Advanced Search Results

Nawab Khan, Sub [No. 870021695] Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Subject : Service

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 20, 40, 45(B), 46, 48, 89, 107, 108 and 117; ;Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 - Section 3; ;Prevention of Corruption Act, 1987 - Section 13(1) and 13(2); ;Border Security Force Rules, 1969 - Rules 45B, 48, 51, 51A, 59, 73 and 167; ;Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 1998 - Section 13; ;Army Act - Sections 52 and 63; ;Evidence Act; ;Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227; ;Army Rules - Rules 22 and 149; ;Defence Service Regulations; ;Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC)

Reported in : 2006(2)JKJ255

of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 could not be established and a fresh charge under Section 46 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 for committing offence in terms of Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 came to be … the second charge.(iv) There has been gross violation of the procedure prescribed under Rules 45-B, 48, 51-A and 59 of the Border Security Force Rules, 1969.6. It is on the above premises that the challenge is made

Chokha Ram Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Service

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 19, 21, 21(1), 21(2) and 22; Border Security Force Rules, 1969 - Rules 48, 48(3), 49(3), 51, 59 to 64, 142(1), 142(2) and 157

Reported in : 110(2004)DLT268; 2004(73)DRJ450; 2004(3)SLJ44(Delhi)

all subjected to any cross-examination on behalf of the petitioner. 8. In terms of Section 21 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968, where any person subject to the Act who disobeys in such manner as to show a willful defiance … of Rule 63, while assailing the punishment of dismissal from service, the petitioner failed to notice that Rules 59 to 64 actually provide for procedure to be followed in connection with convening of a General and Petty

Nawab Khan, Sub [No. 870021695] Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Subject : ServiceCriminal

Acts : Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Section 13(1) and 13(2); ;Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 46 and 59; ;Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 - Section 3; ;Border Security Force Rules - Rule 45

Reported in : 2006(2)JKJ234

the Commanding Officer or by the competent authority in directing his trial while exercising jurisdiction and authority under Section 59 on the advice of the Law Officer, which institution is provided by the Border Security Force Act and … short ground, that his trial by the General Security Force Court is vitiated because of flagrant violation of Border Security Force Act and Border Security Force Rules, hereinafter referred as Act and Rules respectively.2. Mrs. Surinder Kour, learned Counsel for … reads, thus:APPENDIX VIRULE 53(2)CHARGE SHEETThe accused No. 870021695 Subedar Nawab Khan of 5 BN BSF, is charged with:BSF ACT 1968, SECTION 46 : COMMITTING A CIVILOFFENCE, THAT IS TO SAY ABETTING THESMUGGLING OF GOODS, PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 3 OFCONSERVATION

Gouranga Chakraborty Vs. State of Tripura and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : ServiceConstitution

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 11(2), (4), 19, 48, 59 and 141; Border Security Force Rules, 1969 - Rules 6 and 177; Constitution of India - Article 311

Reported in : AIR1989SC1321; JT1989(Suppl1)SC86; 1989(1)SCALE793; (1989)3SCC314; [1989]2SCR271; 1989(2)LC252(SC)

dismissed from service by the Commandant by order dated January 5, 1972 in accordance with the provisions of Border Security Force Act, 1968 and the Rules framed thereunder.6. The Munsiff held that the plaintiff was given reasonable opportunity before the Commandant … February 3, 1972. No relief was granted to him.4. The appellant as plaintiff after serving a notice under Section 80 of the CPC and as no redress was given to him, filed Title Suit No. 33 of

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

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 … 240 days in a calender year (Ref : MANU/SC/00408/2005 : AIR 2005 SC 3966 : (2005) 5 SCC 591 General Manager, Haryana Roadways vs. Rudhan Singh). (ii) If the workman has rendered considerable period of service before

Universal Music India Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : 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),

Reported in : [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 … as to what would constitute adequate opportunity to represent against impugned action. 59. In : (1973)IILLJ84SC Union of India v. G.R. Prabhavalkar and Ors., the … 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

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 … Border Security Force, Punjab Frontier, BSF Campus, the confirming authority. In para 59 (n), the petitioner took the plea that the revisional order was passed … 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

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 … for 240 days in a calender year (Ref : : AIR 2005 SC 3966 : (2005) 5 SCC 591 General Manager, Haryana Roadways v. Rudhan Singh).(ii) If the workman has rendered considerable period of service before his

Border Security Force and anr. Vs. the Land Acquisition Officer and or ...

Court : Rajasthan

Subject : Property

Reported in : 1997(1)WLC518; 1996(1)WLN466

Matched in: Parties Border Security Force and anr. Vs. the Land Acquisition Officer and ors.