LAXMAN SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Lance Dafedar Laxman Singh, the petitioner has assailed the order of the General Court Martial (in short GCM) on the ground of non complying of the provision of Army Rules which are mandatory in nature. These provisions, according to the petitioner, were to be complied with by the Commanding Officer, before the General Court Martial was held and since these provisions d in particular the Rule 22 having not been complied with the General Court Martial proceedings stand vitiated and consequently the sentence passed against him vide order dated 10th December, 1983 and confirment order dated 17th April, 1984 are liable to be set aside.

(2.) In order to appreciate the contentions of the petitioner, the brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was posted in 1983 as Lance Dafedar at 73 Armoured Regiment at Patiala. Along with him Lance Dafedars Amrik Singh and Malkiat Singh were also posted. In the first week of December 1982, one Armoured Brigade left for collective training exercise from their place of location at Patiala. The petitioner was employed as NCO Incharge Canteen Store Department and his co-accused Lance Dafedar Malkiat Singh was employed as an orderely of Lt. Col. G.S. Sirohi, Commanding Officer of the Regiment.

(3.) Lance Dafedar Amrik Singh (the deceased) was working as an orderly with Resaldar Major Bhupinder Singh. The petitioner and his co-accused as well as the deceased, all belonged to 73 armoured regiment and were left in the rear. Malkiat Singh was residing in the servants quarter of Banglow No.46 allotted to Lt. Col. G.S. Sirohi whereas the petitioner and the deceased Amrik Singh were occupying family quarters.