Writ Petition Not Maintainable Before Final Order In Court Martial Process: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that a writ petition challenging disciplinary and court martial proceedings is not maintainable before the passing of a final order.

A Division Bench of Justices V. Kameswar Rao and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora observed,

“...it is a settled position of law that till such time a final order is passed in the proceedings of this nature, any interference without waiting for the final decision on the proceedings by the High Court in a writ petition is uncalled for.”

Reliance was placed on Union of India & Ors. v. L.D. Balam Singh (2002) where the challenge before the High Court was for quashing of charge sheet, sentence of the General Court Martial, order of confirmation of General Officer Commanding and also to quash the trial of the General Court Martial.

In the present case however, there was no order of confirmation.

“This is precisely we have held that the present petition is pre mature. Surely, the petitioner shall be at liberty to urge all contentions as and when the finding of the GSFC are confirmed,” the Court said.

It thus dismissed the petition filed by a BSF Sub-Inspector challenging the constitution of the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC), its findings, and subsequent proceedings including the convening of a General Security Force Court (GSFC).

The petitioner had sought quashing of the ICC findings, the charge-sheet, as well as the GSFC proceedings. He also challenged the composition of the ICC under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, alleging violations of statutory provisions and principles of natural justice.

However, the Court noted that the petitioner had already filed a pre-confirmation petition under the Border Security Force Act, which was pending consideration before the competent authority.

In this backdrop, the Court said, “it is expected that the Authority considering the pre-confirmation petition shall consider all the pleas, which have been urged by the petitioner in the pre-confirmation petition and accordingly pass a reasoned order.”

As such, the petition was dismissed for being premature.

Appearance: Mr. Arjun Pawar and Mr. Prahil Sharma, Advocates for Petitioner; Ms. Swati R.K., CGSC with Ms. Dumni Soren, GP, and Mr. Mohnish Balu, Advocate alongwith Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, DC (Law) for Respondents

Case title: Ajit Kumar Singh Through Smt. Poonam Singh Wife And Pairokar v. UoI

Case no.: W.P.(C) 3064/2026

Click here to read order