CAPTAIN HARISH UPPAL versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

CAPTAIN HARISH UPPAL versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

The upward revision of sentence by the confirming authority, and confirmation thereof, does not violate principles of natural justice where the petitioner had opportunity to address the Court Martial, and the procedure established by law under Army Act and Article 21 of the Constitution was completely followed.

Parties
Petitioner: Captain Harish Uppal; Respondents: Union of India and Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
27 November 1972
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution for a Writ in the Nature of Habeas Corpus / Original Jurisdiction; Final Judgment
Outcome
Petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Principles of Natural Justice, Procedure for Upward Revision of Sentence, Confirmation of Sentence by Army Authorities, Opportunity to Be Heard, Jurisdiction and Authority Under Army Act Sections
Military Law Constitutional Law Criminal Law Principles of Natural Justice Procedure for Upward Revision of Sentence Confirmation of Sentence by Army Authorities Opportunity to Be Heard Jurisdiction and Authority Under Army Act Sections

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Captain Harish Uppal

Petitioner

Union of India and Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution for a Writ in the Nature of Habeas Corpus / Original Jurisdiction; Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether upward revision of sentence by confirming authority violates principles of natural justice under Army Act
  2. 2 Whether opportunity to be heard is necessary before confirming officer sends the case back for sentence revision
  3. 3 Whether the terms 'authority' and 'Officer' under Army Act denote different authorities

Ratio Decidendi

The upward revision of sentence by the confirming authority, and confirmation thereof, does not violate principles of natural justice where the petitioner had opportunity to address the Court Martial, and the procedure established by law under Army Act and Article 21 of the Constitution was completely followed.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed

Orders

  • Petition seeking to quash the order passed by Chief of Army Staff is dismissed.