top of page

Acquitted of Crime, Convicted for Conduct: SCOI on Military Discipline

  • Writer: M.R Mishra
    M.R Mishra
  • Oct 11
  • 2 min read

In S.K. Jain v. Union of India (2025 INSC 1215), the Supreme Court reaffirmed the sanctity of discipline within the armed forces while clarifying the Armed Forces Tribunal’s (AFT) authority under Section 15(6) of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007.


What's The Matter?

A Colonel of the Army Ordnance Corps faced court-martial proceedings in 2008 for alleged bribery and unauthorized possession of ammunition. Although initially convicted for corruption and violation of the Arms Act, the Armed Forces Tribunal later found no evidence of bribery or unlawful possession.


However, it substituted the conviction under Section 69 of the Army Act, 1950 with one under Section 63 “an act prejudicial to good order and military discipline.” This substitution, based on the proven recovery of old ammunition in his office, resulted in compulsory retirement instead of dismissal.


What Court Said?


Before the Supreme Court, Jain argued that since the Tribunal had acquitted him of the Arms Act charge, it could not simultaneously hold him guilty under Section 63.


The Court, however, upheld the Tribunal’s power to substitute findings under Section 15(6) of the 2007 Act, emphasizing that the provision is pari materia with Section 222 of the Criminal Procedure Code, allowing conviction for a lesser or cognate offence.


Justice Alok Aradhe, writing for the Bench, underscored that Section 63 applies to acts “not specified” in the Army Act but prejudicial to discipline.


The Court held that the recovery of ammunition though not used unlawfully demonstrated negligence contrary to military order and accountability. Since the AFT had acted within its statutory powers and imposed a proportionate penalty, no interference was warranted.


The ruling reiterates that while leniency may be extended where intent is absent, the military’s disciplinary framework cannot be diluted. The Supreme Court thus maintained the balance between individual fairness and institutional integrity within the armed forces.

Comments


© Copyright
©

Subscribe Form

Thanks for submitting!

  • Whatsapp
  • Instagram
  • Twitter

 COPYRIGHT © 2025 MRM LEGAL EXPERTS  

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

 
bottom of page