Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1963MP249; 1963CriLJ161; 1963MPLJ382
..... no. 48 of 1950), hereinafter called 'the army act', offences have been categorised into four categories ..... army act offences, the liability of an offender committing them to be tried by a court-martial does not arise unless and until he is 'charged therewith' under the sections, i.e., unless and until formal charges contained in a charge-sheet have been drawn up.6. to appreciate the contentions a few more factsmay now be noted.under the scheme of the army act, 1950 (act ..... in an ordinary criminal court of a civil offence. in spite of the fact that the civil offence is deemed to be an army act offence under section 69 of the army act, if the contention of the learned counsel for the non-applicant be correct, it cannot be sent for trial to a court-martial .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2002(1)MPHT52; 2002(2)MPLJ78
..... his unit well knowing that the concession voucher book (iaft-1720a) bearing machine number from 91l 812100 had been lost by him.third charge : army act, section 63 : an act prejudicial to good order and military discipline.in that he,at field, on 27 march, 2000, when examined as a witness at summary of evidence ..... deficient of concession voucher book (iaft-1720a) containing one hundred forms bearing machine number 91l-812100, the property of the government entrusted to him.second charge: army act, section 57(d): where it was his officialduty to make a declaration respecting a matter knowingly making a false declaration.in that he,at chandigarh, on 25th ..... second charge sheet which has been issued to the petitioner contains the first charge under section 54(b) of army act. the second charge is under section 57(d) of army act and third charge relates to the violation of section 63 of the army act. the charges which are levelled against the petitioner in the undergoing disciplinary enquiry are .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1980MP129; 1980MPLJ729
..... supra). it appears that what weighed with their lordships in air 1969 sc 414 was the provisions contained in the army act and their lordships, after examining the provisions contained in sections 164 and 165 of the army act felt that neither there was an obligation to state reasons specifically, nor by necessary implication it could be inferred, ..... supra) their lordships of the supreme court held that an order passed by the chief of army staff confirming the proceedings of court martial under section 164 of the army act and the central government's order under section 165 of the army act dismissing the petitioner's appeal could not be set aside merely because they were not speaking orders ..... oral hearing is not an essential attribute of natural justice: local government board v. arlidge 1915 ac 120 and a.k. gopalan v. state, air 1950 sc 27. whether the opportunity to show cause should be by written representation or by personal hearing depends on the facts of each case and ordinarily it will .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1973MP191; (1972)IILLJ611MP
..... general court martial, and confirmed by the general officer command-in-chief, central command, lucknow, punishing the petitioner for an offence under section 41(2) of the army act, 1950 (hereinafter called the act).29. the facts in detail have been stated in the order of my learned brother, and it would not be worthwhile to repeat ..... the discussion aforesaid, i would allow the present petition with costs and would quash the impugned order imposing punishment on the petitioner for violation of section 41(2) of the army act, 1950. as the petitioner did not commit any offence whatsoever, there would be no question of any re-trial. therefore, after quashing the said ..... during the investigation before the court of inquiry could never form the subject-matter of a command much less a lawful command, as envisaged by section 41(2) of the army act, 1950. therefore, with due respect to the learned members constituting the general court-martial, i would stress that as the petitioner's presence or .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1972MPLJ449
..... the discussion aforesaid, i would allow the present petition with costs and would quash the impugned order imposing punishment on the petitioner for violation of section 41(2) of the army act, 1950. as the petitioner did not commit any offence whatsoever, there would be no question of any retrial. therefore, after quashing the said order ..... the investigation before the court of inquiry could never form the subject-matter of a command, much less a lawful command, as envisaged by section 41(2) of the army act, 1950. therefore, with due respect to the learned members constituting the general court-martial, 1 would stress that as the petitioner's presence or otherwise ..... said order and whether it would amount to a lawful command, as contemplated by section 41 of the army act. it may be relevant to reproduce section 41(2) of the army act, 1950, which is asfollows:section 41(1)...(2).-any person subject to this act who disobeys any lawful command given by his superior officer shall, on conviction by .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1992(0)MPLJ229
