MAJOR RADHA KRISHAN versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

MAJOR RADHA KRISHAN versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Once the limitation period prescribed under Section 122 of the Army Act for court martial trials is over, the authorities cannot invoke Rule 14(2) to terminate service for misconduct; the satisfaction allowing summary termination must be grounded in the nature or context of the misconduct itself, and not in extraneous factors such as expiry of limitation.

Parties
Appellant: Major Radha Krishan; Respondents: Union of India and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
25 March 1996
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of Division Bench set aside; judgment of Single Judge reinstated.
Legal Topics
Army Act Section 19 Dismissal, Limitation in Court Martial, Summary Procedure Under Army Rules, Termination of Service for Misconduct
Military Law Administrative Law Army Act Section 19 Dismissal Limitation in Court Martial Summary Procedure Under Army Rules Termination of Service for Misconduct

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Major Radha Krishan

Appellant

Union of India and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Rule 14 of the Army Rules, 1954 can be used to terminate the service of an army officer for misconduct after the expiry of the limitation period for court martial trials under Section 122 of the Army Act, 1950.
  2. 2 Whether 'impracticability' or 'inexpediency' under Rule 14(2) can include cases where trial is time-barred, or must relate to circumstances intrinsic to the alleged misconduct.

Ratio Decidendi

Once the limitation period prescribed under Section 122 of the Army Act for court martial trials is over, the authorities cannot invoke Rule 14(2) to terminate service for misconduct; the satisfaction allowing summary termination must be grounded in the nature or context of the misconduct itself, and not in extraneous factors such as expiry of limitation.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of Division Bench set aside; judgment of Single Judge reinstated.

Orders

  • Impugned order of the High Court Division Bench is set aside.
  • Order of learned Single Judge quashing termination and directing reinstatement with all consequential benefits is restored.