9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 1436X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had specifically mentioned in the said letter that it was for bringing to the notice of the concerned authority about the Appellant's act of stealing affection of his wife. The date 13.08.2015 would be the crucial date on which the aggrieved person had the knowledge about the commission of the alleged offence. Therefore The time had started running from the said date for the purpose of Section 122 of the said Act. In that view of the matter, the submission of the learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Respondents that date of aggrieved person's knowledge about the commission of the alleged offence by the Appellant, should be construed as the date when the Respondents prima facie concluded after the Court of Inquiry that the Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore the Tribunal challenging the charge-sheet dated 19.11.2018 containing three charges pertaining to the Appellant having behaved in a manner unbecoming his position and the character expected of him, Under Section 45 of the Army Act, 1950, and challenging the order dated 22.11.2018 passed by Convening Authority directing the trial of the Appellant by way of General Court Martial (GCM). 2. The short facts leading to the present appeal are that the Appellant was commissioned as an officer in the Indian Army in 14 battalion of the Rajputana Rifles (Infantry) on 07.12.1996. On 13.08.2015, Col. Ramneesh Pal Singh, a close friend and colleague of the Appellant wrote a letter to Brig. Ajav Vig which is reproduced hereunder: CONFIDENTIA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the said letter, a Court of Inquiry was conducted by the HQ Delhi Area to investigate into the complaint made by Col. Ramneesh Pal Singh. The said Court of Inquiry was finalized on 11.11.2016 with the directions of GOC Delhi Area to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the Appellant. After the hearing of the Charge in terms of Army Rule 22, on 24.07.2017 directions were given for recording the Summary of Evidence. On the completion of Summary of Evidence, a prima facie case was made out against the Appellant and accordingly, three charges were framed against the Appellant with regard to he having behaved in the manner unbecoming his position and character expected of him, Under Section 45 of the Army Act vide the charge-sheet dated 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... trial by the General Court Martial on 22.11.2018 i.e. three years after the letter written by Col. Ramneesh Singh. Hence the period of three years having already expired as contemplated in Section 122 of the Army Act, the Tribunal had committed an error in not quashing the order dated 22.11.2018 passed by the Convening Authority and consequently the trial proceedings. He also submitted that the charge-sheet dated 19.11.2018 framing three charges against the Appellant Under Section 45 of the Army Act, based on the said allegations was also required to be quashed and set aside. 6. Per contra, the learned Senior Advocate Mr. R. Balasubramanian appearing for the Respondents vehemently submitted that from the letter dated 13.08.2015 written b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Section 122 of the Army Act, which reads as under: 122. Period of Limitation for trial-(1) Except as provided by Sub-section (2), no trial by court-martial of any person subject to this Act for any offence shall be commenced after the expiration of a period of three years and such period shall commence- (a) on the date of the offence or, (b) where the commission of the offence was not known to the person aggrieved by the offence or to the authority competent to initiate action, the first day on which such offence comes to the knowledge of such person or authority, whichever is earlier or (c) where it is not known by whom the offence was committed, the first day on which the identity of the offender is known to the person ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en by the aggrieved person i.e., Col. Ramneesh Singh to the concerned authority, it clearly transpires that he was aware of the alleged act of the Appellant having stolen the affection of his wife on the date of the said letter. He had specifically mentioned in the said letter that it was for bringing to the notice of the concerned authority about the Appellant's act of stealing affection of his wife. He had further alleged therein that the Appellant was sending indecent messages to his wife which were sexually explicit in nature and that he had reasonable cause to believe that the Appellant and his wife had indulged in illegitimate physical relationship with each other. Therefore, the date 13.08.2015 would be the crucial date on which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
