In Brief
Satgur Singh appealed against his discharge from the Army, arguing family problems caused occasional absences and he would reform. The Armed Forces Tribunal upheld his discharge. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, finding Singh was a habitual offender absent from duty on seven separate occasions. The Court held that vague family explanations cannot override documented misconduct. The inquiry procedure followed under the relevant Circular was adequate for disciplinary purposes. Discharge orders based on established patterns of unauthorised absence are justified and do not constitute error.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.