JABALPUR, India, Dec. 26 -- Madhya Pradesh High Court issued the following judgment/order on Nov. 26:

1. The petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the legality and validity of order dated 27.03.1999 passed by the Commanding Officer, 3 Administrative and Training Regiment and order dated 23.09.2024 passed by Armed Forces Tribunal, by which the order dated 27.03.1999 has been maintained.

2. Heard Shri K.C. Ghildiyal, Senior Advocate with Ms. Wariza Ghildiyal on the question of admission.

3. The facts not challenged by the petitioner are that on account of overstay of leave petitioner was apprehended by civil police on 14.01.1999 and produced before the 3 Administrative and Training Regiment, Army Centre Nasik. A charge sheet was served to the petitioner. Statement of witnesses were recorded 11.03.1999. The charge was that he was granted leave of absence from 07.09.1998 to 21.09.1998 to proceed to his home and granted extension from 22.09.1998 to 01.10.1998 and without sufficient cause failed to re-join at field on 02.10.1998 on the expiry of the said leave till apprehended by civil police on 14.01.1999. Thus, he has committed an offence punishable under Section 39(b) of the Army Act, 1950.

4. Summary court martial proceedings were initiated against the petitioner and the trial commenced on 27.03.1999, when the charge sheet was read over to the petitioner/accused and the petitioner accepted the guilt of overstaying without any sanctioned leave. The plea of guilty to the charge was recorded after explaining the meaning of the charge to the petitioner and proceedings on a plea of guilty was carried out. When opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner to make any statement, he replied that he does not wish to make any statement however, requested for consideration in punishment. Similarly, he did not call any witness in his favour. The Court considered the past entries of default and passed the sentenced of dismissal from the service. The said order was challenged by the petitioner in OA No.49/2022 before the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Jabalpur which was dismissed by impugned order dated 23.09.2024.

5. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that imposition of sentence of dismissal by the Commanding Officer (the Court) is absolutely illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the statutory provisions. He further submits that it was not considered by the court that as the petitioner fell ill he could not rejoin the Unit on expiry of leave and in the meanwhile he was arrested by civil police and handed over to 36 Medium Regiment, Aurangabad from where he was brought to the Artillery Training Centre, Nasik and held in 3 Administrative Regiment. He further submits that the Commanding Officer of 3 Adam Regiment was not commanding officer of the petitioner and no proper order was issued to attend the petitioner in 3 Administrative Regiment. He submits that the proceedings were initiated at 9:00 hours and finished at 9:30 hours and no proper opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner and the petitioner was awarded the punishment of dismissal from service which is extreme and hard penalty. He further submits that as the proceedings were held in the violation of principles of natural justice and the punishment is disproportionate to the alleged offence, the order passed by SCM as well as Armed Forces Tribunal are liable to the quashed.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://mphc.gov.in/upload/jabalpur/MPHCJB/2025/WP/37681/WP_37681_2025_FinalOrder_26-11-2025.pdf)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.