Fiat to Army: decide on trial or court-martial

May 2, 2012
Supreme_Court_of_I_1070402e
New Delhi, May 2: The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the Army to decide whether its personnel involved in fake encounter killings in Pathribal in Jammu and Kashmir and Assam should be court-martialled or tried in regular criminal courts.

If Army authorities were not keen on court-martial proceedings, the Central Bureau of Investigation could seek sanction from the Centre for prosecution of the erring officers, said a Bench of Justices B.S. Chauhan and Swatanter Kumar.

The case of killing of five civilians in the March 2000 Pathribal encounter has been pending in a Srinagar trial court with both the Army authorities and the officers challenging the Magistrate's order which asked the Army to explain, under Section 125 of the Army Act, whether it would try its men or wanted the civilian court to do the job. As the Jammu and Kashmir High Court ruled against them, the Army personnel appealed to the Supreme Court.

The CBI maintained that no sanction was necessary to prosecute the erring officers under the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) as the cold-blooded murders could not be said to fall within the ambit of their official duties.

In Assam, the CBI completed the investigation and filed charge sheet against seven Army personnel in the Court of Special Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup, under Section 302/201 read with Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code, for killing five civilians in a fake encounter. In this case, the Centre maintained that sanction from the competent authority was required for the prosecution of Army personnel.

Writing the judgment, Justice Chauhan said: “The competent Army Authority has to exercise his discretion as to whether the trial would be by a court-martial or a criminal court after the filing of the charge sheet and not after cognisance of the offence is taken by the court. A conjoint reading of the relevant statutory provisions and rules makes it clear that the term ‘institution' contained in Section 7 of the Act 1990 means taking cognisance of the offence and not mere presentation of the charge sheet by the investigating agency.”

Rejecting the Centre's stand that the Army personnel facing the CBI charge sheet could not be tried as they were discharging their official duty, the Bench said: “Facts of this case require sanction of the Central government to proceed with the criminal prosecution/trial. In case option is made to try the accused by a court-martial, sanction of the Central government is not required.”

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
June 4,2020

New Delhi, Jan 4: The Supreme Court on Thursday extended till June 12 its earlier order of May 15 asking the government not to take any coercive action against companies and employers for violation of Centre's March 29 circular for payment of full wages to employees for the lockdown period.

A bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan, S K Kaul and M R Shah reserved the verdict on a batch of petitions filed by various companies challenging the circular of the Ministry of Home Affairs issued on March 29 asking the employers to pay full wages to the employees during the nationwide lockdown due to the coronavirus pandemic.

In the proceedings conducted through video conferencing, the top court said there was a concern that workmen should not be left without pay, but there may be a situation where the industry may not have money to pay and hence, the balancing has to be done.

Meanwhile, the apex court asked the parties to file their written submissions in support of their claims.

The top court on May 15 had asked the government not to take any coercive action against the companies and employers who are unable to pay full wages to their employees during the nationwide lockdown due to the coronavirus pandemic.

The Centre also filed an affidavit justifying its March 29 direction saying that the employers claiming incapacity in paying salaries must be directed to furnish their audited balance sheets and accounts in the court.

The government has said that the March 29 directive was a "temporary measure to mitigate the financial hardship" of employees and workers, specially contractual and casual, during the lockdown period and the directions have been revoked by the authority with effect from May 18.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 24,2020

Kochi, Mar 24: Long queues were witnessed in front of state beverages corporation outlets across Kerala on Tuesday despite the statewide lockdown to prevent the spread of the coronavirus.

As tipplers thronged the outlets unmindful of the curfew, officials asked them to ensure that they kept a one metre distance between them as part of preventive steps to check the COVID-19 transmission.

Official sources said precautionary measures have been taken at the beverages outlets to prevent the virus spread.

Only those wearing masks were allowed to stand in queues, the sources said.

Police were deployed to ensure that the people standing in queues keep a one metre distance between them, they added.

The opposition Congress slammed the CPI(M)-led LDF government for not taking steps to restrict crowds in front of the Kerala State Beverages Corporation (Bevco) outlets, apprehending that such a situation would pave way for spreading the virus.

Ernakulam district congress committee general secretary Sherin Varghese claimed if the government had implemented a 2017 Kerala high court order directing the beverages corporation to take remedial steps to end long queues in front of the outlets, such a situation would not have arisen.

"Had the beverages corporation complied with the court order, safety and security of persons standing in queues could have been ensured.

Now there is no protective measure to prevent the possible transmission of the coronavirus from a carrier to another person," he told PTI.

Meanwhile, the state government has directed that adequate distance be kept between people standing in queues.

Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan on Monday justified the decision to keep the liquor shops open citing the "peculiar" situation prevailing in the state.

Kerala is in a total lockdown since Monday midnight till March 31 to check the virus spread.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
January 5,2020

Bikaner, Jan 5: A government-run hospital in Bikaner saw the death of at least 162 children, higher than the number of deaths in Kota's JK Lon Hospital in December.

"In December, we received 2,219 children from different hospitals out of which 162 children died in the Intensive Care Unit here. None of them was born at the hospital," said Dr HS Kumar, Principal, Sardar Patel Medical College, PBM Hospital.

He, however, denied any negligence on the part of the hospital and said that all efforts were made to save every single life.

The official said that all the deceased children had taken birth at the Primary Healthcare Centres (PHC) and the Community Health Centres (CHC) and were referred to the PBM Hospital in a critical condition.

"Their condition was critical and they breathed their last during treatment," he said.

At least 110 children have lost their lives at JK Lon government hospital in Kota, Rajasthan.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.