Military Intelligence officers move SC seeking review of suspension order

Four Military Intelligence officers were suspended for allegedly being part of a WhatsApp group with a Pakistani agent. They have approached the Supreme Court seeking a review of its order, challenging their suspension. The officers claimed that they were not given a hearing before being suspended pending the Court of Inquiry against them.

The Supreme Court rejected the officers' petition. The petition disagree with their contention that before their suspension pending the Court of Inquiry, they were required to have the opportunity for a hearing.

"Even under Regulation 349 also, there is no requirement of such a procedure to be followed. The petitioners can be suspended pending the Court of Inquiry, which as stated by Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General, has already been constituted and inquiry is going on," the bench of Justices M R Shah and B V Nagrathna held on July 14.


Following this, the officers have filed a review petition claiming that inquiry and investigation are two different procedures as per army law. They also stated that the Court of Inquiry (COI) is a "fact finding tool", which is essentially a "pre-stage to disciplinary proceedings".

The COI will reach a conclusion soon, following which the commanding officer will decide if they must proceed with the disciplinary proceedings and carry out the investigation under Army Rule 22. He can decided to suspend the soldiers under his jurisdiction pending investigation and not during the Court of Inquiry, according to the petition.

The COI is an administrative action which is meant to assist the decision making process at the prior stage to making any conclusions with regards to suspension, military custody or arrest.

The investigation acts as a post stage requirement especially when a decision related to military custody originates through the Court of Inquiry conclusions

Both, inquiry and investigations give statutory protection and safeguards to the person subject to the Army Act of rights of being heard.

"Thus this Hon'ble Court has erred in its decision that the suspension of petitioners as correct and legal pending the Court of Inquiry proceedings which was not even concluded.

"Thus, the order of convening the Court of Inquiry itself becomes illegal under the Acts and Rules once the suspension order is passed and the competent authority under the Acts and rules are required to proceed for investigation under the procedure stipulated under Army Rule 22 and onwards," the petition said.

The officers, termed the suspension orders as illegal and suffering from "procedural infirmity". They said that the decision making process of the authority was against the law and arbitrary, because they were denied the opportunity to be heard.

The Solicitor General made a submission of "very serious allegation", not justified with the suspension orders on record.

The officers were suspended in May this year. They have claimed that they were ordered by their superiors to hand over their personal mobile phones which they did without any hesitation and cooperated with the investigation.

They were told that there was one officer who is part of a WhatsApp group in which a Pakistani Intelligence Operative is active hence all digital assets belonging to them need to be checked, they had said in their first petition.