Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: border security force act 1968 section 108 power to confirm finding and sentence of general security force court Page 8 of about 286 results (0.085 seconds)

Union of India Vs. Sandeep Malik

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 1995IVAD(Delhi)745; 60(1995)DLT885; 1995(35)DRJ464

..... 12) it will be seen that the defense had no objection to this procedure being adopted. it was not contended that the procedure under section 91(4) of the border security force act, must be followed. (13) the victim public witness 6 miss razia khatoon was examined on 23.6.92 on the indian side at zero line. she gave her ..... and is clearly not mandatory. just as there are provisions in the civil procedure code . or cr. p.c. for obtaining evidence on commission, there is procedure indicated in the border security force act also. supposing, on a communication from the court in india to witnesses in a foreign country, - say through officials or lawyers - the indian court is able to ..... of issuing a commission to summon a witnesses abroad as envisaged by section 91(4) of the border security force act (read with section 285 of cr.p.c.) is mandatory and is, in our view, not correct. section 91(4) of the border security force act reads as follows: 's.91(4): when the witness resides in a tribal area or in .....

ex.head Constable Moti Singh vs.uoi & Ors.

Court : Delhi

..... hon'ble mr. justice anil kumar chawla indira banerjee, j judgment1 the short question involved in this writ petition is whether the summary security force court constituted under section 64 of the border security force act 1968, was justified in imposing on the petitioner the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for 6 months in civil prison and dismissal from service ..... 3 of 10 7. on or about 12.05.2005, the petitioner made a statutory petition to the respondent no.2 under section 117 of the border security force act. the statutory petition was rejected by an order dated 26th october 2005.8. in this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the sentence of the summary ..... court as revised by the dig station headquarters as also the order dated 26.10.2005 of the director-general border security force rejecting the statutory petition filed by the petitioner.9. from the record of evidence it appears that about four witnesses were examined. one j.r. .....

Raj Kumar and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2006SC938; [2006(1)JCR278(SC)]; JT2006(1)SC49; 2006(1)SCALE67; (2006)1SCC737; 2006(2)SLJ195(SC)

..... narrated in writ petition (c) no. 569/2001. the petitioners were holding different posts under the border security force (hereinafter referred to as 'the force'), constituted under the border security force act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as 'the bsf act'). the first respondent is the union of india in the ministry of home affairs and the second ..... respondent is the director general of the border security force.3. on 27.12.1995 the second respondent with the ..... said rules provided he has put in requisite number of years of service and fulfills all other eligibility conditions.' (the rules referred to are the border security force rules, 1969, hereinafter referred to as 'the bsf rules') this g.o./circular provided that the competent authority may. 'having regard to the .....

Ct.Narender Kumar and ors. Vs. Uoi and ors.

Court : Delhi

..... 9.1997. 25. aggrieved by the finding and sentence awarded by the general security force court which stood confirmed by the inspector general, the petitioners preferred petition(s) under section 117(2) of border security force act, 1969 to the directorate general border security force, ministry of home affairs, government of india, which petition(s) were rejected ..... that petitioners narender kumar, kaptan singh and raj bahadur singh were employed as constables and petitioner om prakash was employed as a naik with the border security force (hereinafter referred to as the bsf) and were attached to the 88th bn. deployed at village chhaturgul in district srinagar on 23.12.1996 ..... act committing a civil offence, that is sec 46 to say, rape punishable u/s 376 ipc in that they, at chack (chhaturgul) on 23/12/96 at 1830 hrs onward committed rape on prosecutrix of village chack (chhaturgul), teh. kangan distt. srinagar (j&k)." 4. complying with the provisions of rule 45 of the border security force .....

Ram Ashray Prasad Dwivedi Vs. the Union of India and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

..... tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that the petitioner is charged for having committed an offence punishable under section 20(a) of the border security force act, 1968. he refers to the provision of 3 section 20(a) and argues that the said provision only pertains to commission of an offence by use ..... onwards of the return and argues that the entire trial was held in accordance to the requirement of the statutory provisions namely the procedure contemplated in the border security force rules, 1969 and as the petitioner participated in the proceedings without any objection and did not avail of the opportunity granted to him, therefore, he ..... out and annexure p/4 introduced as an appeal. however, annexure p/4 is only a memorandum submitted by petitioner s wife to the director general of border security force, new delhi, wherein she makes certain allegations of harassment of the petitioner, in this also he does not challenge the summary trial or the action initiated .....

