https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289037 A petition challenging a General Court-martial conviction raised alleged non-compliance with Rule 15 of the Air Force Act Rules, the admissibility of a confessional statement, and the treatment of a defence witness. The Delhi HC stated that habeas corpus cannot be used to re-examine the correctness of a conviction by a competent court-martial unless a jurisdictional error is shown, and that Article 226 does not enlarge that limited review. It also noted that a spouse may have locus standi to seek habeas corpus, though standing for certiorari was not finally decided. The petition was dismissed. en-us Mon, 17 Mar 1969 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Jul 2020 12:41:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289037 A petition challenging a General Court-martial conviction raised alleged non-compliance with Rule 15 of the Air Force Act Rules, the admissibility of a confessional statement, and the treatment of a defence witness. The Delhi HC stated that habeas corpus cannot be used to re-examine the correctness of a conviction by a competent court-martial unless a jurisdictional error is shown, and that Article 226 does not enlarge that limited review. It also noted that a spouse may have locus standi to seek habeas corpus, though standing for certiorari was not finally decided. The petition was dismissed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 17 Mar 1969 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289037