The Court emphasized the limited scope of the High Court's power of judicial review in court-martial proceedings and the importance of strict compliance with the prescribed procedure.

A.P. Subba, J.

1. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner an Ex. No. 164259 M Rfn/GD of 16 Assam Rifles seeks to challenge the order dated 19.7.2005 passed by the Army Court-martial convicting the petitioner and sentencing him to R.I. for six years and also dismissing him from service.

2. Briefly stated the facts are as follows: The petitioner, a rifleman, serving in 13 Assam Rifles availed of leave from 2nd June 2003 to 24th July 2003 and proceeded to Deoria, his home town in connection with his marriage. One Mr. Masood Alam whom he met when he was at Deoria asked him to procure a weapon from his place of duty for which he promised to pay Rs. One lakh. Similarly, one Md. Haroon whom he met at Gauhati when he was on his way back to resume his duty asked him to procure a weapon offering to pay him one lakh along with one Enfield motor cycle. The said Mr. Haroon also chalked out a detailed plan for the petitioner for stealing the weapon and amunition. Following up this plan the petitioner again applied for leave w.e.f. 9th Aug., 2003 to 28th Aug., 2003 and got the same sanctioned. After the leave was sanctioned he left the Unit on 8th Aug., 2003, and reached Mariani Railway Station where he got his warrant exchanged for Deoria. Then leaving his luggage in a hotel, he returned to his company in a civil vehicle at night on 9th Aug., 2003 and sneaked into the Coy lines after changing into combat dress. At about 2300 hrs when he was trying to make off with two AK 47 Rifles and some ammunition he was spotted by the sentry on duty. Upon this he rushed back and entered No. 1 Platoon Barrack and took his seat on an empty cot from where the petitioner was apprehended by Rifleman/General Duty R. Singh and others.

3. A General Court-martial (GCM) was accordingly convened under the Army Act, 1950 (for short the Act) to try the petitioner, on the following two charges

In that he,

at field, on 9th August 2003, committed theft in respect of following rifles, magazines and ammunition, value as shown against each, the property of the Government:

(a) Two AK 47 Rifles with following particulars:

(i) Butt No. 42 & Regd. No. TU-1160

--Value Rs. 5, 535/-

(ii) Butt No. 66 & Regd. No. ALF-2622

--Value Rs. 5, 535/-

(b) Five Magazines of AK 47

--Value Rs. 2, 500/-

(c) 120 rounds of AK 47 Rifle ammunition

-- Value Rs. 3, 514/- of Lot No. 322/97.

In that he,

at field, on 15th October 2003, when under close arrest in the Unit Quarter Guard escaped there from.

4. The petitioner pleaded guilty to both the charges and as he was found guilty of charges on his own plea he was sentenced to be dismissed from service and to undergo R.I. for8 years. On appeal preferred by the petitioner the sentence of R.I. for 8 years was reduced to 6 years. However, the sentence of dismissal from service was maintained. Aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence the petitioner has filed the present writ petition for setting aside and quashing this order in question.

5. I have heard Mr. R. Jha, the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. S.C. Shyam, the learned CGC representing the respondents.

6. It was the submission of Mr. Jha that the charges were not properly explained and the petitioner was compelled to plead guilty to the charges under duress. He was not provided advocate of his choice which prejudiced his defence. As such, the conviction of the petitioner was without any fair trial. Therefore the impugned orders passed by the Army Court-martial and the confirming authority were liable to be set aside and quashed as being untenable in law. Per contra, Mr. S.C. Shyam, the learned CGC submitted that no pressure of any kind was brought to bear upon the petitioner to admit the guilt. According to him the charges were duly explained to the petitioner in the language which he understood and it was after he fully understood the charges that he pleaded guilty. The Court-martial accepted the plea of gu