Back
K. M. JOSEPH, AJAY RASTOGI, ANIRUDDHA BOSE, HRISHIKESH ROY, C. T. RAVIKUMAR
Joseph Shine – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
ORDER :
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 2204 OF 2020 IN WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 194 OF 2017
1. Applications for intervention and impleadment are allowed.
2. This miscellaneous application is filed by the Union of India seeking the following clarification:
“(a) That persons subject to Army Act, Navy Act and Air Force Act, by virtue of Article 33 of the Constitution of India, being a distinct class, any promiscuous or adulterous acts by such persons should be allowed to be governed by the provisions of Sections 45 or 63 of the Army Act, Sections 45 or 65 of the Air Force Act and Sections 54(2) or 74 of the Navy Act being special legislation and considering the requirements of discipline and proper discharge of their duty.”
3. The applicant is seeking clarification of the judgment of this Court reported in Joseph Shine vs. Union of India, (2019) 3 SCC 39. It must be noticed that the applicant was the sole respondent in the said case.
4. The reasons which have driven the applicant to seek the clarification are as follows:
It is the case of the applicant that this Court has undoubtedly proceeded to find Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’ for bre
Adultery – Section 497 of IPC and Section 198 of Cr.P.C. are unconstitutional – Members of Armed Forces have their own set of laws.
Civil offences under the Army Act may be concurrently tried by civil courts and court-martials; proper authority notification is essential for jurisdictional clarity.
(1) Commandant of BSF has jurisdiction to seek clarification or order an additional Record of Evidence (RoE).(2) When an amendment is purely clarificatory or declaratory in nature, it is deemed to o....
The punishment of reduction in rank and deprivation of badges of good conduct awarded in summary trial are amenable to the Jurisdiction of the Armed Forces Tribunal.
The court affirmed that custody of accused military personnel remains with Court Martial until a charge sheet is filed, emphasizing adherence to statutory protocols in handling sexual offences.
The Court determined that minor punishments, including reprimands, fall under 'service matters,' thus the Armed Forces Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear such cases despite their non-dismissal nature.
Sanction for prosecution – In absence of previous sanction criminal proceedings cannot continue.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
