PREM SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) EX -L/NK Prem Singh was enrolled in the Army on 31.8.1974. His services were brought to an end. An order of discharge was passed in terms of Army Rule 13(1)3(v). Reason for passing this order is found mentioned in show cause notice. Copy of this is annexureR/1 For facility of reference this annexure and the relevant provision i.e. Rule 13(1)3(v) are reproduced below: 13. Authorities empowered to authorise discharge: -(1) Each of the authorities specified in column 3 of the Table below shall be the competent authority to discharge from service persons subject to the Act specified in column 1 thereof on the grounds specified in column 2. (3) In this Table, commanding officer means the officer commanding the corps or department to which the person to be discharged belongs except that in the cause of junior commissioned officers and warrant officers of the special medical section of the Army Medical Corps, the commanding officer means the Director of the Medical Services, Army and in the case of junior commissioned officers and warrant officers of Remounts. Veterinary and Farms Corps, the commanding officer means the Director, Remounts, veterinary and Farms. (v) All other Classes of discharge. Brigade/sub -area commander The Brigade or area Commander before the discharge shall if the circumstance of the case permit give to the persons whose discharge is contemplated, an opportunity to show cause against the contemplated discharge." Show Cause Notice is also reproduced below: Show Cause Notice In your statement, you have committed that you were married to Smt. Krishna Devi in 1970. Without obtaining legal divorced you again married in 1980. Hence contracted plural marriage which is against the law of land.

(2.) YOU are hereby called upon to give any reason (s) you may wish to submit and given an opportunity to show cause as to why your services should not be terminated for contracting plural marriage.

(3.) YOUR explanation should reach to this office by 30 Nov. 85 at 1000h after which it will be assumed that you do not wish to say anything and the action against you will be taken accordingly . 2. Petitioner submitted his reply. Stand taken by him is that he did marry one lady by the name of Smt. Krishna Devi. However, there was a valid divorce. This was in the presence of the Panchayat. It was in this manner he entered into second marriage in the year 1980.Plea taken by the petitioner was that the community to which he belongs divorce is permissible under custom. He placed reliance on Panchayat Nama. This is a annexure R/3. For facility of reference this is also being reproduced below: Panchayat Nama I Prem Singh s/o Ishwar Singh cast Rajput aged 19 years resident of Village Hari Chema, Tehsil Nowshera in my full sense hereby declare that I was married to Smt. Krishna Devi D/o Chatter Singh cast Rajput resident of Village Gounda Tehsil Pudul three years ago. At that time my wife was young and I had no feelings due to which she never stayed with me. Besides she made away with 8 Tolas of Gold. Oftenly she is seen roaming with loafers and had linus with bad character due to which I shall not try to keep her in my home but hereby give up her due to her bad character. In future I shall not give any money, cloth or other things of necessity to her. From my side, she can go anywhere she likes. From now onward I shall not be responsible to her. From Talaq Nama I shall not have any right on Krishna Devi." Thereafter, order annexure R -5 was passed. For facility of reference this is also being reproduced below: Orders of CDRMP Sub -Area on the reply to the show cause notice given By No. 13736594 L/NK Prem Singh of Jak RPC Jabalpur. 1. I have perused the reply to the show cause notice given by No. 13736594 L/ NK Prem Singh and not satisfied with the same. 2. The individual has contracted plural marriage contrary to the provision of Para 333 Regulations for the Army 1962 without obtaining legal divorce from the court of law. 3. I direct that services of the individual be terminated administratively. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that divorce on which reliance is placed by the petitioner is not valid and in any case it is submitted that institutions issued by the army authorities permit the respondents to take action which has been taken against the petitioner. Particular reliance is being placed on annexure R -8. For facility of reference para 333(C) is being reproduced below: - 333 (C) Plural Marriage by persons in whose case it is permissible: (a) An individual whose marriage is alleged to have been dissolved according to any recognised custom or special enactment under the provisions of sec 20(2) read with Sec 3(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act but not by a judicial decree will report immediately after the divorce, the full circumstances leading to and culminating in dissolution of marriage together with a valid proof of the existence of the alleged recognised custom or special enactment. The existence and validity of the alleged custom or special enactment will be got verified from civil authorities and if it is confirmed by the civil authorities that the divorce is valid action will be taken to publish the casualty for the dissolution of the marriage. The individual thereafter will not be required to obtain sanction for contracting the second marriage.