Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2019 (7) TMI SC This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2019 (7) TMI 1841 - SC - Indian Laws


Issues:
- Allegation of misconduct leading to dismissal from service
- Appeal challenging the punishment and seeking modification
- Interpretation of Section 120 of the Army Act, 1950 regarding convening of Summary Court Martial
- Review of previous judgments related to convening SCM and recording reasons

Allegation of Misconduct and Dismissal:
The appellant, enlisted in the 43 Armed Brigade, faced a Summary Court Martial (SCM) resulting in dismissal for allegedly entering a colleague's residence and inappropriately touching the colleague's spouse. The Armed Forces Tribunal upheld the charge but found the punishment disproportionate, modifying it to discharge.

Appeal and Challenge:
The appellant's counsel argued that the incident was fabricated as retaliation for the appellant reporting misconduct by the victim's spouse. The appellant also questioned the timing of the SCM, citing precedents like Ex Havildar Ratan Singh vs Union of India & Ors and Union of India vs Vishav Priya Singh, emphasizing the necessity of immediate action for convening an SCM.

Interpretation of Section 120 of Army Act, 1950:
Section 120 of the Army Act, 1950 was central to the legal arguments, defining the powers of summary courts-martial. The judgment referenced previous cases to highlight the importance of immediate action and the rare exercise of convening an SCM, emphasizing the need for specific reasons for its initiation.

Review of Previous Judgments:
The judgment delved into the interpretation of Section 120, referencing Ex-Havildar Ratan Singh and Vishav Priya Singh cases. A subsequent review clarified that the requirement of recording reasons for convening an SCM applies from 5 July 2016. The court emphasized the drastic nature of the power to order an SCM and the necessity for immediate action.

Conclusion:
The court concluded that the SCM convened in this case was contrary to law due to the lack of immediate action. Despite finding in favor of the appellant, the court acknowledged the practical difficulty in pursuing the matter after twelve years. In the interest of justice, the appellant was directed to be discharged after completing fifteen years of service, making him eligible for pension benefits. The appeal was allowed, modifying the Tribunal's order accordingly.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates