Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: border security force act 1968 section 115 transmission of proceedings of summary security force courts Court: jammu and kashmir

Atal Bihari Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in : 2008(1)JKJ53

..... confirmation statutory petition against the findings, sentence and order of a summary security force court. it is only section 118 of the border security force act, which contemplates power of annulment of proceedings of any security force court including a summary security force court. that being the case, the principle of merger projected in the judgment cited ..... petition may not be maintainable. in support of their contentions, the respondents say that the petitioner had committed the offence under section 46 of the border security force act at govindpur, raiganj (west bengal), and the orders impugned in the writ petition had been passed/issued by the respondents outside the jurisdiction of ..... case and, in that view of the matter, the findings and sentence of the summary security force court had been carried out, at a place which is outside the jurisdiction of this court.22. the border security force act does not provide any right to an accused to prefer a pre-confirmation or post- .....

Yash Paul Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in : 2004(2)JKJ401

..... in respect to allegations of non-observance of the procedure prescribed under rules, it is stated that the petitioner was charged under section 19(b) of the border security force act, 1968 for over-staying the leave without any sufficient cause. he was brought before the commandant for preliminary hearing on offence report under rule 45 of bsf ..... a direction for his reinstatement into service and release of salary etc. the main ground of challenge in the petition is that the procedure prescribed under the border security force act, 1968 and the rules framed there-under has not been followed. in as much as the petitioner was not provided any opportunity to properly defend himself. ..... -4-2003.2. it is under these circumstances that the petitioner has approached this court seeking quashment of order dated 9-4-2003 issued by dig, border security force by which the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed and order dated 12-9-2002 issued by the commandant, 71 bn whereby the petitioner was .....

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

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in : 2003(3)JKJ381

..... transfer of the custody of the accused to bsf authorities for trial by exercising option under section 80 of the border security force act. section 80 of the border security force act 1968 reads as follows:'80. choice between criminal court and security force court -- when a criminal court and a security force court have each jurisdiction in respect of an offence, it shall be in the discretion of the director-general ..... . in the objections filed by the respondents, it is averred that that the petitioner has not availed statutory remedy available to him under section 117 of the border security force act 1968, read with rule 167 of the border security force rules, 1969. petitioner was participating in anti-militancy operational duty in sensitive area of village dedha on 28. 5. 1998 when he was found missing from .....

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

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in : 2006(2)JKJ255

..... 74,000/-, whereas in the second charge amount shown is rs 79,495/-. however, in both the cases, it was a charge under section 46 of the border security force act, 1968. the sum and substance of the allegations is same. one fails to understand how a commandant who is entitled to frame 1st charge becomes in-competent to ..... .7. prayer is sought to be resisted by the respondents on the grounds that the petitioner has not exhausted the statutory remedy provided under section 117 of the border security force act, 1968 read with rule 167 of the bsf rules, 1969, which is statutory in nature. it is alleged in the reply that the petitioner while officiating as ..... the commandant was not competent to frame/alter and issue fresh charge against the petitioner. that too without hearing him in terms of section 45(b) of the border security force act;(iii) no fresh roe was prepared under section 48 in respect to the second charge.(iv) there has been gross violation of the procedure prescribed under rules 45 .....

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

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in : 2006(2)JKJ234

..... . 02/2006) questioning the judgment of the writ court, his conviction and sentence, on a 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 the appellant, submits that appellant was denied opportunity of hearing and producing evidence by ..... 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 rules framed thereunder to ensure that provisions of law and rules are properly followed before exercising powers by the authorities constituted under the .....

Gorakh Nath Vs. State of J and K

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in : 2006(1)JKJ192

..... have heard learned counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the record of this case.8. section 11(2) of the border security force act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the 'b.s.f. act') provides for dismissal, removal or reduction from service by an officer not below the rank of deputy inspector general or any prescribed officer under ..... cause notice.4. in order to appreciate the respective contentions the parties, the facts in brief may be noticed.5. petitioner was enrolled as constable in the border security force on 1.7.1971 and in february 1988, he was selected for posting on deputation in the ministry of external affairs in which capacity he served in the ..... sub-rule shall not apply:(a) where the service is terminated on the ground of conduct which has led to his conviction by a criminal court or a security force court; or(b) where the competent authority is satisfied that, for reasons to be recorded in writing, it is not expedient or reasonably practicable to give the .....

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 .....

Sunil Kumar Misra Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in : 2005(3)JKJ159

..... -1999 has been treated as dias non. this order has been challenged on the ground that no inquiry under section 62 of the border security force act, 1968 read with rules 170 to 176 of the border security rules, 1969 was held against him. he was not afforded an opportunity of being heard though he sent a number of representations for ..... 8-1999 to 9-3-1999 (221 days) as dies non is under challenge in the present petition. while working as constable in 105 bn. of the border security force, petitioner left for his home in 1999. it is alleged that he applied for leave which was orally sanctioned by the assistant commandant. leave was sought on receiving ..... 1) where in the opinion of the director general a person subject to the act has conducted himself in such manner whether or not such conduct amounts to an offence, as would render his retention in service undesirable and his trial by security force court inexpedient. the director general may inform the person concerned accordingly.(2) the director .....

Assadullah Khan Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in : 2004(3)JKJ178

..... communicated to him until service of the dismissal order. according to the appellant, he was denied due opportunity of hearing as provided in the border security force act, 1968 and the border security force rules, 1969 framed thereunder. the order being in violation of the statutory rules as well as the rules of natural justice is fit to be ..... single judge dated february 15, 2001 in swp no. 565/92, dismissing the writ petition of the appellant.2. the appellant, an ex-constable of the border security force (bsf), filed the writ petition for quashing order of his dismissal from service dated 26th february, 1991. the short facts of the case are that upon ..... be convicted and variously sentenced. it may be mentioned that the act provides for the security force court and summary security force court empowered to convict persons subject to the act and sentence them for offences committed by them on the pattern as provided in the army act, and the rules framed thereunder. in the instant case, the .....

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Abdul Rehman and ors.

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in : AIR1981J& K60

..... ' and is governed and controlled by the border security force act. the union of india cannot be fastened with the liability for his tortious acts because the union of india has 'no control' over its statutory employees. the argument is misconceived. the border security force act, no doubt regulates the working of the force and the allied matters, but merely because ..... of that, the personnel of the bsf do not lose their status of being employees of the union of india. the b. s. f. act itself starts with the preamble that the ..... is that the union of india is not liable for tortious act of its 'statutory employees' because such statutory employees are not 'employees of the state in the traditional and ordinary sense of the term'. it is urged that since the border security force, is a creation of a statute and its employees are governed .....