LAWS(ALL)-1972-10-27

G B SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On October 06, 1972
G B SINGH Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. San. Ldr. G. B. Singh seeks a direction that the respondents be asked not to convene a second General Court Martial for his trial on any of the ten charges for which he had already been tried by a general Court Martial on August 1, 1971 and subsequent days.

(2.) DURING the period September 1968 to October, 1970 the petitioner was posted as Recruiting Officer at the Air Force Station Kanpur. On August 3, 1971 he was served with a charge sheet in which as many as ten charges were levelled against him. These charges related to his duties as Recruiting Officer at the Air Force Station Kanpur. Subsequently a General Court Martial was convened by the Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Maintenance Command Nagpur for trying the petitioner. This Court Martial found the petitioner guilty on first five counts but acquitted him of the remaining five charges. The petitioner was sentenced to be dismissed from service. In usual course the finding and sentence awarded against the petitioner were referred to the Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief Maintenance Command for confirmation as required by Section 152 of the Air Force Act. The Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief, however, passed an order reserving the same for confirmation by superior authority and forwarded the proceedings to the Chief of the Air Staff. On 10th Dec. 1971 Chief of the Air Staff passed an order not confirming the findings of sentence awarded by the court Martial. The findings and sentence which were not confirmed by the Chief of the Air Staff together with the order of Chief of Air Staff were promulgated to the petitioner on l'7th of January. 1972. as required by Rule 78 of the Air Force Rules 1969.

(3.) AFTER a lapse of about ten months, the petitioner was informed by the Headquarters Maintenance Command, that a fresh General Court Martial was being convened to retry him. He then sought clarification as to how and in what circumstances he was going to be tried afresh by a communication dated June 13, 1972 the petitioner was informed that the findings and sentence of the General Court Martial had not been confirmed as it was found that the proceedings were not in order. Thus, there was no valid order of the Court Martial convicting or acquitting him. Since needs of justice and discipline demanded that he should be retried, the retrial had been ordered under the provisions of Air Force Act, 1950 in particular in the light of the provisions of Section 152 of the Act. The petitioner contends that once he has been convicted and sentenced by a court martial the respondents have no jurisdiction to convene a second General Court Martial for his retrial. He pleads that Section 120 of the Air Force Act bars such a trial and therefore a writ of Mandamus be issued to the respondents directing them not to convene the second General Court Martial.