Anil Kumar, J.

1. The petitioner has sought the quashing of the verdict of ‘guilty' passed by the Summary Court Martial and the sentence of deduction in the rank by order dated 13th February, 2010 and the order dated 31st January, 2011 rejecting the petition dated 15th May, 2010 submitted by the petitioner against the Summary Court Martial’s findings to the Chief of Army Staff. The petitioner has also sought the quashing of retirement order dated 2nd August, 2011.

2. Brief facts to comprehend the disputes are that the petitioner was enrolled as a Sepoy on 23rd August, 1995 and was promoted to the rank of Naik. The petitioner was performing the duties of a Driver of a school bus.

3. On 20th December, 2006, after dropping the children from school by bus, when the petitioner was returning with his vehicle, the school bus met with an accident. A young boy Master Simarjeet Singh son of Sh.Gurwinder Singh died on the road in Bhatinda. The said boy who died in the accident, was going on the bicycle on the same road and in the same direction in which the bus was driven by the petitioner.

4. An FIR was registered against the petitioner and the challans were filed. However, the case of the petitioner had been taken over by the Army from the civil authorities for disposal under the provisions of the Army Act as the Act mandates effectual proceedings against the individual.

5. The Court of Enquiry was also held before the case had been taken over by the Army, however, in the Court of Enquiry the culpability of the petitioner could not be pinpointed according to the petitioner.

6. In the meantime after the accident, the petitioner had been also promoted to the next rank of Hawaldar in Oct, 2008. Three years after the accident, the Army had taken over the case of the petitioner from the civil authorities, a Summary of Evidence was ordered and consequent thereto chargesheet was framed on 13th November, 2009 under Section 69 of the Army Act for committing a civil offence of causing death by rash or negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide.

7. A Summary Court Martial was convened on 1st December, 2009 and the petitioner had pleaded “not guilty”. Before the Summary Court Martial, a total of 9 witnesses were examined and the Summary Court Martial was concluded on 13th February, 2010.

8. On perusal of the evidence on record, the Summary Court Martial returned the verdict of “guilty” and sentenced the petitioner “to be reduced to ranks”. The petitioner was consequently reduced from the rank of Hawaldar to the rank of Sepoy.

9. Aggrieved by the order of the Summary Court Martial dated 13th February, 2010, the petitioner submitted a post confirmation petition in terms of Section 164(2) of the Army Act on 15th May, 2010 to the Chief of Army Staff. The petition to the Chief of the Army Staff was, however, rejected on 25th January, 2011.

10. Consequent to the reduction in rank and the petitioner becoming a Sepoy, his service as Hawaldar with 25 years of service had been reduced to 17 years and the petitioner was ordered to be proceeded on pension as a Sepoy with effect from 31st August, 2012.

11. The petitioner has challenged the order of the Summary Court Martial, rejection of his petition by the Chief of the Army Staff and the order dated 2nd August, 2011. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter-alia, on the ground that the petitioner was not in the accident zone at Bhatinda when the accident had taken place. Relying on the post mortem report, it has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that though the deceased did not die due to any heart attack or fear of ghost or a natural cause, but on account of internal subdural haemorrhage, however, the report did not disclose that the impact on the boy’s head was on account of hitting the ground or the Army vehicle.

12. Relying on the testimonies of the witnesses, it has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that the road, on which the victim was going on bicycle, was under const