L Nageswara Rao, J. - (1.) Leave granted. The first Respondent was working as Subedar (Building and Road) and the second Respondent was a Naib Subedar (building and Road) in Headquarter- 6 Sector, Assam Rifles, Kamrup, Assam. A sting operation was carried out by a contractor, Mr. C.C. Mathew, followed by a telecast in Matrabhumi News, a Malayalam Television channel and 'Tehelka.com' on 24/25th September, 2014 alleging corruption in the Assam Rifles. On the basis of the said news, a Court of Inquiry was convened by Headquarters, IGAR (East.), Assam Rifles by an order dated 29.09.2014 which was later amended on 01.10.2014 in respect of the composition of the Court of Inquiry. A Court of Inquiry was conducted at Srikona, Silchar, Assam during which the Summary of Evidence was recorded. A charge-sheet was issued by the Convening Authority to the Respondents under Section 55 of the Assam Rifles Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the "2006 Act") for an offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the "PC Act") with an alternate charge under Section 49 of the 2006 Act. The General Assam Rifles Court (hereinafter referred to as 'the GARC') was convened on 10.11.2016.
(2.) The Respondents raised certain preliminary objections before the GARC which are: 1. During the Court of Enquiry and Summary of Evidence, no opportunity to cross -examine the complainant of the case was given to the Respondents.2. The composition of the GARC was in violation of Section 90 of the 2006 Act inasmuch as the members of the GARC did not have the required rank to be members of the GARC.3. The GARC cannot try a case punishable under the PC Act.
(3.) The GARC rejected the preliminary objections raised by the Respondents under Section 139 of the 2006 Act by an order dated 09.01.2017. Aggrieved by the said rejection order, the Respondents filed a Writ Petition in the Guwahati High Court. A learned Single Judge of the High Court allowed the Writ Petition and declared that the GARC cannot try an offence punishable under the PC Act involving a person governed by the 2006 Act. The appeal filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge was dismissed by a Division Bench of the High Court, aggrieved by which, the Appellants have filed this appeal.;