GAJRAJ SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner was commissioned in the Indian Army on 9-6-1968 as Second Lieutenant in Army Service Group. He was promoted from time to time and rose up to the rank of Colonel from which post he retired on 31-5-94. During the period May, 1990 to 31-10-1991 petitioner was posted as Commandant 4 Reserve Petroleum Depot, Delhi Cantt. He made local purchase of Hygiene Chemical for supply to various units dependent on the aforesaid depot where petitioner was posted. On 31.10.92 petitioner was transferred to ASC Centre North Gaya, Bihar. In May, 1993 after the transfer of the petitioner from 4 Reserve Petroleum Depot, Delhi Cantt. two technical inquiries were conducted into the aforesaid purchases made by the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that he was not called to give evidence in the said inquiries nor was found blame worthy on any account. However, on 7-5-94 a high level Staff Court of Inquiry was ordered by Western Command of Army to inquire into the alleged irregularities committed in the aforesaid purchase of Hygiene Chemical. The petitioner was awarded commendation by General Officer. In the English translation of the relevant portion of the said commendation certificate reads as under:

(2.) Thereafter, the petitioner retired from Indian Army on 31-5-94 with full retiral and beneficiary benefits and started drawing pension w.e.f. 1-6-94. However, the high level Staff Court of Inquiry which was constituted on 7-5-94, assembled on 6-6-94 and on subsequent dates for recording the statement of concerned persons. The petitioner was summoned before the said Inquiry under Section 135 of the Army Act and gave his statement as Witness No.24 on 23.8.94. On 23.8.94 the Court of Inquiry expressed definite opinion against the petitioner stating that the local purchases of Hygiene Chemical made by the petitioner were totally illegal. The said Inquiry had, before forming this opinion, given opportunity to the petitioner under Army Rule 180 identifying him as an accused and he was allowed to cross-examine various witnesses. It appears that on the basis of the opinion dated 23.8.'94 expressed by the Inquiry Committee, the pension of the petitioner was stopped w.e.f. 1-10-96. Petitioner filed writ petition being CWP.No.19649/96 in the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh against the aforesaid order and restoration of this pension which was allowed by the said High Court vide order dated 1-5-97 and his pension was restored. Petitioner had received an invitation from Army Authorities to attend passing out function at the indian Military Academy which he attended on 7.6.97.

(3.) Petitioner was arrested by the Civil Police at the behest of Army Authorities on 21.9.97. He preferred Habeas Corpus writ against theaforesaid detention in this Court being CrI.W. 704/97 and on 1.10.97 order was passed by this Court directing release of the petitioner. It was on an undertaking given by the brother of the petitioner, who had filed the writ petition, to the effect that petitioner would appear before the authorities during the recording of summary of evidence. This order was passed subject to the petitioner's right to raise such pleas as may be available to him in law and without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the petitioner. Thereafter, respondents passed order of attachment dated 8.10.97 under the provisions of Al-30/96 attaching the petitioner to COD, Delhi Cantt. till finalisation of disciplinary case against him. Tentative charge-sheet dated16.1.98 was served upon the petitioner initiating disciplinary proceedings against him invoking Section 123 of the Army Act. The allegations contained in the charges in this charge-sheet relate to the local purchase of Hygiene Chemical which the petitioner made during the period May,1990 to 31.10.91 while working as Commandant 4 Reserve Petroleum Depot, Delhi Cantt. These charges are framed under Section 52(f) and Section 63 of the Army Act readwith Section 25 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner has filed this petition challenging the initiation of the said enquiry.