LAWS(DLH)-2001-5-14

UNION OF INDIA Vs. CAPTAIN S S MEHTA

Decided On May 21, 2001
UNION OF INDIA Appellant
V/S
CAPTAIN S.S.MEHTA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Clause X of lettrers Patent is directed against the Judgement dated 27/05/1998 of a Single Judge of this Court in Writ Pet ition No. 720 of 1995 quashing the sentence awarded by the General Court Martial to the respondent

(2.) Shorn of verbiage, facts giving rise to this appeal are that a general court martial under the Army Act (fort short 'the Act') was convened to try the respondent for having voluntarily caused hurt to Sepoy Driver (M. T. ) Bhoop Singh on the night intervening 18/19-11-1988. After conclusion of the Court Martial proceedings, the respondent was held guilty of the said offence and was sentenced to take rank and precedence as if his appointment as substantive Captain bore dated 30/08/1983 and to forfeit, one year of service for,the purpose of promotion. The sentence passed against the respondent. was confirmed by the confirming authority as required under I he Act vide orders dated 8/02/1991 . On, 30/06/1993, the respondent filed a petition under Section 164(2) of the Act against his conviction and sentence and the same was considered and dismissed by the Central Government vide orders dated 18/07/1994. On 23/02/1995, the respondent filed a writ petition being Writ Petition No.720/95 challenging validity of his conviction and sentence awarded by the General Court Martial. The learned Single Judge, on re-appreciation of the evidence produced before the General Court Martial, concluded that there (A/BS no evidence to sustain the respondent's convict ion and sentence. He, therefore, allowed the writ petition and set aside the respondent's conviction and Sentence. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant has/filed the present- appeal

(3.) Assailing validity of the impugned Judgment, the learned counsel for the appellant has strenuously urged that the learned Single Judge has committed a patent illegality by setting aside the respondent "s conviction and sentence on re-appraisal of the evidence adduced by the prosecution before the General Court Martial. We find considerable force in the said submission or the learned counsel. It is well settled that the proceedings in respect of court martial can be quashed in exercise of power of Judicial review if they suffer from a Jurisdictional error or any error of law apparent on the face of the record. (S.N. Mukherjee Vs. UOI) AIR 1990 SC 1984; Ex-Major R.S. Budhwar Vs. UOT & Anrs. 58 (1995) DLT 339 D.B. and Balwan Singh Vs. (JOT and Ors. 2000 (87) DLT 229 D.B. ).