Sakunjay Vyas
Published on: April 5, 2022 at 07:30 IST
The Two Judge Bench of Justice L. Nageswara Rao and Justice B.R. Gavai of the Supreme Court overturned the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Kochi, convicting the appellant Major R. Metri for the offence punishable under Section 63 of the Army Act and sentencing him to forfeiture of seniority of rank and severe reprimand.
The Supreme Court recently ruled that the extra-judicial confession is a weak piece of evidence.
The Two-Judge Bench of Justice M. R. Shah and Justice B. V. Nagarathna was hearing an appeal against the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Kochi, convicting the appellant Major R. Metri for the offence punishable under Section 63 of the Army Act and sentencing him to forfeiture of seniority of rank and severe reprimand.
The Apex Court, by analyzing the facts and evidence of the present case the Court came down to these findings:
1. Extra-judicial confession is not a material piece of evidence unless found voluntary, trustworthy, and reliable; and is corroborated.
2. that a candidate otherwise not fit cannot be declared medically fit by a single officer.
“It could thus be seen that the extrajudicial confession is a weak piece of evidence. Unless such a confession is found to be voluntary, trustworthy and reliable, the conviction solely on the basis of the same, without corroboration, would not be justified…It could thus be seen that a single officer like the respondentofficer cannot declare a candidate medically fit, if he is otherwise not.” the Court said.
That the appellant submitted that:
1. The re-appreciation of evidence by the learned AFT is not permissible.
2. The AFT has grossly erred in holding that the confessional statement made by the respondent-officer was not voluntary.
3. The punishment of cashiering from service for such misconduct ought not to have been sustained.
That the Respondent submitted that :
1. The learned AFT has rightly held that the confessional statement was not voluntary.
2. The extrajudicial confession is a very weak piece of evidence, and conviction on the basis of the same cannot be sustained.
After hearing both the parties, the Apex Court further stated that Where a court-martial’s findings are legally insufficient for any reason whatsoever, the learned AFT can interfere with them.
When a material irregularity in the trial results in a miscarriage of justice, the learned AFT is justified in allowing an appeal against a conviction.
This Court has previously stated that we recognize the right of the learned AFT to re-appreciate evidence to determine whether any findings of the court-martial are legally not valid for any reason; whether the findings involve a mistaken decision on a legal question; or whether there was a material irregularity during the trial which resulted in a miscarriage of justice.
“That this Court itself has held that the learned AFT was entitled to re-appreciate evidence to find out if any findings of the court-martial are legally not sustainable due to any reason; or that the finding involves wrong decision on a question of law; or there was a material irregularity in the course of the trial resulting in miscarriage of justice.” the Court said.
As a result, the Apex Court overturned t the learned Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Kochi by stating that the impugned judgment and order, convicting the appellant-Major R. Metri for the offence punishable under Section 63 of the Army Act and sentencing him to forfeiture of seniority of rank and severe reprimand is quashed and set aside.
