Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: army act 1950 section 16 persons to be attested Court: supreme court of india Page 11 of about 373 results (0.078 seconds)

Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Major A. HussaIn (ic-14827)

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1998SC577; JT1997(9)SC676; 1996LabIC581; (1996)ILLJ781SC; 1995(6)SCALE214; (1998)1SCC537; 1998(1)LC165(SC); (1998)1UPLBEC330

..... -martial.2. a general court-martial (gcm) under the army act, 1950 (for short 'the act') was convened to try the respondent holding the rank of major in the army on the following charge:'charge-sheet'the accused ic-14827f major arshad hussain, 225 ground liaison section type 'c' attached to aoc center, an officer holding ..... a permanent commission in the regular army, is charged with:section 63, army act an act prejudicial to good order and military discipline, in that he,at field, between 17th sep., 1984 ..... and 17th nov., 1984, when serving with 225 ground liaison section type 'c', lost by neglect twelve (12) pages of the .....

Pradeep Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2007(2)JKJ55[SC]; JT2007(6)SC1; 2007(6)SCALE1

..... for a period of 2= months was treated as misconduct and summary court martial was convened in terms of section 116 of the army act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act'). he was charged under section 39a of the act by order dated 7.8.1989 for having remained absent from duty without leave. he was tried and punished by ..... it and to follow the procedural safeguards. if one looks at the provisions of law relating to court-martial in the army act, the army rules, defence service regulations and other administrative instructions of the army, it is manifestly clear that the procedure prescribed is perhaps equally fair if not more than a criminal trial provides to the ..... officiating commanding officer was not competent to convene summary court martial was without substance in view of the definition of 'commandant officer' as given in section 3(v) of the act. so far as the denial of legal assistance is concerned, it was noted that the appellant admitted that major d.p. naikavde was named as .....

Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Naik Subedar Baleshwar Ram and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1990SC65; 1990CriLJ60a; [1990(60)FLR13]; JT1989(4)SC260; 1989(2)SCALE944; 1989Supp(2)SCC652; [1989]Supp2SCR19

..... 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 allegation at the stage of inquiry under rule 22 ..... 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 ..... in turn handed over the matter to military police for investigation and necessary action. after due inquiry a disciplinary action was initiated and inquiry under rule 22 of the army rules was undertaken. a general court martial followed where definite charges were given and ultimately on the basis of summary evidence available all the three persons were found .....

Ram Sarup Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1965SC247; 1965CriLJ236; [1964]5SCR931

..... 1. ram sarup, petitioner, was a sepoy in 131 platoon dsc, attached to the ordnance depot, shakurbasti. as a sepoy, he is subject to the army act, 1950 (xlvi of 1950), hereinafter called the act. 2. on june 13, 1962 he shot dead two sepoys, sheotaj singh and ad ram and one havildar pala ram. he was charged on three counts ..... accordance with it. magistrates can question it and the government, in case of difference of opinion between the views of the magistrate and the army authorities, decide the matter finally. 19. section 69 provides for the punishment which can be imposed on a person tried for committing any civil offence at any place in or beyond india ..... against whom the offence is committed. 24. lastly. it may be mentioned that the decision of the relevant military officer does not decide the matter finally. section 126 empowers a criminal court having jurisdiction to try an offender to require the relevant military officer to deliver the offender to the magistrate to be proceeded against .....

Balbir Singh and anr. Vs. State of Punjab

Court : Supreme Court of India

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

..... (46 of 1950), the navy act, 1957 (62 of 1957), and the air force act, 1950 (45 of 1950 ..... section 72 of the act (supra). it is here that section 475 cr.p.c, the 1952 rules and section 124 and 125 of the air force act come into operation.section 475 cr.p.c. reads as follows:475. delivery to commanding officers of persons liable to be tried by court-martial. - (1) the central government may make rules consistent with this code and the army act, 1950 ..... of the air force act, 1950 (hereinafter 'the act'), the provisions of section 475 of the crpc and criminal courts and court martial (adjustment of jurisdiction) rules, 1952 (hereinafter the '1952 rules')11. section 72 of the air force act (which corresponds to section 70 of the army act) provides as under:72 .....

