R K GOGNA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Trial by General Court Martial was ordered against the petitioner by the respondents. In the said General Court Martial the petitioner was tried on a total of eight charges, six of which were under section 63 of the Army Act for acts prejudicial to good order and military discipline whereas one of the charges was under section 45 of the Army Act for behaving in a manner unbecoming of his position and the character expected of him and one under section 69 of the Army Act for committing civil offence i.e. of abetting an offence specified in section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. The court returned a verdict of "not guilty" on all the eight charges. Thereupon the General Officer Commanding 21 Corps, who had ordered the General Court Martial, ordered a Revision General Court Martial, after which the court again returned a verdict of "not guilty" on all the charges. The findings of the General Court Martial were confirmed in respect of the First and Third charges and not confirmed on the other charges namely Charges No. 2,4,6, 7 & 8 as according to the Confirming Authority the findings on the remaining six charges are not supported by the evidence on record. By a communication dated 6.6.1996, the respondents issued a show cause notice to the petitioner purportedly under section 19 of the Army Act read with Army Rule 14 intimating the petitioner that the Chief of Army Staff who is the. Competent Authority to confirm the findings of the General Court Martial had confirmed the said findings only in respect of the First and Third charges but had not confirmed the same in respect of charges No. 2, 4 and 5 to 8 being against the evidence. It was also intimated that in view of the aforesaid position it was found by the Competent Authority that further retention of services of the petitioner was undesirable and against the interest of the organisation. The petitioner was accordingly directed to show cause as to why his services should not be terminated in terms of the provisions of section 19 of the Army Act read with Rule 14 of the Army Rules.

(2.) The petitioner submitted a ieply to the aforesaid show cause notice. However, in the meantime another show cause notice was issued to the petitioner dated 21.8.1997 whereby the petitioner was Informed that from the records of the Court of Enquiry it was revealed that a vehicle-Shaktiman from the Brigade Headquarters of the petitioner was used for removal of wood from the Government Forest. It was also alleged that the petitioner knowing or having reason to believe that an offence had been committed with an intention of screening the offenders from legal punishment, caused suppression of the evidence in this respect and therefore, the facts and circumstances as brought out in the said Court of Inquiry when viewed in totality would go to show that the conduct of the petitioner had been unbecoming of an officer. The petitioner was, therefore, informed that the Chief of Army Staff, the Competent Authority had directed the petitioner to show cause as to why his misconduct should not be suitably censured.

(3.) The petitioner submitted a reply to the aforesaid show cause notice also. It transpired from the records that both the aforesaid replies were considered by the Chief of the Army Staff and found that his replies to the statements contained in the aforesaid two show cause notice were not satisfactory. After considering the entire matter the Chief of the Army Staff conveyed to the petitioner severe displeasure holding that while evaluating the over all conduct of the officer in this episode the acts of commission and omission in so far as in the 'cover up' operations as also in instigating the subordinate to give false evidence had been established beyond doubt. The said communication was dated 31.12.1997. The present writ petition was filed in this court on 2.2.1998. In the aforesaid writ petition the petitioner challenged the legality of the show cause notices dated 6.6.1996 under section 19 of the Army Act read with Rule 14 of the Army Rules and also the second show cause notice dated 21.8.1997 which was issued in respect of the censure proceedings.