SHALENDRA KUMAR Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition for a writ of certiorari, the petitioner calls in question the summary court martial proceedings held against the petitioner culminating in his discharge from service and for a mandamus directing the respondents to reinstate him in service with all consequential benefits. The challenge arises in the following circumstances.

(2.) The petitioner is a Gunner Lans Naik and was posted in 74, Medium Regiment. On 26th May 2001 he is alleged to have used criminal force and slapped Subedar(Regimental Gunner Surveyor) Lok Nath Sharma on the face. A court of inquiry was ordered by the Commanding Officer into the incident which, on the basis of evidence recorded by it, came to the conclusion that the petitioner had assaulted Subedar Lok Nath Sharma and recommended disciplinary action against him. Summary of evidence was, thereafter, recorded in which the statements of as many as 5 witnesses were recorded. The petitioner, however, refused to sign the summary of evidence proceedings or to lead any evidence in defence. He even declined to sign the statement to the effect that he did not wish to lead any evidence in defence. He was eventually charged with an offence punishable under Section 40(a) of the Army Act and put to trial. The charge framed against him was, in the following words:

(3.) Copies of the summary of evidence recorded earlier and a chargesheet were handed over to the petitioner, required under Army Rules 33 and 34, he was also got examined from the regimental Medical Officer of 74, Medium Regiment, who found the petitioner medically fit to stand trial at the Summary Court Martial. He was also referred to Major J.S. Rana specialist in psychiatry who certified that the patient was in touch with the reality and had no features of Psychosis/depression or any cognitive defit or behavioural abnormality during his stay and repeated interviewing. He was accordingly declared fit for discharge and discharged from the psychiatric ward. The Summary Court Martial eventually found the petitioner guilty for an offence punishable under Section 40(a) of the Army Act and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months in a civil prison and dismissal from service. Aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present petition as already noticed earlier.