Union of India and Others Vs. J.S. Brar

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1993SC773; JT1992(6)SC266; 1992(2)SCALE749; (1993)1SCC176; [1992]Supp1SCR916; 1993(2)SLJ77(SC); 1992(2)LC789(SC)

..... as let in fresh evidence on his behalf to rebut their evidence.2. the accused was charged with the offence punishable under section 69 of the army act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') read with section 379 of the indian penal code. two charges were framed against the accused in respect of articles alleged to had been ..... chatrath or any other witness. there was no failure of natural justice in any respect.11. we see no substance in the contention regarding jurisdiction. section 154 of the act says:section 154. power to confirm finding and sentence of general court-martial.-the findings and sentences of general courts-martial may be confirmed by the central ..... findings and sentences rendered by the gcm by order dated 29.8.1986. the accused thereupon filed a petition before the government of india under section 164(2) of the act. the government of india rejected the petition vide order dated 25.1.1988. these orders confirming the findings and sentences against the accused were .....

Justice P.D. Dinakaran Vs. Hon'Ble Judges Inquiry Committee

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... thakur v. union of india (1987)4scc611. in that case, the appellant had challenged his dismissal from service on the ground of violation of the provision contained in section 130 of the army act, 1950. the facts of that case were that the appellant, who was already serving sentence of 28 days rigorous imprisonment, is said to have committed another offence for which he ..... to summary court-martial and was dismissed from service. respondent no.4 who had earlier punished the appellant was a member of the summary court-martial in terms of section 130 of the army act, 1950. the appellant was entitled to object the presence of respondent no.4 in the summary court-martial, but this opportunity was not given to him. the writ petition .....

Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Vs. V.N. Saxena

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2008(4)ALD38(SC); JT2008(4)SC613; 2008(6)SCALE35; (2008)11SCC516; 2008AIRSCW2647; 2008LABIC2586; 2008(3)Supreme25; JT2008(4)SC613

..... the date when the impugned order was passed. no order as to costs.6. in harjeet singh sandhu's case (supra) the scope and ambit of the army act, 1950 (in short the 'act') and rule 40 of the army rules, 1954 (in short the 'rules') inter alia fell per consideration. this court also referred to earlier decision in chief of ..... ors. : [1996]3scr836 , the hon'ble apex court has held that where the trial by court-martial against the offences committed by an army personnel was barred by limitation under section 122 of the act, the summary procedure for termination under rule14(2) of the rules, cannot be followed on the ground that the trial by court-martial was ..... rule 14 having become available to be exercised on account of a trial by a court martial having been rendered impracticable on account of bar of limitation created by section 122, other considerations would assume relevance, such as - whether the facts or set of facts constituting misconduct being three years old or more have ceased to be .....

General Court Martial and ors. Vs. Col. Aniltej Singh Dhaliwal

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1998SC983; 1998(1)ALD(Cri)470; 1998(1)ALT(Cri)185; 1998CriLJ1402; 1998(1)Crimes62(SC); JT1998(4)SC228; 1997(7)SCALE717; (1998)1SCC756; [1997]Supp6SCR470; (1998)1UPLBEC24

..... (v) mt accidents resulting in fatal or serious casualities, accidents involving civilian vehicles resulting in damages to property or injuries to civilians or person subject to army act.(c) other serious cases e.g. unnatural deaths not covered under sub-para (b) above.24. it is quite obvious that the charge framed against ..... and affray where persons subject to army act are involved.(b) breaches of discipline :-(i) collective insubordination.(ii) suicide, attempted or suspected suicide; (iii) murder or an attempt to murder, (iv) ..... relevant part of it reads as follows :adjutant general's branchsao 13/s/so discipline-procedure for submission of reports regarding incidents and offences involving army personnel and for their investigationincidents and offences to be reported.1. the following incidents and offences will be reported :-(a) all cases of assault .....

Major R.S. Budhwar Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 1996IVAD(SC)213; AIR1996SC2000; 1996(2)ALD(Cri)226; 1996CriLJ2862; 1996(2)Crimes154(SC); JT1996(5)SC39; 1996(4)SCALE269; (1996)9SCC502; [1996]Supp2SCR528

..... dead) guilty of the above charge and awarded them punishment of imprisonment for life and cashiering. aggrieved thereby the appellant presented a petition under section 164(1) of the army act, 1950 ('act' for short) wherein he prayed that the findings and sentences recorded against him be not confirmed. the goc-in-c eastern command however rejected ..... that petition and confirmed the findings and sentences of the gcm. he then filed another petition in accordance with section 164(2) of the act which was ..... 10, 1988 the gcm held them guilty of the above offences and sentenced each of them to death. aggrieved thereby they presented petitions under section 164(1) of the army act ('act' for short) wherein they prayed that the findings and sentence of the gcm be not confirmed. those petitions were rejected and the findings .....