Ravit Kumar vs Union of India on 13 November 2026

ORDER

JUSTICE SUDHIR MITTAL MEMBER, (JUDICIAL)

The applicant seeks quashing of letter dated 02.07.2026 written by Chief Administrative Officer of Air Force Station, Chandigarh, to the wife of the applicant intimating her that the applicant had absented himself without leave w.e.f. 27.12.2025 and had been declared deserter. She was, thus, advised to disclose his whereabouts to the authorities and advise him to report to the unit. In case, she was not aware of his whereabouts, she was advised to lodge an FIR at the nearest police station and send a copy thereof to the authorities. He has also sought quashment of letter dated 06.07.2026 issued by the Station Adjutant of 12 Wing Air Force addressed to the applicant with reference to his application dated 22.06.2026. The applicant has been informed that he was absent without leave as he was granted four weeks sick leave by Command Hospital, Western Command from 29.11.2025 to 26.12.2025 and was supposed to report to the said hospital on 27.12.2025 but had failed to do so and had accordingly been declared deserter after conduct of Court of Inquiry (C of I). His personal belongings and service effects in the official house allotted to him had been listed by a Committee of Adjustment and taken into safe custody. They would be released only on receipt of disposal instructions from the Air Force Standing Committee. This letter was in response to the applicant's request for removal of the lock from his accommodation. Relief of quashment of letter dated 06.07.2026 addressed to the counsel of the applicant has also been sought. Vide the said letter, the learned counsel has been informed that the applicant has been absent without leave w.e.f. 27.12.2025 and has been declared a deserter. Further, action will be initiated on surrender/apprehension.

2. From the reliefs sought, it is evident that the applicant is aggrieved by the declaration of desertion and the actions being taken against him thereafter.

3. The facts, as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and as evident from the record, are that the applicant was commissioned as a Short Service Commissioned Officer on 29.12.2011 for a fixed tenure of 14 years. The period of 14 years expired on 28.12.2025. In this regard reference has been made to Air Headquarters letter dated 26.05.2025 wherein date of release of the applicant has been given. Unit has been asked to complete clearance actions and to grant the officers mentioned therein 28 days terminal leave at the time of release.

4. For certain acts of the applicant, a C of I had been convened against him by 12 Wing Air Force (the Unit of the applicant) in July 2023. It was concluded in August 2023. A charge-sheet dated 25.07.2024 containing six charges was issued, according to which the applicant had committed forgery by signing as Group Captain Manoj Kumar Rana, attempting to extract Rs.15 lacs from a resident of Mullanpur by misrepresenting that the land occupied by him belongs to the Air Force, forging the signature of an officer on a letter indicating that the said letter be used for the purpose of obtaining land records of a piece of land occupied by the resident of Mullanpur aforestated, availing leave travel concession by using a document which was false to his knowledge, being in unauthorised possession of secret documents, and carrying a personal smart phone inside the technical area of Air Force Station, Chandigarh, contrary to rules. After completion of preliminaries, Summary of Evidence (S of E) was recorded from January 2025 to October 2025.

5. To avoid disciplinary proceedings the applicant immediately got himself admitted to Command Hospital Western Command. He was granted sick leave by the said hospital for four weeks from 29.11.2025 to 26.12.2025. Accordingly, the applicant was expected to report to the hospital on 27.12.2025. Relevant documents regarding admission to the Command Hospital, grant of sick leave and movement order has, however, not been placed on record.

6. Instead of reporting to Command Hospital, Western Command on 27.12.2025, the applicant got himself admitted as an indoor patient in Military Hospital, Hisar on 27.12.2025 from where he was discharged on 29.12.2025. He was admitted for viral fever. A movement order dated 29.12.2025 was issued by Military Hospital, Hisar directing the applicant to report to his unit.

7. As stated earlier, the applicant neither reported to his unit nor to Command Hospital, Western Command. Taking benefit of the fact that his tenure finished on 28.12.2025, he went home to Karnal. The unit of the applicant, thus, declared him absent without leave. A C of I was conducted as provided by Section 107 of the Air Force Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). The said provision provides that when a person has been absent from duty without authority for a period of thirty days, a C of I shall be assembled to enquire into the absence and for making an inventory of Government items entrusted to him, including arms, ammunition and equipment. If the person does not subsequently surrender or is apprehended, he shall be deemed to be a deserter. After conclusion of the C of I, the wife of the applicant was informed through communication dated 22.07.2026 that the applicant had been declared a deserter w.e.f. 27.12.2025. It appears that the applicant has since been apprehended on 01.11.2026 by the Air Force police with the help of local civil police and has been brought to 12 Wing for conduct of disciplinary proceedings. As stated hereinabove, the Original Application has been filed challenging the aforementioned actions. An application for grant of bail has also been filed.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant stood discharged from the Air Force w.e.f. 28.12.2025. The discharge was automatic because the period for which the applicant had been commissioned had expired on 27.12.2025. Thereafter, the applicant became a civilian and the Air Force Authority had no jurisdiction to apprehend him with the help of the local civil police. For the same reason, the declaration that the applicant had deserted was also illegal. Conduct of C of I under Section 107 of the Act was also illegal.

