Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: army act 1950 section 166 form of sentence of death Page 54 of about 564 results (0.052 seconds)

secretary,govt.of India . Vs. Dharambir Singh

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... subject to this act, means the time during which such person (a) is attached to, or forms part of, a force which is ..... the respective arguments of learned counsel for the parties, the provisions of the army act, 19508, notification issued by the central government on november 29, 1962, rules and regulations which are applicable in respect of grant of disability pension need to be extracted hereunder: army act, 1950 section 3 (i) (i) active service , as applied to a person ..... - new delhi, the 28th november 1962 in exercise of the powers conferred by section 9 of the army act, 1950 (46 of 1950), the central government hereby declares that all persons subject to that act, who are not on active service under clause (i) of section 3 thereof, shall, wherever they may be serving, be deemed to be on .....

ex.link Vishav Priya Singh vs.uoi

Court : Delhi

..... punishment of dismissal into discharge by the central government is not illegal and is within the powers of the central government. the petitioner had submitted a petition under section 164(2) of the army act 1950 against the findings and sentence awarded by the scm. the government of india after due consideration of the petition had directed that the punishment of dismissal awarded to ..... were supplied to the petitioner i.e on july 10, 1991. it is the case of the petitioner, on august 09, 1991, the petitioner submitted his petition under section 164(2) of the army act, 1950 against his w.p.(c) no.2511/1992 page 4 of 41 wrongful dismissal but no reply was received for the same. he accordingly, approached this court by .....

Abhimaya Basumatary Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Guwahati

..... (air 1969 sc 414) laid down as follows :- 'in the present case, it is manifest that there is no express obligation imposed by section 164 or by section 165 of the army act on the confirming authority or upon the central government to give reasons in support of its decision to confirm the proceedings of the court martial. mr ..... proceedings or reduce the sentence to any other sentence which the court might have passed.' 48. from a bare reading of section 115 of bsf act and section 162 of the army act, it is clear that both these sections are similarly worded. 49. apart from the fact that in nirmal chandra das's case (supra), there is no clear ..... aside the proceedings, or reduce the sentence to any other sentence which the court might have passed.' (emphasis is added) 47. let me also quote hereinabelow section 162 of the army act ;- 'the proceedings of every summary court-martial shall without delay be forwarded to the officer commanding the division or brigade within which the trial was held, .....

Narendra Pal Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : (2001)3UPLBEC2253

..... , j.1. the petitioner while borne in the books of 13 garhwal rifles as a rifleman holding the rank of acting lance nayak was chargesheeted vide charge-sheet dated 18.6.1993 under section 52 of the army act, 1950 for having committed theft in respect of carbine, machinegun 9 m.m. regd. no. zz-1945, the property of ..... courts martial arc of four kinds : (a) general courts martial; (b) district courts martial; (c) summary general courts martial; and (d) summary courts martial (section 108 of the army act, 1950). as visualized by section 116 of the act the summary court martial may be held by the commanding officer of any corps, department or detachment of the regular ..... a district court martial namely, central government or chief of the army staffer any officer authorised by the chief of the army staff who is competent to convene a general court martial and a district court martial, as provided by section 115 of the army act, 1950. summary court martial in the instant was not convened by an .....

Krishan Dahiya Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (1996)114PLR468

..... issued, the respondents have filed their reply.2. it is not disputed on behalf of the respondents that an officer, subject to the army act, while he is on casual leave is considered to be on duty. moreover, in view of the judgment of the apex court in joginder ..... v. secretary defence, and ors., 1991(1) s.l.r. 678, it cannot be even disputed that an officer subject to the army act while on casual leave is to be treated on duty. the only ground for denying disability pension to the petitioner as is clear from ..... leave was to spend for travelling from his own pocket, he would not be treated on duty. if a person subject to army act is considered to be on duty while on casual leave, it would not make any difference whether he travels from duty station to ..... writ petition is liable to succeed. as observed above it is not disputed and rather admitted that while a person subject to the army act is on casual leave, he is to be treated on duty. the only question is that if he is travelling to and fro .....

