Summary Court Martial requires genuine immediate necessity; invalid convening can justify moulded relief and pensionary protection.

A Summary Court Martial under the Army Act, 1950 is valid only where immediate action is genuinely necessary and reference to the regular convening authority would prejudice discipline. On the facts described, the long gap between the incident and the convening of the court martial showed that the statutory precondition was absent, so the proceedings were held unlawful. The Court then used Article 142 to mould relief, taking account of the lapse of time, the difficulty of fresh proceedings, and length of service, and directed discharge on completion of minimum pensionable service with pensionary benefits.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the Summary Court Martial was validly convened in the absence of immediate necessity; (ii) Whether the appellant was entitled to consequential relief despite the finding of misconduct.

Issue (i): Whether the Summary Court Martial was validly convened in the absence of immediate necessity.

Analysis: Section 120 of the Army Act, 1950 permits a Summary Court Martial only when there is no grave reason for immediate action and reference can be made to the appropriate convening authority without detriment to discipline. The power is drastic and must be exercised only where immediate action is absolutely imperative. The incident was of August 2007, whereas the Summary Court Martial was held in May 2008. On that chronology, the statutory condition for convening such a court was not satisfied.

Conclusion: The convening of the Summary Court Martial was contrary to law, and the appellant's challenge on this issue succeeded.

Issue (ii): Whether the appellant was entitled to consequential relief despite the finding of misconduct.

Analysis: After holding the Summary Court Martial to be invalidly convened, the Court considered the long lapse of time, the practical difficulty in holding fresh proceedings, and the appellant's length of service. In exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, the Court moulded relief so that the discharge would take effect on completion of fifteen years of service, enabling pensionary benefits.

Conclusion: The appellant was granted consequential relief, including pensionary entitlement, in lieu of fresh proceedings.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, the impugned order was modified, and the appellant was directed to be treated as discharged on completion of minimum pensionable service with payment of pensionary benefits in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: A Summary Court Martial can be convened only when immediate action is genuinely necessary, and if that statutory precondition is absent, the proceedings are unlawful; in appropriate cases, relief may be moulded under Article 142 to do complete justice.

---