Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: army act 1950 section 37 mutiny Page 3 of about 71,895 results (0.297 seconds)

Union of India and Others Vs. Sadha Singh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1999SC3833; 1999(2)ALD(Cri)815; 2000CriLJ15; 1999(3)Crimes263(SC); JT1999(8)SC337; 1999(6)SCALE594; (1999)8SCC375; [1999]Supp4SCR28

..... by the respondent.3. respondent was awarded life imprisonment and dismissed from service by the general court martial after being tried for the of fence under section 302 i.p.c. and under section 69 of the army act, 1950. he preferred a writ petition in the high court for his immediate release from the imprisonment on the ground that he has undergone imprisonment exceeding ..... ' is near allied and 'thin partition do their bounds divide' the two are different, section 433a escapes the exclusion of section 5.7. in the present case, respondent was convicted under section 69 of the army act, 1950 for the of fence of murder. it is true that army act is a special act inter alia providing for investigation, trial and punishment for the of fences mentioned therein by .....

Major E.G. Barsay and ors. Vs. the State

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1958CriLJ1144

..... persons who are subject to the act, under section 3 (ii) 'civil offence' is defined as 'an offence which is triable by a criminal court', and ..... , the provisions of sections 125 and 126 of the army act read with the relevant rules framed under the act, have not been complied with.14. in order to examine these submissions, it would be necessary to deal in some detail with the provisions of the army act, 1950, and the rules made thereunder. section 2 (1) of the act gives a list of ..... that there are some irregularities and errors in the charge.13. the second point as regards the legality of the trial is raised under the provisions of the army act, 1950, by mr. purshottam on behalf of accused no. 1. that again is a point which has been raised for the first time in appeal challenging the jurisdiction .....

Madan Lal Vs. Union of India and anr.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 1998VIIAD(Delhi)65; 4(1998)CLT368; 75(1998)DLT750

..... the had been framed to meet the situation coming within the purview of sections 71, 72 and 73 of the army act, 1950. section 71 of the army act, 1950 deals with the punishment awardable by court-martial. the provision reads as under: section 71. punishment awardable by courts martial - punishment may be inflicted in respect ..... of offences committed by person subject to this act and convicted by court-martial, according to the scale following ..... date. 4. mr. aruneshwar gupta, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that having regard to the language of sections 71, 72 and 73 of the army act, 1950, the regulation which is non-statutory in nature cannot prevail over the statutory provisions. the learned counsel further submitted that the .....

Umesh Singh Alias Umesh Prasad Singh Vs. State of Bihar

Court : Patna

..... of 1966 and such amendment apply to west bengal also, (ii) expiry of period of three years of limitation prescribed for court-martial proceeding by section 122 of the army act, 1950 would not confer jurisdiction upon the ordinary criminal court if it did not have initial jurisdiction due to non compliance as required by the code and the rules and (iii) ..... necessary to take a look at the aforesaid provisions :--code section 475. delivery to commanding officers of persons liable to be tried by court-marital -- (1) the central government may make rules consistent with this code and 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 .....

Union of India and ors. Vs. Ex-gnr Ajeet Singh

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... army act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the army act'). after the conclusion of the gcm proceedings, the respondent was awarded punishment vide order dated 3.4.2003, as has been referred to hereinabove.d. the sentence awarded in the gcm was confirmed by the competent authority, i.e. chief of the army staff, while dealing with the petition under section 164(2) of the army act. ..... submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.6. relevant parts of the chargesheet issued to the respondent read as under:-i) charged under army act section 52(a)- theft of 30 grenade hand no.36 high explosive and160 rounds of 5.56 mm insas on 17/18.3.2002.ii) charged under ..... army act section 52(a) - theft of carbine machine gun 9 mm on 27.9.2002. iii) charged under army act section 39(a) - absent from duty without leave from 26.2.2002 to 8.3.2002.iv) charged under army act section 39(a) - absent from duty without leave from 12.6.2002 .....

