WA 329/2007 BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR MADAN B. LOKUR HON’BLE MR JUSTICE K. MERUNO (Madan B. Lokur, CJ) The appellant is aggrieved by a judgment and order dated 2-8-200 6 passed by a learned Single Judge in WP(C) No.310(SH)/2004. 2. The appellant was tried by a summary court martial conducted by the Assam Rifles on the following allegation :- CHARGE SHEET The accused No.C/360945 Nk/Clk Lal Kumar Shrestha of HQ ’B’ Range ASSAM RIFLES attached to 20 ASSAM RIFLES a person subject to the Army Act, 1950 being so under the provisions of Section 4(1) thereof, read with SRO 117 of 28 Mar 60 and 318 of 6 Dec 62 as amended by SRO 325 of 31 Aug 77 is charged with :- Army Act 1950 Sec 39(b) WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE OVERSTAYING LEAVE GRANT ED TO HIM in that he, at field, on 28 Oct 96, having been granted leave of abse nce from 29 Oct 96 to 01 Nov 96 to proceed to Alugodam (village), failed without sufficient cause, to rejoin at Rear Dimapur, on 02 Nov 96 (FN), on expiry of th e said leave till voluntarily rejoined at Rear Imphal on 14 Oct 98 (AN) Total a bsence period - 1 year, 11 months and 13 days. 3. A perusal of the above would show that the appellant was unautho risedly absent for almost two years. In the Summary Court Martial (for short SCM ) the appellant pleaded guilty to the charge and was sentenced to three months i mprisonment in military custody and reduction in rank. 4. Before the learned Single Judge, the appellant raised several co ntentions, all of which were negatived. The writ petition was dismissed and so t his appeal. Before us, the only contention urged by learned counsel for the appe llant was that his client did not plead guilty as recorded by the SCM and as obs erved by the learned Single Judge. Therefore, the entire case proceeded on a fac tual error. 5. When this writ appeal came up before a Division Bench on 21-7-20 10, the original records of the SCM were called for. Learned counsel for the app ellant urged us to go through the original records and determine whether in fact the appellant had pleaded guilty as held. 6. We have gone through the original records of the SCM and find th at it is recorded that the appellant had pleaded guilty. We have also gone throu gh the statement made by the appellant in the SCM. The appellant did not deny th e charge levelled against him, and therefore in a sense, admitted his guilt. The appellant also did not produce any witness in his defence in the SCM. The relev ant paragraphs of the statement of the appellant, recorded in the presence of an independent witness, are reproduced below:- 2. During my leave, I got sick and reported at HQ DGAR (Med Branch) MI Room . During the leave, I received a phone call from my home at Nepal that my younge r brother is seriously ill so I rushed to Nepal to attend him. On reaching Nepal , unfortunately, I myself fell sick and was under treatment of Dr Raju Gautam, M O, Western Regional Hospital, Pokhra, Nepal from 15 June 96 to 23 Aug 96. I had informed regarding my condition to HQ ’B’ Range (AR) by registered post. 3. On recovery from my illness, I returned to Shillong as all my luggage wa s there. On reaching Shillong, I again fell sick and reported to Dr DJ Goswami, Civil Hospital, AMA, Shillong and was under his treatment from 21 Aug 96 to 04 O ct 96. During the period, I received a message through HQ DGAR (Est Br) vide the ir letter No.I.38011/2-Est/96 dated 07 Oct 96, addressed to my wife, who is work ing in HQ DGAR (UPAO Br) to report to HQ 19 Assam Rifles by 11 Oct 96 and my rem aining leave period has been cancelled. 4. I reported at HQ 19 Assam Rifles on due date and was there till 28 Oct 9 6. As the court was adjourned for 15 days, I reported to Maj Lalit Sood of 20 As sam Rifles, who was performing the duties of prosecutor of Maj DK Sawhney, for g ranting me four days of EL to solve my problems at Shillong. My four days EL was sanctioned and the leave certificate was issued by HQ 19 Assam Rifles. 5. On reaching Shillong, I again fell sick and was on continuous treatment of Dr DJ Goswami, Civil Hospital, AMA, Shillong from 01 Nov 96 to 12 Oct 98. Reg arding my condition I had also despatched an application to HQ ’B’ Range through registered post on 04 Nov 96 but I failed to receive any reply from HQ ’B’ Rang e (AR). I finally rejoined my duty from leave on 14 Oct 98 at Rear Imphal. 7. A perusal of the above would clearly show that the appellant cla imed to have fallen sick in Shillong and was under treatment of a civil doctor f rom 1st November 1996 to 12th October 1998. During this entire period he did not report to any competent or authorised medical officer even though the Headquart ers of the Assam Rifles is located at Shillong and adequate medical facilities a re available over there. The only defence given by the appellant in his stateme nt is that he had dispatched an application through registered post on 4th Novem ber 1996 but since he did not receive any reply, he did not take any further ste ps. There is nothing to show that such a letter was in fact sent by the appellan t by registered post at all. 8. The contention now sought to be raised before us is clearly an a fterthought as held by the learned Single Judge. The record of the SCM shows, wi thout doubt, that the appellant did not deny the charge levelled against. The na tural consequence of this would be a finding of his guilt. We cannot agree with learned counsel for the appellant that there was no admission of guilt by his cl ient. No other submission was urged before us 9. We find no merit in this appeal. It is accordingly dismissed.