Advanced Search Results

Shiv Parshad Pandey Vs. C.B.i. Through Director, New Delhi

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Acts : 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

Reported in : 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, … Section 77(2) ofthe BSF Act. Therefore, even this Section 80 would not apply tothe facts of this case.15. Section 81 of the BSF Act reads thus:-'81. Power of criminal court to require delivery ofoffender-- (1) When a criminal

Deputy Inspector General, Border Security Force Vs. the State and anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 173, 446, 451, 475, 475(1) and 482; Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 46, 80 and 81; Border Security Force Courts (Adjustment of Jurisdiction) Rules, 1969 - Rules 3 to 9; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 279 and 337; Criminal Courts and Court Martial (Adjustment of Jurisdiction) Rules, 1952 - Rules 3 to 9; Army Act, 1950 - Sections 125 and 126

Reported in : 2002IIIAD(Delhi)433; 96(2002)DLT217; 2002(62)DRJ16

Matched in: Parties Deputy Inspector General, Border Security Force Vs. the State and anr.

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 … of the charge. The court shall enter the plea only thereafter and proceed with the trial accordingly.60. Rule 81 stipulates the procedure which is to be followed on a plea of guilty. When the court has so

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 … 3-5-1994 under Section 80 of the Act were not at all belated. The procedure in Sections 80 and 81 of the Act and in the Adjustment of Jurisdiction Rules for resolving the conflict of jurisdiction is mandatory.

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 … the entire material available on record. We also summoned the original records of Special Trial Nos. 80 and 81 of 1998 which are pending before the Court of Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Gorakhpur and have perused it.6.

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

Kundan Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Subject : Criminal

Reported in : 2001(1)WLN135

of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Sections 46, 47, 80 and Section 2 (a) & (d) of Border Security Force Act, 1968, hereinafter referred-to as 'the Act of 1968'. In support of the contention, learned Counsel has heavily placed reliance … instituted before a Security Force Court, to direct that the accused person shall be detained in Force custody.21. Section 81 contemplates that when a Criminal court having jurisdiction is of the opinion that proceedings, shall be instituted before

Baljinder Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Subject : Service

Reported in : 2006(3)SLJ392(P& H)

decision of the Summary Security Force Court, the petitioner preferred a statutory petition under Section 117 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 along with an application under Section 130 of the Act for suspension of the sentence imposed upon him. … petitioner' s statutory petition is also unsustainable being a non-speaking and crypatic order. Mr. Ghuman also referred to Section 81 of the Act in order to contend that once FIR had been registered by the police, Summary Security

Dr. Santosh Kumar Jha Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation

Court : Delhi

Subject : 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 … be instituted in the regular criminal court. The Appellant was handed over to the CBI in terms of Section 81 of the BSF Act.31. In Lt. Col. R.S. Yadav v. State of Madhya Pradesh 2012 Crl LJ19 the

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 … Ravula Hariprasada Rao v. The State : 1951CriLJ768 , the Supreme Court considered whether offence punishable under Rule 81 of the Defence of India Rules requires punishment. In that case the appellant was a licensee of two