E-Paper
‘Discipline is hallmark of Armed Forces’: Supreme Court on former Army sepoy's dismissal
A bench of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Rajesh Bindal said that gross indiscipline by those serving in the defence forces cannot be tolerated.
The Supreme Court on Friday said that discipline is the implicit hallmark of the Indian Armed Forces and a non-negotiable condition of service, reported Bar and Bench.
A bench of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Rajesh Bindal said that gross indiscipline by those serving in the defence forces cannot be tolerated while upholding a February 2015 order passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal Lucknow Regional Bench, dismissing a mechanical transport driver from the service for overstaying leaves without a sufficient cause.
"Such gross indiscipline on the part of the appellant who was a member of the Armed Forces could not be countenanced. He remained out of line far too often for seeking condonation of his absence of leave, this time, for a prolonged period of 108 days which if accepted, would have sent a wrong signal to others in service. One must be mindful of the fact that discipline is the implicit hallmark of the Armed Forces and a non-negotiable condition of service," the Court said.
In an appeal before the Supreme Court, the driver's counsel argued that the punishment was grossly disproportionate to the offence, however, the court also found that driver, a former sepoy, who has been charged under Section 39b of the Army Act, appeared to be a habitual offender and that he had remained out of line for far too long by seeking condonation of his leave, the report added.
The driver during the hearing had not produced any document on record to justify his leaves and had only made a bald statement while making submissions before the Court of Inquiry in 1999.
The apex court also observed that the punishment pronounced was not graver than the one contemplated under the Army Act adding that the former sepoy did not deserve any leniency for his conduct. "The punishment of dismissal from service on conviction by Court Martial has been treated as a lesser punishment vis-à-vis the punishment of imprisonment for any period below 14 years ... sub-section (4) of Section 120 clearly states that a SCM can pass any sentence as contemplated under the Act," the bench said.
