Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kochi
..... , the respondents pray for dismissal of the original application. 3. though the applicant has produced documents to show that before joining territorial army he was working in the border security force from 1.4.1988 to 1.1.1993, this aspect was not brought to the notice of the officer concerned at the time of enrolment in the territorial army. ..... 5 years and 238 days were embodied service and an unembodied service of 3 years and 104 days. as there is no entry regarding previous service in the border security force in the discharge certificate issued by territorial army it is not possible for us to tack on that service also while considering this matter. annexure a3 produced by ..... subsequently joined in 106 infantry battalion (ta) para, bangalore as a g.d.soldier on 23.8.1994. he was discharged on 30.7.2003 under territorial army act rule 14(b)(iii) of 1948, as service no longer required being rmb category s1h1a1p1e2. the applicant has rendered 5 years and 238 days of embodied service out of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kochi
..... proceedings. we do not find the sentence of `dismissal' disproportionate to the offence committed. on the contrary, the respondents have been lenient considering the overall security environment when the petitioner overstayed leave. we do not find anything to support the various allegation made by the petitioner regarding the court of inquiry, summary ..... . 18. the entire indian army was deployed in a near war like situation from january 2002 to march 2003 in their operational locations along the borders. this was consequent to the attack on the parliament in december 2001 by terrorists. petitioner himself has admitted in his petition that he was `posted ..... more than six months have elapsed after submission of the complaint. section 15 of the armed forces tribunal act 2007 states the tribunal shall exercise from the appointed day, all jurisdiction, powers and authority exercisable under this act in relation to appeal against any order, decision, finding or sentence passed by a court martial .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kochi
..... orders or give such directions as may be necessary or expedient to give effect to its orders or to prevent abuse of its process or to secure the ends of justice. . t.a. no.84 of 2009 was filed by the applicant, anu.v.r., for the following reliefs, viz ..... entitled to rs.10 lakhs towards ex-gratia, since the death of her husband had occurred while he was on duty, which is attributable to acts of violence. so, under such circumstances, it is clarified that as per order in t.a.no.84/2009 dated 14.5.2010, the ..... in course of dutiesrs.10.00 lakhs(b)death in the course of duties attributable to acts of violence by terrorists, etc.rs.10.00 lakhs(c)death occurring during enemy action in war or border skirmishes or in action against militants, terrorists, etc.rs.15.00 lakhs(d)death occurring ..... a.c.a. adityan, member (j): 1. this application has been filed under rule 25 of the armed forces tribunal (procedure) rules 2008, which reads as follows: 25. powers of the tribunal with regard to certain orders and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kochi
..... did so with the intention to outrage her modesty. in our view, the court rightly concluded the matter with the finding that the charge under section 71 of the air force act read with section 354 ipc (charge no.1) was proved beyond all reasonable doubts against the accused. we, therefore, affirm the finding of the court on the said ..... as it was triable by the regular criminal court. in this connection mr.chandrajeet yadav tried to contend that according to the provisions of section 72 of the air force act, 1950, the trial ought to have been held by the criminal court and not by the court martial. in order to appreciate the submission we consider it just ..... story. 27. the second submission of the learned counsel for the accused was that, the court wrongly concluded that the second charge under section 65 of the air force act 1950 was made out. even if it is proved that the accused failed to ensure the presence of a female attendant while examining the prosecutrix, which was contrary to .....
Tag this Judgment!