This ad will auto close in 10 seconds

Army Tribunal sets aside 25 year-old Court Martial order

Last Updated: Friday, November 19, 2010 - 16:18

Kochi: Setting aside a 25-year-old Court
Martial order of an Army officer, the Armed Forces Tribunal
here has directed the Union Government and the Amry Chief to pay him within 6 months the arrears of his salary,
allowances, and full pension due to him.

The tribunal has ordered the respondents-- the Union
Government, Chief of Army staff, Commandant COD and the
General Officer Commanding UP area to treat as if the
petitioner, Captain Tony George, was on actual duty till the
date on which he would have superannuated without any break of
suspension and to treat him as a person who superannuated on
the date on which he would retired in the normal course and
pay full pension from the date of superannuation.

The arrears of salary, allowances of salary and pension
after adjusting the amounts should be paid to the petitioner
within 6 months, the Kochi bench of the tribuanl held while
allowing a petition by Captain Tony George of Central
Ordinance Deport, Agra cantonment challenging his Court
Martial, chargesheet under Rule 37 of the Army Rules and the
conviction and penalty imposed on him by the court martial.

The divsion bench of the tribunal comprising Justice K
Padmanabhan Nair and LT Gen Thomas Mathew also set aside the
court martial findings and punishment against the petitioner.
`The facts and circumstances clearly shows that the Court
Martial was held without any valid order or a report as
provided under Army Rule 150 by the competent Military
authority and that is the reason the respondents are finding
it shy to fight out this case on merit`, the tribunal held.

The tribunal held that the convening order to Court Martial
the petitioner for giving false evidence was `without
jurisdiction and illegal`.
`We hold that there is violation of mandatory provisions
contained in sect 109 of the Army Act and Rule 37 of the Army
Rules and trial of the petitioner by court martial is
vitiated`. The trial against the petitioner was without
jurisdiction and finding of guilt and was not based on
evidence, the bench observed.


First Published: Friday, November 19, 2010 - 16:18
comments powered by Disqus