K P SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for an order for setting aside and quashing the general court martial proceedings and convening orders with charge sheet and summary of evidence as contained in Annexure P-35 to the writ petition.

(2.) . It is stated in the writ petition that the aforesaid convening order of the general court martial is violative of the provisions of Rule 43 of the Air Force Rules. It was also submitted that subjection of the petitioner to warning on 17/12/1997, initial trial under section 86 of the Air Force Act on 26/6/1998 and then before General Court Martial during 23/9/1999 and 28/9/1999 in breach of provisions of the Air Force Rules for same and similar accusations with different charge sheets is wholly opposed to the principles of natural justice and law. It was also submitted that the Convening Order having not been issued under authority and signatures of the competent Convening Officer and being issued by one Air Commodore J.S.Sandhu, who is not the competent authority is illegal, void and incompetent and therefore, the entire proceedings of the General Court Martial stand vitiated. It was also the submission that the entire proceedings before the General Court Martial is vitiated by violation of the principles of natural justice and hence the present petition.

(3.) . In the writ petition several grounds have been cited on the basis of which it is prayed that the entire proceedings of the General Court Martial and the Convening Order with Charge sheet and summary of evidence are required to be quashed. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order convening the Court Martial was not issued by the Competent Officer and therefore, the said order is required to be quashed and the entire Court Martial proceedings stand vitiated. In support of his contention the learned counsel relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India and Others Vs. Harish Chandra Goswami, JT 1999(3) 324. Counsel appearing for the petitioner also submitted that the petitioner having been already reprimanded for the same offences for which the General Court Martial has now been convened, the punishment proposed subject to confirmation pursuant to the charge sheet and summary of evidence as contained in Annexure P-35 is illegal and violative of principles of natural justice and also amounts to double jeopardy. He further submitted that there were several violations in convening and holding the General Court Martial and therefore, the said proceedings are liable to be quashed.