A naval officer has questioned the ability of his superior to have court martialled him saying he was sending SMS from his mobile phone during the proceedings.
Taking into account his allegations, a Mumbai high court bench of Justice M K Sharma and Justice Gita Mital directed the MTNL to preserve the SMS record of Commodore S N Singh, who as the President of Court Martial proceedings against Lt Commodore M P Verma from April 7 to May 21 last, sent several SMS from his cellular.
Verma, who was court marshalled for allegedly taking bribe from material suppliers, contended that the act of the President of the Court Martial Proceedings violated the spirit of the law.
"The Court Martial proceedings stand vitiated on this ground itself for want/lack of application of mind and indulgence on the part of the President of the Court Martial, to the proceedings thereof and violating the spirit of Provisions of Navy Act," Verma's counsel Meet Malhotra said.
The counsel alleged that the President of the Court Martial committed serious irregularities by carrying and using the mobile phone during the trial every day and he was not attentive to the proceedings.
Claiming that Commodore Singh sent and received ten messages every day, the counsel said, "This had been a most serious infraction of majesty at law, impartiality and the decorum attendent to court martial."
Earlier, the high court had stayed the conviction and sentence of of Verma, who was found guilty in the Court Marshal Proceedings on May 21 last.
The court had issued notice to the naval authorities on a plea by Verma challenging his conviction and one year imprisonment along with a fine of Rs 6.91 lakh and dismissal from service.
Verma, a Deputy Controller of Procurement posted in Mumbai was arrest by the Naval police on June 8, 2003 for alleged bribe taking.
The officer had contended that the court martial order was delivered even after the Mumbai high court, on March 11, had directed the Navy not to execute the sentence in case the officer was convicted.
Contending that the officer's commissioning had ended in 2000 but was re-employed on contractual basis for a period of one year from January 1, 2003, the counsel had said court martial was held even after expiration of his re-employment.
The court martial procedings were illegal as Verma being a re-employed commissioned officer was not amenable to the provisions of the Navy Act, 1957, Malhotra said.
© 2025