SAVANT PURUSHOTTAM VLTTAL RAO Vs. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITION was an Officer holding permanent commission in the regular army. He was holding a substantive rank of Lieutenant Col. (time scale) with effect from 31. 7. 1984. This promotion came to be cancelled while Court Martial Proceedings was in progress and was reverted back to the rank of Major. In this petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, petitioner calls in -question the correctness or otherwise of the sentence imposed by General Court martial in dismissing him from service and the order made by Chief of the Army Staff in confirming the sentence imposed by the General court Martial.

(2.) THE brief facts are:while petitioner was working as Accounts Officer of Depot battalion, Madras Engineering Group and Centre with effect from 1. 11. 1983 to 12. 11. 1983 and 21. 11. 1983 to 19. 12. 1983, the General officer Commanding, Andhra Pradesh, Tamilnadu, Karnataka, and kerala Area, had passed an order dated 19. 10. 1986 convening for the assembly of General Court Martial to try certain offences said to have been committed by him. The Judge, Advocate and Prosecutor was also named for the purpose of trying the petitioner by the Court martial. The General Court Martial has power to try any person subject to the Army Act for any offence punishable therein and award any sentence authorised thereby. After following the initial procedure before the trial by Court Martial the General Court Martial had prepared a document, which contained the issues to be tried by the court Martial. In Military Law, this document is normally known as charge sheet or charge memo and this contained three charges and each charge is divided into two parts, namely, (I) Statement of the offence and (II) Statement of the particulars of the act, neglect or omission constituting the offence. The charge memo so framed is as under:

(3.) THE first two charges come within the provisions of Section63 of the Army Act and the third charge falls under Section 39 (a) of the Act. Before the Genera) Court Martial, certain witnesses were examined in support of the allegations made in the charge memo and the accused Army Officer had examined two witnesses. The general Court Martial after conclusion of its proceedings, has recorded a finding which reads as under: findings