Advanced Search Results

Krishna Chandra Chaurasiya Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Service

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 23 and 48; Indian Penal Code; Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes Act

Reported in : 2004(2)AWC1409; (2004)2UPLBEC1784

of the first 12 of following questions you will be liable to be punished as provided in the Border Security Force Act, 1968.'Since at the trial the petitioner was found to be guilty under Section 23 of the B.S.F. Act, 1968

Head Const. Hardev Singh Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Constitution of India - Article 227; Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 46, 107 and 108; Border Security Rules, 1969 - Rule 48; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 302, 304 and 304A; Evidence Act - Sections 24

Reported in : 2000CriLJ2585

months from the receipt of the Court order. The respondents defended the vires of the provisions of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 and the Border Security Force Rules, 1969 and contended that the same were in accordance with the provisions … the charge-sheet dated 14th May, 1992. The charge-sheet was served on the petitioner for committing civil offence under Section 46 of the BSF Act, i.e. the offence of murder, punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal … Rule 129A. A copy of the FIR HQ BSF Jal Savingram dated 23-9-93 was placed on record as Appendix R-3. Regarding the pre-confirmation petition dated

Gajendra Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 46, 47, 47(1), 80, 81 and 141(2); Army Act, 1950; Navy Act, 1957; Air Force Act, 1950; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 307, 323 and 452; Border Security Force Rules, 1969 - Rules 41, 41(1) and 42; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1974 - Sections 192, 439 and 475; Criminal Courts and Security Force Courts (Adjustment of Jurisdiction) Rules, 1969 - Rules 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8; Criminal Courts and Court Martial (Adjustment of Jurisdiction) Rules, 1952 - Rules 3 and 4; Constitution of India; Air Force Law

Reported in : 1995CriLJ3347; 1995(3)WLC635; 1995(2)WLN31

the learned Sessions Judge, Jodhpur, whereby he allowed the application dated 23-5-1994 filed under Section 80 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 (in short, 'the Act') by the D. I. G., B. S. F., Bikaner (non-petitioner No. 2) and directed

Yacub Kispotta and Others Vs. Director General BSF and Others

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

of India €“ Article 311(ii) - Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Section 14 (c),Section 2I-C, Section 22, Section 23, Section 36, Section 40, Section 47, Section 48, Section 49, Section 51, Section 64, Section 70, Section 74, … any inquiry or giving them opportunity to explain their alleged misconduct in accordance with its parent law, the Border Security Force Act, 1968 ("the Act") or the Border Security Force Rules, 1969 ( Rules ?) framed there-under. 2. The facts necessary

Comdt. Atul Kumar Singh Vs. Uoi and anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1969 - Section 117(2); Constitution of India - Articles 226, 227

the finding and sentence of the Security Force Court in terms of the provisions of Section 107 of Border Security Force Act, 1968. 20. Aggrieved by the finding and sentence awarded by the Security Force Court which stood confirmed by the … handed over to HC/Driver Ram Babu but entries regarding the same were made in the necessary registers on 23.03.2005 as he had to leave for Agartala on 20.03.2005 and returned to his unit only on 23.03.2005. 9.

Ex.Const.Ram Kumar Vs. Uoi and anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

of the above captioned is that on April 25, 1988 the petitioner was enrolled as a Constable in Border Security Force.2. Pertaining to an incident dated August 18, 2002 as per which the petitioner was found absent from … Record of Evidence the Commandant framed charges against the petitioner which read as under: IST CHARGE INTOXICATION BSF ACT - 1968 SECTION - 26 in that he, at 67 Bn BSF Panjipara where he was undergoing SLC Phase-II on … 1969 i.e. drew out a charge sheet against the petitioner.3. On August 23, 2002 the Commandant 78th Bn. directed S.M.Kispotta, Deputy Commandant 78th Bn. to

Sanjay Kumar Vs. Uoi and Ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Criminal

JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The writ petitioner sought appointment under the Border Security Force and being successful was offered employment. The petitioner was required to fill up an enrollment form, which he … case was made out to try the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 23 of the BSF Act, 1968, which Section makes it an offence to give false information when enrolled in the force and provides punishment

S.A. Qadir Vs. the Union of India and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Subject : Service

Reported in : 2000(2)WLN635

the appellant is that mens rea is a necessary ingredient of the offence under Section 40 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968. Section 40 reads:40. Violation of good order and discipline-Any person subject to this Act who is guilty of any … , their Lordships considered the question whether mens rea was necessary for an offence under Section 8(1) and Section 23(l-a) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act. 1947. In that case, the respondent, boarded the Swiss plane at Zurich

Balwinder Singh Vs Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Border Security Force

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1969 - Rule 53(2) ; Sections 40, 26, 117, 53, 5575

consider the statutory position with regard to persons subjected to the Border Security Force. Section 70 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 (BSF Act hereafter) provides the constitution of a Summary Security Force Court (`SSFC' hereafter). It is permitted under … has been succinctly put by the Supreme Court in the judgment reported at MANU/SC/0349/2005 : AIR 2005 SC 2372 : (2005) 5 SCC 124 Allahabad Jal Sansthan vs. Daya Shanker Rai when the court held that "no

Chanchal Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Subject : Service

Acts : Border Security Force Rules - Rule 142 and 142(2); ;Border Security Force Act - Sections 18(1) and 80

Reported in : 2003(3)JKJ381

dismissed from service vide the impugned order dated 18.11.1999. This punishment was imposed under section 18(1) of the Border Security Force Act 1968. As far as the commission of offence under Section 376/452 RPC is concerned, the authority i. e. the