[Can't understand the news here] 3 years beyond limitation u/S 122 Army Act for General Court Martial to be directed: Supreme Court

On the question of limitation necessitated under Section 122 of the Army Act, the Supreme Court held that the Convening Authority having directed the trial by General Court Martial through an order was clearly beyond three years and therefore barred. The Court was further of the opinion that the time had started running when the respondent had the knowledge about the commission of the alleged offence.

The present matter involves an alleged offence was for stealing brother’s affection, i.e., the appellant behaved in the manner unbecoming his position and the character expected of him, under Section 45 of the Army Act, 1950).

It becomes pertinent to note, that although Adultery is not a crime under the Indian Penal Code, however, it remains a ground to initiate disciplinary proceedings in the Indian Army under the relevant Act and Rules.

It was vehemently submitted by the appellants, that disciplinary proceedings were initiated only after a written letter by the respondent, ‘which was for bringing to the notice of the concerned authority about the appellant’s act of stealing affection of his wife’. Therefore the ground of objection was, that he had knowledge about the offence but perused it after a expiry of 3 years limitation period. Resultantly, sought the order passed by the Convening Authority directing the trial of the appellant by way of General Court Martial to be quashed.

The Bench after considering the relevant factual matrix and the provision, said that for the purposes of Section 122 of the Act and deciphering the limitation period two dates are relevant: the date when the alleged offence comes to the knowledge of the person aggrieved, and the date on which the authority competent to initiate action comes to know about the alleged offence. The bench was led by the former CJI UU Lalit also comprised of Justice Bela M. Trivedi.

The bench was thus of the opinion that the trial by the General Court Martial order dated 22.11.2018 was clearly barred under Section 122 of the Army Act. Therefore, the proceedings deserve to be quashed and set aside and are accordingly set aside.

However, while allowing partly, the bench was of the opinion that the in the matters of judicial review, Court has very limited powers in matters regarding disciplinary proceedings. Holding the disciplinary proceedings to continue the bench noted, “power of judicial review in the matter of disciplinary proceedings is extremely limited. It is circumscribed by the limits of correcting errors of law or procedural errors leading to manifest injustice or violation of principles of natural justice. The power of judicial review is an evaluation of the decision-making process and not of the merits of the decision itself”.

Case Title: IC-56663X COL ANIL KUMAR GUPTA vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.