LAWS(MPH)-1992-8-5

PURSHOTTUM KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On August 18, 1992
Purshottum Kumar Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this Writ Petition, the life sentence passed on 11 -7 -1988 by the General Court Martial which assembled at Gwalior on 24 -5 -1986 is challenged by the convict who was tried for committing the civil offence of murder contrary to Section 302, Indian Penal Code. He is also dismissed from service. After pronouncing the sentence, 'recommendation to mercy' was pari passu made - - 'the accused may not be made to undergo the full term of the sentence'. The confirmation of sentence by G.O.C., 36 Infantry Division (Respondent No. 3) is also challenged.

(2.) A chequered career this petition has had in this Court and about that, few words we must say. Hearing was piecemeal, on different dates, on and from 7 -1 -1992. It concluded on 21 -2 -1992 when Order was reserved. In the course of preparation of the Judgment, we faced some difficulty in dealing with the main contention based on Section 79, Indian Penal Code. We found materials available to us insufficient to deal with the plea because from the 'Summary of Evidence' recorded under Section 23 of the Army Rules we found new vistas of arguments opened to press the plea on the basis also of Rules 24, 28 and 36 of the Army Rules. We accordingly ordered re -hearing and when we heard the matter again on 25 -4 -1992, we told Shri Mittal, Central Government Standing Counsel, to make available to us the proceedings of the 'Court of Inquiry' relating to the incident. After records came, we heard counsel on 10 -8 -1992, and today also, we heard them before disposing of finally today this petition. We are distressed that despite our categorical direction, the proceedings of the 'Court of Inquiry' are not made available to us. In this connection, it is necessary to point out the right of the accused petitioner in that regard contemplated under Rule 184 which respondents have violated by withholding the relevant records of the 'Court of Inquiry'.

(3.) FIRST , few words about the prosecution case, projected in the opening address of the Prosecution Counsel, Annexure P/5. Deceased Avatar Singh and some other persons of the Platoon, it is stated, had consumed liquor on the date of occurrence, in excess of their free quota. Deceased quarrelled with petitioner and P.W.7 Ajmer Singh and the latter reported the matter to Naib Sub. Sadha Singh. Some of his colleagues in the Platoon gave the deceased a good beating. Besides P.W.7, Sep. Chhinderpal Singh (P.W.9) and Sep. Jaspal Singh (P.W.10) were also involved in the fracas. Petitioner had shot the deceased out of revange because he had picked up quarrel with him demanding more meat to be taken by him with the liquor. It is surprising that the address blacked out completely the killing in the course of the same incident L/Hav. Siri Singh though it spoke of the conduct and character of L/Hav. Bikkar Singh, charged and tried separately for Siri Singh's murder. He is stated to be a sodomist corrupting young Sepoys ; he was otherwise too unruly and mischievous contributing to 'mismanagement' at the Post where 'vices and vengeance 'were rampant.