17th june, 1953.4. it appears that during 1953 the deceased was stationed in jammu & kashmir and thereafter posted to c.o.d. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Sep-30-2002
Reported in : 2003(1)SLJ151(Delhi)
..... surinder singh v. the union of india & ors., the learned counsel has drawn our attention to the fact that sections 162 and 121 of the army act, 1950 are in pari material with sections 115 and 75 of the bsf act.8. it was further submitted that as the petitioner had partially undergone the sentence awarded by ssfc trial dated 06.02 ..... persons. article 33 of the constitution of india is an exception to the said rule to the extent it is covered by the provisions of army act, 1950 and the rules framed there under, namely, army rules, 1954. by reason of article 33 of the constitution of india, the parliament is empowered to restrict or abrogate by law fundamental ..... as the punishment to suffer 4 months' rigorous imprisonment commenced immediately on signing of the ssfc in terms of section 120 of the bsf act.51. section 162 and 121 of the army act are in pari materia with sections 15 and 75 of the bsf act. in surinder singh's case (supra), dharmadhikari, j., as his lordship then was, speaking for a .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Sep-25-2002
Reported in : 2003(68)DRJ686
..... submitted that the petitioner had admitted his guilt. it was pointed out that the entire trial was conducted in a fair manner and in terms of the army act, 1950 and the rules framed there under, namely, army rules, 1954. as regards number of the butt, it was contended that at the time of seizure of the weapon, pw-18, i.e., si ..... out by respondents 2 and 3. it had been pleaded that the inquiry under rule 22 as against respondent no. 1 related to an offence which came under section 63 of the army act, namely, conduct prejudicial to good order and military discipline; while the charge he was called upon to face in the general court martial was one of theft ..... punishable under section 52(a) of the army act. we have seen the evidence recorded in the inquiry under rule 22. it is a fact that the allegations at the stage of inquiry under rule 22 .....
Tag this Judgment!