- (1.) These appeals arise out of an order dated 11.02.2010 passed by the Armed Forced Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi whereby Original Application No.26 of 2009 filed by the appellant has been dismissed thereby affirming his conviction for an offence punishable under Section 302, Ranbir Penal Code and sentence of life imprisonment awarded to him.
(2.) The appellant, it appears, was deputed for Map Reading Standard-I between January, 2007 to March, 2007 at 28 Infantry Division Camp. A movement order dated 16th January, 2007 was issued to him in that regard. By another movement order dated 07.01.2007 seven other personnel were also detailed for the same course. Naik Ratheesh Kumar was one of those seven. The prosecution case is that on 19.03.2007 at around 8.00 P.M. the appellant shot Naik Ratheesh Kumar by a service rifle issued to the appellant. An FIR about the incident was filed on 19.03.2007. Investigation was concluded by the Investigating officer PW 15 Sub-Inspector Bashir Ahmad of Police Station, Kupwara but the appellant was eventually tried by the Court Martial for the offence of murder punishable under Section 302, RPC. At the trial before the Court Martial, the prosecution placed reliance upon the deposition of PW 1 Havildar Thomas T.Mathew who proved certain documents relevant to the case. PW 2 Naik Sadagopan was examined as an eye-witness to the incident. So also, PW 3 Havaldar C.Jayaseelan of Garrison Engineer 874 engineer work Section, PW 4 Major MK Venkatesh, PW5 Lance Havildar D.Prasanath who was also one of the seven personnel undergoing the course and who was occupying the same room as the deceased and the appellant PW 6 Lance Havildar D.Anbunavalan and PW 8 Naik K. Venkataramana were all examined as witnesses to prove the incident. The prosecution in addition relied upon the deposition of PW 9 Naik Subedar S.K.Konar's according to whom the accused had confessed his guilt before him. Reliance was also placed by the prosecution upon the report of the forensic science laboratory to show that EX. B-441/07 issued to the appellant had been fired from and was in working condition and that the fired cartridge had been fired from the said rifle.
(3.) On a careful appraisal of the evidence assembled by the prosecution, the Court Martial came to the conclusion that the prosecution had successfully brought home the guilt of the appellant who was accordingly convicted under Section 302, IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. Aggrieved, the appellant preferred Original Application No. 26 of 2009 before the Armed Forces Tribunal at New Delhi which application as noticed earlier was heard and dismissed by the Tribunal upholding the conviction of the appellant and the sentence awarded to him. The present appeal by special leave under Section 31(1) of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act questions the correctness of the aforementioned judgment and order passed by the Tribunal and that passed by the Court Martial.;