- (1.) LEAVE granted.
(2.) THIS appeal is directed against a judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Rajasthan. The respondent, who was serving in Army, faced a court - martial proceeding and ultimately was convicted under S.307 IPC and was sentenced to imprisonment for three years in the said court - martial proceeding. Against the said conviction recorded by the Court - Martial, the respondent approached the High Court by invoking its jurisdiction under Art.226 of the Constitution of India. The High Court by the impugned order having set aside the order of punishment inflicted upon by the Court Martial, the Union of India is in appeal against the same. Mr. Lalit, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, contended that howsoever wide the jurisdiction of the Court under Art.226 may be, in exercising judicial review against an order of an inferior tribunal, the same jurisdiction would not extend to reappreciation of the evidence on record and interfere with a finding arrived at by the inferior tribunal. According to him, a perusal of the impugned judgment would show that the High Court has reappreciated the entire evidence and recorded a conclusion that the accused is not guilty of the charges levelled against him.
(3.) WE have no quarrel with the aforesaid proposition of law. But having examined the impugned judgment of the High Court, we find that the High Court was fully justified in interfering with the conviction recorded by the Court Martial inasmuch as the order of the Court Martial unequivocally indicates that either the defence plea or even the contentions raised by the accused in the proceeding had not been taken into consideration and merely on the evidence of the injured who happened to be the sole witness of the entire incident, the conviction was recorded.;