Ex-constable Ramvir Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2008(16)SCALE253; (2009)3SCC97:2009AIRSCW163:2009(1)LHSC93

..... while undergoing ri, which is total defiance of authority.he was put to trial before a summary security force court on the aforementioned two charges in terms of the provisions of the border security force act, 1968 (for short, 'the act') and the rules framed thereunder.4. he pleaded guilty to both the charges. he was dismissed ..... from service. a statutory petition filed by him under section 117 of the act was rejected by the director general of border security force by an order dated 28. ..... counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant apart from the contentions raised before the high court, urged:i. as 'kalipada mandal', another constable of the border security force having also absented from the duties and no action having been taken against him, the entire proceeding against appellant is vitiated in law.ii. the purported .....

Satpal Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 116(2005)DLT607; 2005(80)DRJ263; 2006(2)SLJ240(Delhi)

..... to have an advocate to represent him at the trial and being not well conversant with english, he could not understand the proceedings before the summary security force court and the trial was, thus, conducted in gross violation of principles of natural justice. it is also pleaded that the penalty of dismissal from ..... that the same was passed illegally and arbitrarily, without any valid reasons, in violation of principles of natural justice. according to the petitioner, the summary security force court failed to consider the evidence on record. it is added that the petitioner was not subjected to any medical examination and no medical report was ..... and his erratic behavioral pattern witnessed no improvement even on his posting to a sensitive area close to the international border. indiscipline breeds indiscipline. any disciplined force can ill-afford to acquiesce the acts of indiscipline by a soft paddling approach when enforcing discipline with an iron hand is dire need in all eventualities. .....

Union of India and Another Vs. Major Singh and Chander Pal Singh

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2001IIIAD(Delhi)376; 2001(58)DRJ282

..... and seriallized as one of the punishments under section 48 of the border security force act (in short 'bsf act'). 3. the respondents in these appeals were tried by the summary security force court on a charge under section 19(a) of bsf act for remaining absent without leave. during the course of their trials, the ..... of dismissal from service. 4. the respondents herein preferred statutory petitions before the director general, border security force under sections 117(2) and 128 of the bsf act. while exercising the appellate powers the director general, border security force converted the sentence of 'dismissal' to that of 'removal from service'. the respondents aggrieved by ..... that while exercising the appellate jurisdiction under section 117(2) and 128 of the act, the director general, border security force is not bound to confine his order to the punishments as seriallized under section 48 of the bsf act. the appellate authority can exercise the powers enumerated under sections 117(2) and .....

Union of India and Others Vs. Ex Constable Mohinder Singh (Deceased No ...

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 91(2001)DLT291

..... his wife and two minor children and will be referred to hereinafter as respondent) was enrolled in the border security force (bsf) as a constable in april 1988 and became subject to the border security force act (hereinafter the act). and border security force rules (hereinafter the rules). in october 1993 he was posted in 'b' coy of 92 battalion bsf ..... act i.e. the personnel of the b.s.f.(b) if a civil offence is committed by such person (i) in any place in india, or (ii) in any place outside india.16. this section enables the trial and punishment of border security force personnel or officer by a security force court. where both security force ..... court and ordinary criminal court have jurisdiction to try a member of the bsf the option to decide the forum rested with the force authorities and the criminal court would not have any jurisdiction .....

Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. S.S. Kothiyal and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1995(2)WLC288; 1995(1)WLN351

..... lieutenant on 30.6.1963. the petitioner was promoted as captain in the year 1965 and acting major in the year 1966. the petitioner was released from the army service on 16.9.1967 and was absorbed in the border security force where he was already working on deputation for some time as assistant commandant.3. respondents no. ..... as deputy commandant. this too is an admitted fact as recorded in the dpc proceedings that only such officers were appointed and absorbed as assistant commandant in the border security force, who had a high average record in the army and who did well during the interview. there were no interviews held for the post of deputy commandants. ..... that the record of the petitioner even in the army was a high average record otherwise he would not have been absorbed as assistant commandant in the border security force. there is nothing to indicate in the proceedings the basis for supersession of the petitioner respondent no. 1. reference may usefully be made to the observations .....