UNION OF INDIA Vs. Y SPR CLK JAMIL AHMED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ appeal has been filed by the Union of India and others against the judgment of the learned Single Judge, dated 3.3.1993, passed in Civil Rule No. 2200 of 1990. It has been held by the learned Single Judge that the Court Martial could not award more than one sentence, as it is violative of Rule 124 of the Army Rules, 1954.

(2.) For appreciating the precise question involved in this case, it would be necessary to have a look at the provisions of the Army Act, 1950 and the rules framed thereunder. Sections 73 and 74 of the Army Act, 1950, need reproduction in the first instance. "73. Combination of punishments.- A sentence of a court-martial may award in addition to, or without any one other punishment the punishment specified in clause (d) or clause (e) of Section 71 and any one or more of the punishments specified in clauses (f) to (1) of that section." "74. Cashiering of Officers. - An officer shall be sentenced to be cashiered before he is awarded any of the punishments specified in Clauses (a) to (c) of Section 71."

(3.) Rules 124 and 168 of the Army Rules, 1954, read as under: "124. Sentence - The Court shall award one sentence in respect of all the offences of which the accused is found guilty."