Paramjit Singh Kohli Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in : 2007(3)JKJ202

..... he raised the 'plea-in-bar' before the general court martial in terms of rule 53 of the army rules for submitting that his trial was barred by limitation in view of the provisions contained in section 122 of the army act, 1950. the plea set up by the petitioner was opposed to by the prosecution in its reply filed on 14 ..... order no. 24000/35/sim/q1 (ops) dt 17 jan 2001, please advise further action.17. in terms of clauses (b) & (c) of sub-section 1 of section 122 of the army act, the period of limitation would start to run from the date the competent authority acquires the knowledge of commission of the offence or of the person who committed ..... the petitioner was also served with the charge sheet dated 31.5.2004 and its schedules, whereby he was charged for commission of the offences contemplated by section 52(f) and section 63 of army act for his various commissions and omissions while serving as assistant director, supplies & transport, hq 21, sub area. the essence of the charges is that he .....

Sulekha Rani Vs. Union of India

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... not appealed against in accordance with the provisions of law. the learned asg has submitted that the decision in dharam singh (supra) deals with the provisions of 4 army act 4 rule 14(b) and hence may not have application. moreover it was urged that the spouse of the appellant had an ectopic kidney and his condition was ..... the person to be discharged belongings except that in the case of junior commissioned officer and warrant officers of the special medical section of the army medical corps, the commanding officer means the director of the medical services, army, and in the case of junior commissioned officer and warrant officers of remounts, veterinary and farms, corps, the commanding ..... to non-availability of a sheltered appointment in the unit, he may be discharged in a manner that would enable him to obtain other service in the civilian section. on the basis of this response, it was urged that the jawan had in fact accepted his discharge and as a result, there was no necessity to .....

Union of India and ors. Vs. Naresh Chandra Nath

Court : Guwahati

..... before the general court martial (gcm in short) on 31.12.1985. since 31.12.1985 happened to be the date of retirement of the respondent, section 123(1) of the army act, 1950 was invoked. in the trail, besides exhibiting a large number of documents, as many as 11 witnesses were examined in support of the charge. the ..... to be cashiered and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3 (three) months subject to confirmation. the respondent presented a post-confirmation petition under section 164(1) of the army act to the chief of army staff, who confirmed the findings of the gcm but commuted the sentence of chasiering andthree months; rigorous imprisonment to dismissal from service by his ..... to the respondent vide annexure-b dated 12.12.1986, and it was promulgated on 15.12.1986 vide annexure-c. the respondent's petition under section 164(2) of the army act to the central government was also rejected. this was communciated to him vide annexure-d dated 28.9.1988. the respondent filed the instant writ .....

Ex Hav Ashok M Rao Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Principal Bench New Delhi

..... very ambiguous as regards the amount alleged to have been found from his possession; (e) the appellant should have been arraigned under the prevention of corruption act and not under army act section 69 by the sgcm; and (e) the findings arrived at by the sgcm were merely on conjectures and surmises and there was no evidence worth ..... the delhi high court challenging the order dated 3.7.2006 passed by the summary general court martial, whereby he was held guilty of having committed an offence under army act section 69 and sentenced (a) to be reduced to the ranks; (b) to be dismissed from service; and (c) to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years in ..... the 1988 is not established against the appellant. 8. viewed in this light, the appeal is allowed. the conviction and sentence under army act section 69 read with section 5(2) of the prevention of corruption act 2006 (1949 ad)(jandk) is set aside. the appellant shall be deemed to have been discharged from service and is entitled to all .....

Md Najrul Islam Vs. the Union of India, Service Through the Secretary, ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kolkata

..... in accordance with the rule. 14. fourthly, learned advocate for the applicant further argued that summary court martial proceeding is vitiated due to non compliance of section 120(2) of the army act. so far as this proceeding is concerned it appears that the commanding officer of the unit conducted the summary court martial and it is who can only ..... of the penalty imposed, would remain undisturbed. 11. so it appears that the law as enunciated by the apex court is clear on this point that section 130 of the army act is not at all applicable so far as summary court martial proceeding is concerned. since the delhi high court considered the original judgment, as passed by the ..... . true it is that the honble apex court in the decision as reported in air 1987 s c 2386 (supra) has held that non-compliance of section 130 of the army act by not asking the accused as to whether he had any objection regarding the formation of the summary court martial proceeding, will vitiate the entire proceeding and .....