Advanced Search Results

Ashok Kumar Vs. Dg. Bsf and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Service

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Section 26; Border Security Force Rules - Rule 45

Necessary order would be passed within a period of 6 weeks from today. 15. No costs. 16. Dasti. Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Section 26 - Intoxication -- Learned counsel for the petitioner urges on the proportionality of the punishment inflicted upon

Ex. L/Nk Vimal Kumar Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Service

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 20, 26, 48, 70 and 117(2); ;Army Act; ;Army Rules - Rules 115, 115(2), 115(2A) and 125; ;Navy Act; ;Armed Forces Act; ;Border Security Force Rules, 1969 - Rules 33(2), 43, 45, 45B, 46, 48(3), 49, 51, 62, 81, 81(3), 101, 101(3), 142, 142(2) and 157; ;Border Security Force Rules, 1965 - Rules 48(3), 49(2) and 49(3); ;Constitution of India - Article 14

(hereinafter referred to 'SSFC' for brevity) finding the petitioner guilty of an offence under Section 26 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to 'BSF Act' for brevity) and the sentence of dismissal from service. The petitioner also assails

In Re: for Stay (Can 6546/05)

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Civil

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 26, 40, 87, 117, 117(1) and 117(2); ;Evidence Act, 1872; ;Army Act, 1950 - Sections 162 and 164(2); ;Border Security Force Rules, 1969 - Rules 48.3, 156 and 167 to 169; ;Constitution of India - Article 226

referred to as SSFC) at 10-30 a.m. on 12th November, 2001 under Sections 40 and 26 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968. The appellant was given liberty to be present along with any person of the Battalion as friend, as … performing ambush Duty in the area of BOP Lachugachh On International Border with Bangladesh.BSF ACT BSF ACT 1968 SECTION-26 SEC-26 INTOXICATION CHARGE-IIIn that he, At about 22.30 hrs. on 27.10.2000, While an ambush duty in area of

In Re: an Appln. for Stay (Can 6546/05)

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Service

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 26, 40, 87, 117, 117(1) and 117(2); ;Border Security Force Rules, 1969 - Rules 48.3, 156 and 167 to 169; ;Evidence Act, 1872; ;Army Act, 1950 - Sections 162, 164 and 164(2); ;Constitution of India - Article 226

referred to as SSFC) at 10-30 a.m. on 12th November, 2001 under Sections 40 and 26 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968. The appellant was given liberty to be present along with any person of the Battalion as friend, as … 27.10.2000Brought a local womanto NakaMachan, while performingambushDuty in the area of BOPLachugachhOn International BorderwithBangladesh.BSF ACT BSF ACT 1968 SECTION-26SECTION -26 INTOXICATIONCHARGE-IIIn that he,At about 22.30 hrs.on 27.10.2000,While an ambush dutyin area ofBOP Lachugachh foundin a stateof intoxication2.

Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Vs. S.S. Ranade

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Service

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 2 and 141; Border Security Force (Seniority, Promotion and Superannuation of Officers) Rules, 1978 - Rules 3, 6, 7 and 9; Border Security Force (Seniority, Promotion and Superannuation of Officers) (Amendment) Rules, 1989; Border Security Force Rules, 1969 - Rule 14A

Reported in : [1995(71)FLR492]; JT1995(2)SC582; 1995(3)SCALE65; (1995)4SCC462; [1995]3SCR773; (1995)3UPLBEC1499

the security of the borders of India and matters connected therewith, are governed by the provisions of the Border Security Force Act, 1968. Section 141 of the Border Security Force Act enables the Central Government, by notification, to make rules for the … were increased to 185. The revised cadre strength is set out in paragraph 2 of the communication dated 26 of June, 1990 from the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs to the Director General, Border Security

Ajai Kumar Roy Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : CriminalConstitution

Acts : Army Act, 1950 - Sections 101; Borders Security Force Rules, 1969 - Rule 40; Constitution of India - Article 21

Reported in : 2003CriLJ3999

to two years or such less punishment as is in the Act mentioned. 13. Section 28 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 is also a verbatim reproduction of Section 50 of the Army Act. Section 50 of the Army Act … the provisions of the Act. The petitioner has filed this writ petition without availing the alternative remedy under Section 26 of the Act and Rule 33(b) of Army Rules. The petition is therefore liable to be dismissed.4. After

Ex.Uttam Navik Dalbir Singh Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

under Rule 149 of the BSF Rules, 1969 or by the appellate authority under Section 117(2) of the Border Security Force Act, 1968. In the said case, the Supreme Court had carefully examined the provisions of Rule 149 of the Border … chargesheet was drawn for convening a Coast Guard Court for trial of the petitioner in terms of Rule 26 and 27 of the Coast Guard (Discipline) Rules, 1983. The charges framed against the petitioner were as under:-

Const. Jaibir Singh Vs. Union of India

Court : Delhi

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1969 - Rule 45; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 34, 149, 120B

u/s 20(a) i.e. using criminal force to his superior (first charge) and Section 26 intoxication (second charge) of BORDER SECURITY FORCE Act 1968. All the three accused persons pleaded not guilty of 1st charge and guilty of 2nd charge, hence competent

Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Devi Lal Sahu

Court : Rajasthan

Subject : Service

leave. The writ-petitioner submitted that on 28.10.2003, he was served with a charge-sheet under Section 26 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 ('the BSF Act') and was placed under close arrest at Headquarter 20 Bn. Barmer on 29.10.2003; and that

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