01.02.2010 Counsel for the applicant has submitted that in W.P (C) No.9124 of 2008, a miscellaneous application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed by the respondents attributing knowledge regarding the involvement of the petitioner in the commission of the offence. From that date onwards, the period of limitation is to be computed. Counsel for the respondents, however, submitted that the High Court had already disposed of the said writ petition setting aside the first Court of Inquiry and directing respondents to initiate fresh Court of Inquiry, after giving the applicant an opportunity of being heard. On the basis of the conclusion arrived at in the second Court of Inquiry, the knowledge about the involvement of the petitioner could only be inferred for the purpose of ascertainment of limitation under Section 122 of the Army Act. It is submitted that whatever had been mentioned in the miscellaneous application earlier moved before the High Court was based on the first Court of Inquiry and the moment that was set aside by the Delhi High Court, the earlier submission on the point of limitation lost its significance. At this stage, however, learned counsel for the respondents has pointed out that the question of limitation was adjudicated by the GCM and the finding on that issue has not yet been confirmed by the appropriate authority under Section 153 of the Army Act and so the challenge on that point is premature. No grievance can be said to have been suffered by the petitioner unless that finding on limitation is confirmed and attained finality.
2. The present application, therefore, appears to be premature. The O.A is dismissed. The petitioner shall be at liberty to challenge the findings on limitation, if fresh cause of action accrues. (S.S DHILLON) (S.S KULSHRESHTHA) MEMBER MEMBER
Comments