Delhi High Court
Ram Niwas Dhanda vs Union Of India & Ors. on 9 August, 2023
Neutral Citation Number 2023:DHC:5684-DB
$~50
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 09.08.2023
+ W.P.(C) 10511/2023, CM APPL. 40773/2023 & CM APPL.
40774/2023
RAM NIWAS DHANDA ......Petitioner
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Mr. R.K. Ojha, Advocate with petitioner in person
For the Respondents: Mr. Vikas Kumar Sharma, Senior Panel Counsel
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. Petitioner impugns order dated 19.07.2022 whereby the
Commandant, 25 Battalion, BSF has detailed the Deputy Commandant
to prepare the record of evidence in respect of charges against
petitioner under Section 20 (c), 40 & 21 (1) of BSF Act, 1968.
2. Petitioner had earlier filed an identical petition impugning the
same order dated 19.07.2023 in WP (C) No. 9862/2023 seeking
quashing of the said order.
Signature Not Verified
By:SONIA THAPLIYAL
Signing Date:11.08.2023
19:07:39
Neutral Citation Number 2023:DHC:5684-DB
3. Respondents on 27.07.2023 had stated that it was decided to try
the petitioner by General Security Force Court. All defences would be
available to the petitioner before the General Security Force Court.
After some arguments on 27.07.2023, learned counsel for petitioner
had sought leave to withdraw the petition reserving the right of
petitioner to take all available defences in accordance with law.
4. We are informed that General Security Force Court is likely to be
convened within the next week.
5. Petitioner having earlier filed a petition before this Court
impugning the same order and having withdrawn the same is precluded
from filing a second petition on the same cause of action. This second
petition has been filed merely on the ground of change of counsel
contending that the new counsel noticed that in the earlier petition a
specific point was not urged.
6. This Petition is barred on the principles of res-judicata,
constructive res judicata and issue estopple1. Mere change of counsel
does not entitle the petitioner to approach the High Court afresh.
7. In view of the above, we are not inclined to entertain the present
petition. The petition is consequently dismissed.
8. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, we are
refraining from imposing any cost on the petitioner for filing a petition
Hope Plantations Ltd. Vs. Taluk Land Board (1999) 5 SCC 590
Signature Not Verified
By:SONIA THAPLIYAL
Signing Date:11.08.2023
19:07:39
Neutral Citation Number 2023:DHC:5684-DB
before this Court repeatedly for the same cause.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
MANOJ JAIN, J
AUGUST 9, 2023/dr
Signature Not Verified
By:SONIA THAPLIYAL
Signing Date:11.08.2023
19:07:39
