Indian Army officer’s petition dismissed for molesting a woman passenger

We find no reasons to interfere with the verdict, says ATF bench

By :  p. arul
Update: 2015-08-22 05:28 GMT
Representational image
ChennaiUpholding the order of the Indian Army dismissing an army aviation squadron personnel for molesting a woman passenger on a train journey, the Regional Bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal, Chennai has dismissed the appeal of Merlin S. Raj.  
 
While travelling in Uttar Sampark Kranti Express on September 19-20, 2013, he had molested a co-passenger under the cover of darkness. 
In the appeal, Merlin S. Raj, 29, Mulagumoodu, Kanyakumari district submitted that he was enrolled in the Army on July 30, 2002 and posted in the Army Aviation Squadron (Reconnaissance and Observation) and on September 18, 2013 he was returning along with wife to the Unit after 10 days of casual leave. 
 
At midnight, he molested a woman passenger sleeping in a berth next to his wife. 
The woman woke up and raised an alarm. On the basis of a complaint given to the Movement Control officer, Jammu Railway Station, Corps of Military Police, charged him under section 69 of the Army Act for committing a civil offence of using criminal force to a woman with intent to outrage her modesty and he was tried by the District Martial.
 
On December 1, 2014, he was sentenced to one year of rigorous imprisonment and dismissed from the service. Aggrieved over this, he filed the appeal in the Tribunal stating that the District Court Martial had not properly conducted the trial and hence he sought setting aside of the order and be re-instated him with all benefits.
 
Opposing this, the Army informed that his appeal was devoid of any merit. The Bench comprising its judicial member, Justice V. Periya Karuppiah and administrative member Lt Gen K. Surendra Nath said the prosecution has proved the case. “We have also found that the procedures were followed by the authorities by giving proper opportunity as contemplated in the conduct of Court Martial. We are of the opinion that the decision reached by the District Court Martial regarding the commission of offence against the accused cannot be set aside”, the bench said. Dismissing the appeal, the bench said “we find no reasons to interfere with the verdict.”

Similar News