9. The applicant is being forcibly kept at 12 Wing Air Force. The same amounts to illegal custody and, accordingly, the applicant deserves to be granted bail during the pendency of the Original Application.

10. The submission aforestated does not take into account Section 3 of the Act. The same is re-produced below :- ―Termination of application of the Act. – Every person subject to his Act under clauses (a) to (c) of section 2 shall remain so subject until duly retired, discharged, released, removed, dismissed or cashiered from the service.”

11. According to aforestated provision, a person remains subject to the Act till he is duly retired, discharged, released, removed, dismissed or cashiered from the service. None of these events has happened. Even though a warning order dated 26.05.2025 has been issued by the Air HQ, the same was only in anticipation. The officers mentioned therein were due to be released on the dates mentioned against each. A formal order of release had, however, not been passed and thus, the applicant continues to be subject to the Act. It cannot, thus, be said that the action being taken by the Air Force Authorities is without jurisdiction.

12. Regarding allegation that the applicant is under arrest, we have been informed by the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India that the submission is patently false. He has been brought to the unit because he had deserted. Action according to law is required to be taken against him. The applicant has been accommodated in the officers’ mess and no constraints upon his movement within the Air Force Station have been imposed. Under the circumstances, the request for bail is misconceived.

13. With respect to the submission that the C of I conducted under Section 107 of the Act is illegal, it only needs to be observed that according to the said provision, a C of I needs to be conducted after a person has been absent from duty for a period of thirty days. The date of commencement of the C of I or the date of the convening order have not been placed on record. Accordingly, we find no illegality in the conduct of C of I as it cannot be asserted that the C of I commenced before expiry of 30 days absence. The submission that the tenure of the applicant having expired, he could not be held to be absent from duty, is misconceived as the applicant continues to be subject to the Act even though his tenure is over. He has to abide by the disciplinary code of the Air Force till he is officially released.

14. It has next been contended that the applicant was taken into custody by the Air Force police. The same was in violation of Section 106 of the Act.

15. Section 106 of the Act is reproduced below:- ―Capture of deserters.—(1) Whenever any person subject to this Act deserts, the commanding officer of the unit or detachment to which he belongs, shall give written information of the desertion to such civil authorities as, in his opinion, may be able to afford assistance towards the capture of the deserter; and such authorities shall thereupon take steps for the apprehension of the said deserter in like manner as if he were a person for whose apprehension a warrant had been issued by a magistrate, and shall deliver the deserter, when apprehended, into air force custody.

(2) Any police officer may arrest without warrant any person reasonably believed to be subject to this Act, and to be a deserter or to be travelling without authority, and shall bring him without delay before the nearest magistrate, to be dealt with according to law.”

16. Perusal of the aforementioned provision shows that the Commanding Officer has to give written information of desertion to the civil authorities who in his opinion may be able to afford assistance for apprehending the deserter. Such authorities shall thereafter take appropriate steps for apprehension and, when apprehended, shall deliver to the Air Force Authorities. The police officer may, however, arrest without warrant any person reasonably believed to be a deserter. According to the pleadings of the applicant, the applicant had been apprehended by the Air Force police. This implies that the stipulation contained in Section 106 (1) of the Act has been fulfilled and to say that the apprehension was illegal is incorrect.

17. Finally, learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon representation dated 05.05.2026 made to the Chief of Air Staff to submit that the applicant never intended to desert. He was in touch with the Air Force Authorities regularly and the charge of desertion raised against him is illegal.

18. A perusal of letter dated 05.05.2026 shows that the said letter was written for release of pending retiral benefits. It did not pertain to providing information to the Air Force Authorities regarding his whereabouts. Thus, it cannot be said that the applicant had no intention to desert. Making a request for retiral benefits is not akin to informing the Air Force Authorities about his whereabouts. The letter dated 05.05.2026 does not even mention the address of the applicant, from which it would be reasonable to infer that the applicant was trying to conceal his location. The applicant absented himself without proper authorization and was apprehended on the basis of information collected by the local police. This conveys that the applicant had no intention to report to his unit. Under the circumstances, the declaration of desertion was justified.

19. In view of the foregoing reasons, the Original Application has no merit and is dismissed.

(Lt Gen Ravendra Pal Singh (Retd)

(Justice Sudhir Mittal) Member (A)

Member (J)

13th Nov, 2026 ‘dp’ REPORTABLE : YES