Delhi High Court rules on the limits of the Armed Forces Tribunal's authority to enforce orders, emphasizing reliance on inherent powers and High Court oversight.
In a landmark judgment, the Delhi High Court has delineated the scope of the Armed Forces Tribunal's (AFT) authority to address contempt and enforce its orders. The court clarified that while the AFT can act against the disobedience of interim orders if they disrupt proceedings, it lacks the power to penalize for the non-compliance of final orders. Such enforcement is to be sought under Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, which falls under the jurisdiction of the High Court.
The decision arose from a writ petition filed by the Union of India challenging the AFT's decision regarding its contempt powers. The court, presided over by Justices C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla, emphasized that the AFT does not possess contempt powers equivalent to a High Court as it is not a court of record.
The judgment also highlighted the AFT's inherent powers under Rule 25 of the Armed Forces Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 2008, allowing it to issue necessary orders to ensure the implementation of its judgments. However, these powers do not extend to imprisoning individuals for non-compliance. Instead, the AFT can impose service sanctions or act against assets to secure compliance.
The court further noted the startling fact that over 5,612 orders of the AFT remained unimplemented, underlining the importance of ensuring that judicial decisions are respected and executed. The judgment serves as a reminder to the authorities to either comply with or legally challenge the orders rather than leaving them unimplemented.
In conclusion, while the AFT has mechanisms to address certain contempts, ultimate enforcement of its final orders rests with the High Court, ensuring a balance between judicial authority and procedural compliance.
Bottom Line:
The Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) does not possess the power to punish for disobedience of a final order passed by it under Section 19 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007. However, disobedience of interim orders that disturbs proceedings can attract contempt action under Section 19. Final order disobedience can be pursued under Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Statutory provision(s): Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 Section 19, Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 Section 29, Armed Forces Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 2008 Rule 25, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 Section 10.
Union of India v. LT Col Mukul Dev, (Delhi)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2857048