..... authorisation on the basis of a-i warrant is not valid as no general empowerment can be done by the chief of the army staff in exercise of powers under section 109 of the army act. sections 109 and 111 of the army act read as under : -'109. power to convene a general court-martial - a general court-martial may be convened by the ..... that there were 12 main charges and 12 charges in the alternative. in the final charge-sheet these alternative charges have not been mentioned and only 12 charges under section 52 of the army act have been mentioned. in s. n. mukherjee v. union of india, air 1990 sc 1984, in para 54, it has been observed that when alternative ..... contrary to ar 44(e)even before the swearing or affirming of members in pursuance of ar 45. the court could only be dissolved as per section 117(3) of the army act (for short the 'act'). as regards the court of enquiry, it was contended that ar 180 was violated. complete proceedings containing the documents filed in the court of enquiry .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2001(1)MPHT72
..... if that officer decides that they should be in-stituted before a court-martial, to direct that the accused person shall be detained in military custody.' section 126 of the army act provides that:--'when a criminal court having jurisdiction is of opinion that proceedings shall be instituted before itself in respect of any alleged offence, it may, by ..... . it is also manifest that for the offence alleged against the petitioners, the special judge as well as the court-martial have a concurrent jurisdiction. section 125 of the army act provides that:--'when a criminal court and a court-martial have each jurisdiction in respect of an offence, it shall be in the discretion of the ..... of the above provisions clearly indicates that if the ordinary criminal court decides to try accused who is subject to army act, it will have to give notice to the army authorities as envisaged in sections 125 and 126 of the army act and the rules 3 and 4 of the said rules.8. shri r.s. patel, learned counsel appearing .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1988CriLJ597
..... e. goc central command, lucknow, directed the gcm to reconsider the question regarding sentence which was too linient, by exercising revisional powers under section 160 of the army act, 1950, (hereinafter referred to as the act). the petitioner was then given a notice by gcm on 18-9-1986 directing to appear on 25-9-1986 for reconsideration of the sentences ..... be, we find no merit in the contentions sought to be raised by way of amendments, thereby challenging some more provisions of the army act and the army rules. validity of sections 158 and 160 of the act has been upheld by the supreme court in harish uppal v. union of india 1973 cri lj 274 (supra). there is no ..... as to ensure the proper discharge of their duties and the maintenance of discipline among them. therefore, the parliament h as enacted army act of 1950. validity of a law made under this article such as army act cannot be challenged on the ground of contravention of any of the fundamental rights i.e. article 14 or 16 or 19. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1991(0)MPLJ985
..... challenging conviction and sentences of the petitioners in court martial proceedings for alleged offences said to have been committed by them under sections 37(c), 38(1) and 63 of the army act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act').4. in the sikh regiment centre at ramgarh on 10-6-1984 soldiers waged a mutiny and looted the arms in ..... 4) no. 3381905 sepoy hakum singh all of the sikh regimental centre, attached with adm. bn. the jammu and kashmir rifles regimental centre are charged with :first charge army act, section 37(c) against all accused persons being present at a mutiny in the military forces of india, not using their utmost endeavours to suppress the same, in that they ..... battalion kotes. the cause of mutiny in the sikh regiment was said to be the entry of the indian army in the precinct of the golden .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1993(0)MPLJ71
..... that 'the complainant on the report of investigation and opinion of the court of inquiry by his order dated 28-3-1986, charge-sheeted the accused under section 69 of the army act'. that order is, however, not produced. indeed, no materials are produced as would have enabled this court to screen the decision-making process which resulted in ..... apply for separate court martials to hold separate trial. in s.n. mukherjee, air 1990 sc 1984, also a case under the army act, the amenability of any decision-making process under the act and the rules to judicial review is stressed by the constitution bench, observing that recording of reasons is necessary to impart the process ..... own perception of his duty and of the possible consequences of his disobeying the command which would have exposed him the risk of suffering punishment under section 41 of the act. his act was not tainted by malice and it was done in good faith without any premeditation with the singular object of carrying out the command of .....
Tag this Judgment!