Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: border security force act 1968 section 104 order for custody and disposal of property pending trial Page 7 of about 438 results (0.175 seconds)

Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Debashish Ghosh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2009(8)SCALE779; 2009(5)LC2077(SC):2009(4)LHSC2462.

..... bench of the calcutta high court whereby the calcutta high court allowed the writ appeal filed by the respondent herein. the respondent herein was serving as a constable in the border security force, 'bsf' for short, having joined the service in the year 1988. in his checkered career, on seven occasions, he went on leave and never reported back in ..... has been ordered, though the high court has kept it open for the respondent union of india to take appropriate action in accordance with the provisions of the act and law as indicated.3. we have carefully considered the provisions as well as the facts which have been brought before us by the learned counsel appearing on ..... cause overstays leave granted to him; or (c) to (g) x x x shall, on conviction by a security force court, be liable to suffer imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years or such less punishment as is in this act mentioned.learned counsel further takes us to section 48 which provides the punishments awardable in the .....

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Bhadreswar Hira

Court : Guwahati

..... his post after serving for 10 or more years but less than 20 years, is entitled to pension/pensionary benefits under the relevant provisions of border security force act. 1968 (hereinafter called the act) and the border security force rules, 1959 (hereinafter called the bsf rules) or the central civil services (pension) rules, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the ccs ( ..... under the rules. under the rules, he is not entitled to get such benefits.'10. the apex court, after considering all the relevant provisions of the bsf act, border security force rules, 1969 and ccs (pension) rules, 1972, to which reference have already been made, came to the following conclusion: '22. in the result, ..... back in service. letter dated 17th october, 1998 reads as under :'no. 13/19/ 1/98-rectt/bsf/1367-1667government of indiaministry of home affairsdte general border security force(pers dte : rectt section) new delhi-3, dated 17th oct 1998.to.all ftr hqrs bsf all sector hqrs bsf bsf academy, tekanpur bsf cswt .....

Ravi Paul and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : JT1995(1)SC579; 1995LabIC405; 1995(1)SCALE261; (1995)3SCC300; [1995]1SCR419; 1995(2)SLJ205(SC); 1995(1)LC571(SC)

..... central training college in the central reserve police force. on september 2, 1968, parliament enacted the border security force act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the 'bsf act') to provide for the constitution and regulation of an armed force of the union for ensuring the security of the borders of india and for matters connected therewith. sub ..... -section (1) of section 141 of the bsf act empowers the central government ..... providing for conditions of service (including deductions from pay and allowances) of the members of the force. under sub-section (2) of section 142 members of the border security force in existence at the commencement of the act are deemed to have been appointed or, as the case may be, enrolled as such .....

The Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs Vs. G. Majumdar

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : 1978CriLJ80

..... elected to start proceedings in their own forum end the learned magistrate has accepted the proposition. rule 5 says that when the competent authority under the border security force act elects that the accused should be tried by the border security force court, the magistrate shell stay proceedings and if the accused is in his power or in his control shall deliver the accused with the statement ..... of the charge-sheet and in fact processes had been issued against them. the inspector general, b. s. f. has elected to institute the proceedings in the security force court under section 80 of the border security force act, 1968. such proceedings may be started, but for that purpose the judicial records before the sub-divisional judicial magistrate, bongaon cannot be of any use and moreover .....

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

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : 2000CriLJ2585

..... petition was disposed of within three 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 of the constitution of india. it was further mentioned that whatever ..... court-martial are rendered infirm in law. this disposes of the first limb of the contention (a).' 22. section 65 of the border security force act provides as under :- 'a general security force court may be convened by the central government or the director-general or by any officer empowered in this behalf by warrant of the ..... new court to be constituted for his trial. 5. the petitioner lateron submitted a post-confirmation petition under section 117 (2) of the border security force act (hereinafter to be referred as 'the act') to the union of india, i.e. respondent no. 1 through secretary, ministry of home affairs, new delhi and a copy of .....

Const. Jaibir Singh Vs. Union of India

Court : Delhi

..... report before commandant 1st bn. bsf on 15th oct 2003, for committing offences 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 authority issued ..... orders to prepare record of evidence of the case by shri g.p.das, ac, 1st battalion border security force".15. it is then urged that the first charge ..... is vague inasmuch as the role of the accused is not assigned/described in the charge. it is urged that it has not been stated that the accused acted with a common intention or a common object or .....

Border Security Force (B.S.F.) Vs. State of Meghalaya and ors.

Court : Guwahati

..... the bsf would not in any way dilute the control over the 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 over the working of the bsf can be said to have been ..... and unauthorised entry into the indian territory and to instil security among the people residing in the border areas of the country. this act in ten chapters covers 142 sections. at first two sets of rules were promulgated. border security force rules of 1969 and adjustment of jurisdiction rules of 1969. later superannuation rules of 1978. border security force pay and allowance rules of 1978. the rules were promulgated .....

Deputy Inspector General, Border Security Force Vs. Ashok Kumar Mishra ...

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : 2005(2)CHN638

..... why his services should not be terminated, by virtue of the powers vested in the said commandant under section 11(2) of the border security force act, 1968 read with rule 22 of the border security force rules, 1969. it was also observed that considering the contents of the show-cause notice, it was not expedient and impracticable to ..... erred in not considering the provisions of section 115 of the border security force act, 1968, which, according to mr. ghosh, would have to be read with rule 22 of the border security force rules, 1969 so as to give a harmonious construction to the provisions of the act or the rules in a case where the concerned authority differed ..... , the said show-cause notice along with the invocation of rule 22 of the border security force rules, was the subject-matter of challenge in the writ petition.4. the learned single judge after considering the various provisions of the act and the rules, came to the conclusion that once the writ petitioner had been acquitted .....

Vinod Kumar S/O Sudarshan Kelkar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2004(4)MhLj561

..... position that section 121a of the b.s.f. act has been introduced in the border security force act w.e.f. 1-9-2000 and the petitioner-prisoner has been convicted by the border security court by the order dated 17-7-1992. it may be useful to reproduce section 121a of the border security force act, which is pari materia to section 428 of the ..... convicted and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and ordered to be dismissed from service. prior to 1-9-2000 there was no provision in the border security force act regarding grant of set off against the term of imprisonment imposed upon the convict and for the first time by the b.s.f. (amendment ..... this petition is; whether the petitioner prisoner who is undergoing imprisonment on his conviction by the security force court for the offence under section 302 of the indian penal code and under section 46 of the border security force act, 1968 (for short, the b.s.f. act) is entitled to set off for the period he has undergone detention as an under- .....

Des Raj Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

..... statement had been used against the petitioner, to the petitioner, before concluding the trial.4. the petitionerbtherefore, demonstrates violation of the provisions of border security force act and rules framed there under by the respondents, in holding his trial.5. responding to the writ petition, the respondents have submitted that, while ..... court of enquiry which according to the learned counsel was a pre-requisite for holding the petitionerbwas in violation of the provisions of the border security force act and rules framed there under which was liable to be set aside additionally because the respondents had failed to provide opportunity of hearing and ..... recording of evidence and consequent trial of the petitioner affording him full opportunity as provided under the act and the rules.16. petitionerbthe principles of natural justice and the provisions of the border security force act and rules framed there under in holding his trial is, thus, not substantiated.17. petitionerblaw because .....