MEHAR SINGH Vs. SHANTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Written request made on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner is declined. The plaintiff/petitioner had filed a suit for damages to the extent of Rs. 10 lacs on account of false and malicious allegations of rape made by of Shanti-defendant against him. FIR No. 128 dated 31.5.1999 under Section 452 and 376/34 IPC in this regard was lodged at Police Station City Abohar. Ultimately, the plaintiff Mehar Singh and other accused, namely, Ram Singh and Rakesh Kumar were acquitted, vide judgment dated 12.3.2004. Criminal Revision filed by the complainant against the said judgment was also dismissed by this Court on 23.10.2009.

(2.) However, after acquittal, the plaintiff filed a suit for damages on account of malicious prosecution on 11.5.2007, claiming damages to the extent of Rs. 10 lacs. In the said suit, the court framed issue No. 6 with regard to limitation. The trial court, while interpreting Article 74 of the Limitation Act, 1963, held that the limitation for compensation in a suit for malicious prosecution was one year from the date when the plaintiff was acquitted or prosecution is otherwise terminated. Thus, the suit filed by the plaintiff/petitioner was held to be time barred.

(3.) The primary contention raised on behalf of the respondent is that when the trial court had framed the issue of limitation, and while treating the same as a preliminary issue, decided the same against the plaintiff and consequently dismissed the suit of the plaintiff, then no revision was maintainable.