VIDYA DEVI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS a result of the General Court Martial ('gcm' for short0) convened by the respondents, which tried the husband of the petitioner for purported offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, the husband of the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the 'accused') is imposed the punishment of imprisonment for life, dismissal from service and reduction in rank. Pre-confirmation appeal as well as post-confirmation appeal preferred by the accused did not bring any positive results in his favour. After the dismissal of post-confirmation appeal on 18. 2. 2003, the petitioner has preferred the instant petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the order of GCM dated 29. 9. 2000 and also the subsequent orders with prayer for consequential benefit for reinstatement in service etc.

(2.) THE factual matrix detailing death/murder of a fellow jawan on 20. 3. 2000, which happened to be ?holi? is not in dispute. We may narrate that incident in the first instance.

(3.) ON the festival day, the accused was posted at 223 field work shop at Lucknow. Festival of Holi was celebrated in the unit of the accused where jawans as well as senior officers participated. All ranks were served with rum, whisky and beer in the said festival. After celebrations, officers left when the jawans were still celebrating and enjoying the said festival. At that time, some altercation took place among the jawans. It was allegedly pacified by a mediator, who intervened. However, at about 6. 00 p. m. , when there was a call for the night duty, someone from the unit informed Subedar Hari Ram that craftsman Nanhe Lal was lying in his bed and was bleeding. He was taken to hospital where he died ultimately. Husband of the petitioner was accused of the charge and killing said Nanhe Lal. The GCM was conducted in which the accused allegedly confessed to the charge by pleading guilty on 18. 8. 2000. On that basis, he was convicted by the GCM on 29. 9. 2000, as aforesaid. Further, as already pointed out above, the pre-confirmation as well as the post-confirmation appeals preferred by the husband of the petitioner were dismissed by the appropriate authorities.