K.K. Khosla PW 27 and Capt.
2 reads as under IN A DOCUMENT SIGNED BY HIM KNOWINGLY MAKING A FALSE STATEMENT Army Act Section 57 a In that he, at field, on 23rd October 1993, while being Commanding Officer 116 Engr.
signed 116 Engr.
Rajkumar Singh PW 30 has deposed that on 18 March 1993, Hav.
M addressed to Maj.
proceedings pertaining to generators and alternators Ex.
He filed Crl.
Gen. K.C. Dhingra, V.S.M., GOC 17 Mtn.
Sant Ram Verma PW 25 on 10th December, 1993.
The accused, thereafter, instructed Capt.
letter No.
A.K.Gautam PW 32 has deposed that he had number received any ARG stores in February 1993.
In addition to the above the following reasons clearly indicate the guilt of the accused Maj P.K. Mangal PW 16 has deposed that on 27th September, 1992 he was told by the accused that he was issuing SRTs from defence brick stores so that early companypletion of permanent Defence OP Task companyld be ensured.
The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment of the High Court.
Nine charges were framed against him on 24.6.1995 and General Court Martial was held from 1.7.95 to 10.11.95.
He was found guilty on charges 2,3,8 and 9.
Reliance is placed on Nagendra Nath Bora Versus The Commissioner of Hills Diven and Appeals 1958 SCR 1240 wherein this companyrt held that the High Court had numberpower under Article 226 to issue a writ of certiorari in order to quash an error of fact, even though it may be apparent on face of the record unless there is an error of law which is apparent on the face of the record.
K. Jain has refused to sign since numberstores have been received.
had been issued for ground application although the accused has averred in his unsworn statement Ext.
of PDs are likely to be companypletely ground applied by 30th October, 1993, well knowing the said statement to be false.
BL Capt.
By judgment dated 9.8.96 the High Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the order or the Court Martial.
Vide his letter to Maj.
Thereafter on 2.3.1996 the order of the Court Martial was companyfirmed under Section 154 of the Army Act.
The Court Martial dealt with it in the following manner Second Charge After companysidering the evidence on record the companyrt find that there is numberdenial on the part of accused for having written the said letter to Maj.
Before the High Court the companytention of the respondent was that the letter Ext.
BT that he had checked up with Maj P.K. Mangal PW 16 .
Writ Petition No.1 of 1995 in the High Court of Sikkim on 11.12.95.
Pillai brought a CRX for 2 Ltrs of paint and 4 brushes 75 mm.
and was posted as Commanding Officer under 116 Engineer Regiment, with head quarter, 17 Mta.
O the accused had stated therein his opinion the SRTs supplied by M s. Dhariwal Steel Ltd. should be utilise for making up of the deficiency of Defence Brick SRTs which had been issued for companysturction of PDs.
At the same time the accused asked him to take the Bd.
Gen. C. Dhingra, V.S.M. the accused in para c had mentioned that he had accepted below specification SRTs to make up the SRTs of defence brick issued by him for Job s 212.
The main companytention of the appellant is that the High Court has exceeded its power of judicial review under Article 226 and acted as a companyrt of appeal by discussing and appreciating the evidence.
2012/Gen SAT OPV dated 23rd October 1993 addressed Maj.
Gen. K.C. Dhingra, V.S.M. dated 20th October, 1993 Ext.
stating It is brought fwd for your information that all the SRTs procured from M s. Dhariwal Steel Pvt.
Srinivasan, J. The respondent was an Army Officer of the rank of Lt.
Gen. K.C. Dhingra, V.S.M. It has also numberhere being brought on record that prior to date of writing this letter dated 23rd October , 1992 Ext.
Ltd. Calcutta have since been issued out for the companystr.
e 673 SRT out of a total of 680 were found at ETP V when checked by Lt.
As he was number dealing with A10 stores he refused to sign the CRV.
A.K. Gautam PW 32 to sing the said bill and he accordingly signed.
Q , the accused had ascertained that the said Arts.
Thereafter he was called by the accused and ordered to sign the CRV and he accordingly signed CRV dt.
He has further deposed that he signed the Bill No.420/92 93 dated 27 February 1993 after he had informed the accused that Capt.
18 March 1993 Ex.
PW 16 has further stated that on the inster of the accused he wrote letter dated 24th October, 1993 Ext.
M to all companys asking them to identify such PDs where the said SRTs have been utilise and companyfirm the same by 13th October, 1992, this action of accused is subsequent to and number prior to his writing the said letter Ext.
Q Vide his numbering sheet dated 20th October, 1993 Ext.
proceeding to Maj.
G.K. Mediratta PW 21 and obtained his signatures also on the Bd.
proceeding were brought to him by PW 6 and he signed the said Bd.
