Advanced Search Results
Shiv Parshad Pandey Vs. C.B.i. Through Director, New Delhi
Supreme Court of India
Mar-05-2003
Criminal
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sections 7, 13(1) and 13(2); Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 3, 3(2), 17, 52, 53, 57, 75, 77, 77(2), 80, 81 and 84; Border Security Force Rules - Rules 41, 45B, 51A, 52, 53, 53(2) to 106 and 170 to 174; Army Act, 1950
2003(51)BLJR934; 2003CriLJ1710; JT2003(2)SC413; 2003(2)SCALE658; (2003)11SCC508; 2003(1)LC640(SC)
appellant.27. In the said view of the matter, these appeals fail and thesame are dismissed. Service Law - Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 52, 53, 75, 77 and 81 - B. S. F. Rules - 41, 45B, 51A, 53, … 5. Before the High Court the appellant had contended in viewof the provisions of Section 52 read with Section 57 of the BorderSecurity Force Act. 1968 (the BSF Act), the appellant cannot beprosecuted before the Special Judge because
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskS.A. Qadir Vs. the Union of India and ors.
Rajasthan
Apr-26-2000
Service
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 self-esteem and dignity and would cause serious prejudice to the good order and discipline of the Force. 57. When any allegation is made against a member of any unit of human beings, without disclosing the name
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskEx.Uttam Navik Dalbir Singh Vs. Union of India and Others
Delhi
Mar-21-2012
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 … Affidavit dated 28th September, 1999 by contending that summary punishment had been imposed on the petitioner as per Section 57, and as per Rules 18 to 20 of the Coast Guard (Discipline) Rules, 1983. It is further contended
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask18-section briefs on any result in this list
Balwinder Singh Vs Union of India and ors.
Delhi
Jun-03-2010
Border Security Force
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
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskMohinder Singh Malik and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Jammu and Kashmir
Mar-20-2002
Service
Border Security Force (Seniority, Promotion and Superannuation of Officers) Rules, 1978 - Rules 9 and 14A; ;Border Security Force (Seniority, Promotion and Superannuation of Officers) (Amendment) Rules, 1998; ;Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 16
2003(3)JKJ73
dated 27.5.1998, purportingly issued in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (2) of Section 141 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968, Rule 9 of the 1978 Rules was amended so as to provide for the age of superannuation of … Force Act, 1978.5. Appellant also claimed that his age of superannuation should have been 60 years instead of 57 years as in the case of other central civil servants, looking after the affairs of Union of India.
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskBorder Security Force (B.S.F.) Vs. State of Meghalaya and ors.
Guwahati
Oct-07-1988
Constitution
Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 - Sections 2(2) and 3; Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 4
BSF vesting in the Central Government by virtue of what has been stated in Section 4 of the Border Security Force Act inasmuch as Commission of Enquiry is a fact finding body and by appointing such a Commission no control … The Central Government can suo motu deploy the force in any State.' 15. The BSF Act 47 of 1968 and the rules promulgated under the Act were heavily relied in support of the writ petitions therefore we … to 56 of Chapter IV punishments are prescribed. In Chapter V Sections 57 to 63 deal with the trial of offences. Sections 64 to 81
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskMr P S Venkatesh Vs. The Secretary
Karnataka
May-24-2021
Land Acquisition
‘the said Rules’ for short). These Rules are framed under sub Section (2) of Section 141 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968. It cannot, therefore, be in doubt that the Rules are statutes. The Rule that is germane for consideration … at Bengaluru the age of retirement of all the personnel including that of the petitioner was enhanced from 57 to 60 years. It is then the time of retirement of the petitioner got changed from April 2020
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskUniversal Music India Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Delhi
Sep-07-2006
Intellectual Property Rights
Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 4D, 10A to 10D, 79, 111(4), 237, 397, 398, 399, 399(1), 399(2), 399(3), 399(4), 399(5), 401, 402 and 642; Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 33; Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Sections 10; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Sections 86, 92, 92(1) and 92(2); Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 195 and 197; Companies (IInd Amendment) Act, 2003 - Sections 44; Constitution of India - Article 226; Army Act, 1950 - Sections 19; Army Rules, 1954 - Rule 14; Land Acquisition Act - Sections 17(4); Foreign Exchange Regulation Act; Electricity Act, 1910 - Sections 4(1); Border Security Force Act, 1968; Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949; Minimum Wages Act, 1948 - Sections 5(1); Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Sections 11, 11(4),
[2008]87SCL51(Delhi)
and legislative intent, the Apex Court held that the authority which disposed of a post-confirmation petition under the Border Security Force Act, 1968 and rules framed there under is not a court and every order passed administratively cannot be subjected to … of the respondents in requiring them to serve on the other side a copy of their application under Section 399(4) seeking leave to maintain a petition under Section 397 and 398 of the Companies Act. The petitioners
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskDr. Santosh Kumar Jha Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
Delhi
Aug-20-2014
Land Acquisition
of the enquiry was of no legal consequence. Mr. Sinha submitted that there was no power under the Border Security Force Act, 1968 („BSF Act‟) for the BSF to have recorded the so-called confessional statement of the Appellant and it was … Special Judge, CBI, New Delhi in Criminal Complaint No.101 of 2006 convicting the Appellant for the offence under Section 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1) (e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 („PC Act‟) and
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskV.G. Pillai Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Guwahati
Jun-12-2007
Criminal
petition) was confirmed vide order dated 10.6.91 (Annexure-B to the writ petition) passed by the Inspector General of Border Security Force (for short BSF) Tripura, Cachar and Mizoram Frontier (Confirming Authority) and the communication being No. 6/57/97-Pet/CIO (D&L;)/BSF/O-14 dated … Security Force Court, not in criminal court, and the appellant/petitioner was charged under Section 46 of the BSF Act 1968 (for short 'the Act') for committing a civil offence that is to say committed an offence of rape, … may make rules consistent with the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Army Act, Navy and the Air Force Act and other law relating to the Armed Forces of the Union, for the time being in force. He
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskAI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »