P. CHANDRA MOULI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioners in these two cases have approached this Court to quash general Court Martial proceedings against them and to order for their release. As the;points of law involved are same, common arguments were addressed and both the petitions are being disposed of by one judgment.

(2.) SHRI Khatri who has appeared for the petitioners has contended that, it is open to this Court to order release of the petitioners if the Court Martial has or had no jurisdiction in regard to the petitioners and the offences alleged against them. In support of this broad submission, I have been referred to the decision of a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in S. P.N. Sharma v. Union of India AIR 1968 Delhi 156 : 1968 Cri LJ 1059. This legal proposition has not been challenged before me by Shri Laskar appearing for the respondents.

(3.) IN view of this, Shri Khatri admits the application of Act but contends that the general Court Martial having been convened by the Chief Engineer the same could not acquire any jurisdiction over the petitioners as the Chief Engineer has no such authority in law. The case of the respondents is that the Chief Engineer had convened the Court -Martial having been empowered in this behalf by warrant of the Chief of the Army Staff'(COAS), who is authorised to do so by Section 109 of the Act. that there is such an empowerment is not disputed. Really Sri Laskar has produced the original warrant for my perusal. The contention however is that the empowerment visualised by Section 109 in favour of the COAS does not apply so far as the GREF personnel are concerned. According to Shri Khatri, if Section 109 is read reddendo singula singulis that part of the Section which deals with empowerment by COAS has to be confined to the personnel of regular army, and not to the GREF. Reference has also been made to Section 4(4) of the Act which is in these terms: