Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The Supreme Court bench comprising of Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice MR Shah made an observation that an accused in a Summary Court Martial is entitled to have the benefit of legal representation while setting aside an order of punishment of dismissal from service and six months rigorous imprisonment in civil jail awarded to an Army Sepoy after finding him guilty of assaulting a superior officer.
The Court martial was convened on two charges, viz., assault on a superior officer and use of abusive language against a subedar who had found the appellant to be not properly dressed for the Parade on the basis of which he was awarded a punishment of dismissal from service and six months rigorous imprisonment in civil Jail. The Appellant had moved to the Armed Forces Tribunal which dismissed the Original Application. The appellant had requested the Commanding Officer to permit him to hire a civil advocate which was declined on the ground that under Regulation 479 of the Army Regulations, a civil advocate is permissible to only those who are subject to trial for an offence which may result in the imposition of the death penalty.
The Court held that there was a clear violation of the principles of natural justice. Following the circumstances, the appeal was allowed and judgment of Armed Forces Tribunal set aside.
86540
103860
630
114
59824