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

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 95(2002)DLT770

..... issue a writ of mandamus and any other appropriate writ, order or direction, inter alia, commanding the respondent nos. 1 and 2, in accordance with section 165 of the army act, 1950, to annul the proceedings of the general court martial affecting the petitioner as they are mala-fide, irrational, unjust and illegal, and there has been ..... exercises conducted under it in 1977 and this was an offence under section 69 of the army act, 1950 read with section 3(1)(c) of the official secrets act, 1923. before general court martial gnr. aya singh and gnr. sarwan dass were produced as material witnesses. besides this, ..... petitioner had informed about orbt of 20 infantry division and 57 mountain division in 1967 and this was an offence under section 69 of the army act, 1950 read with section 3(1)(c) of the official secrets act, 1923. the second charge is the petitioner had passed information about orbat of 18 infantry division and details of .....

Major E.G. Barsay Vs. the State of Bombay

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1961SC1762; 1961CriLJ828; [1962]2SCR195

..... and that they should have been tried only by a court martial under the army act. 18. the argument of learned counsel for the appellant may be briefly stated thus : the army act, 1950 (46 of 1950) created new offences. section 52 of the said act created offences with which accused in the present case were charged, and provided a ..... question is whether he can make an investigation in regard to the offences alleged to have been committed by the accused in the present case. section 5a of the prevention of corruption act, 1950, on which reliance is placed reads : 'notwithstanding anything, contained in the code of criminal procedure, 1898, no police officer below the rank ..... given to the officer referred to in s. 125 of the act. 19. to appreciate the said argument it is necessary to scrutinize the provisions of the army act in some detail. section 2 describes the different categories of army personnel who are subject to the army act. section 3(ii) defines 'civil offence' to mean 'an offence which .....

In Re: A.A. Paul

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 1974CriLJ375

..... if he continued to be so subject. the very words relied on by the learned counsel clearly indicate that the accused contemplated under that section is really not subject to the army act, but the procedure for the trial of such person should be the same as in the case of a person who is still subject ..... person is subject to military, naval or air force law, the abovesaid rules would be attracted. section 2 of the army act mentions persons who are subject to the said act. sub-section (2) of that section says that every person subject to the said act shall remain so subject until duly retired, discharged, released, removed, dismissed or cashiered from the service ..... accused (revision petitioner) contends that in spite of the accused having retired from army service, he must be deemed to be subject to the army act by virtue of section 123 of the army act and so much so. the rules made by the central government under section 549 of the code of criminal procedure would be attracted.3. there can .....

Ex. No. 13672886-w Naik Natwar Lal Harjiwan Das Vs. Union of India (Uo ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : (2004)1UPLBEC266

..... reasons for my conclusion, some of the relevant provisions of the army act and rules may be reproduced below:--the army, 1950--'section 120. powers of summary courts martial.--(1) subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), a summary court martial may try any offence punishable under this act.(2) where there is no grave reason for immediate action and ..... for but supplied to the petitioner for the first time alongwith the order dated 10.4.1993, that is after the decision on the petition under section 165 of the army act. thus, it is established from the record that the copy of the proceedings were not supplied to the petitioner within a reasonable time as required ..... the commandant had been taken before the commencement of the summary court martial on 10.3.1992 and thus, the proceedings were in accordance with section 120(2) of the army act read with para 459 of the regulations; and that adequate opportunity was afforded to the petitioner and he was given opportunity to cross-examine the .....

Ram Dev Prasad Singh Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 1995IIIAD(Delhi)622; 59(1995)DLT693; 1995(34)DRJ552

..... inflicted on him for which purpose respondent found him undesirable and, thereforee, decided to discharge him from service. the punishment imposed on the petitioner was under section 63 of the army act while serving in field. he had brought an unauthorised person (women) in unit lines for illegitimate purposes. thereforee, imprisoned for 28 days and 14 ..... was awarded 14 days imprisonment in military custody because of using criminal force to a santry on duty. he was awarded seven days detention under section 46(a) of the army act because he urinated in a container in front of the sentries and threw towards quarter guard of the day. this was treated as a ..... insubordinate language to his superior officer he was imprisoned for 28 days in military custody which was under section 40(c) of the army act. he also suffered 28 days ri in military custody under section 39(a) of the army act for absenting himself without due permission from the unit lines. for threatening the superior officer he was .....