SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1998 Supreme(SC) 981

B.N.KIRPAL, G.T.NANAVATI, S.P.BHARUCHA
Union Of India – Appellant
Versus
Subedar Ram Narain – Respondent


Judgment

Kirpal, J.-The only question which arises for consideration in this and the connected appeals is whether the respondent who was a junior commissioned officer, would be ineligible for pension or gratuity in respect of all his previous service on his being dismissed under the Army Act 1950.

2. The respondent was enrolled in the Indian Army on 17th March, 1962. He was promoted to the rank of Subedar Major with effect from 1st March, 1984. While he was serving with 75 Medium Regiment he was kept in close arrest with effect from 17th November, 1988 and was then court-martialed under the provisions of the Army Act. He was charged under Section 40(a), using criminal force to his superior officer, and Section 48 of the Army Act, 1950 for being in a state of intoxication while on duty.

3. The General Court Martial found the respondent guilty and thereupon he was dismissed from service on 1st August, 1989. He filed an appeal to the Chief of the Army Staff against the decision of the General Court Martial but the same was rejected after due consideration.

4. The respondent then filed writ petition No. 423 of 1989 in the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir praying for quashing of the court-ma

























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top