Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: border security force act 1968 section 30 offences in respect of property Court: delhi Page 9 of about 175 results (0.234 seconds)

Sarbjit Singh Vs. Vijay Karan, Commissioner of Police and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 1991(20)DRJ390

..... had been indulging in criminal activities continuously and has been spreading terror in the public in general. she stated that the petitioner was a naik in the border security force and the son of a head constable as well as the brother of a sub-inspector sister in the police. she submitted that if a person belonging ..... .12,89 passed by respondent no. 1; under sub-section 2 of section 3 of the national security act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'). the impugned order was passed with a view to preventing the petitioner from acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order the detention order was approved under section 3 ..... order depends on the facts and circumstances of each case which have to be seen in the background of surrounding circumstances and the overall impact thereof if an act has an impact on public tranquility and potential to disturb such tranquility then undoubtedly it would be matter of public order. even one incident satisfying the above .....

Shyam Singh, Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 128(2006)DLT346; 2006(88)DRJ483

..... we may add a word of caution. a large number of writ petitions and original applications have been filed challenging and questioning orders passed by border security force and other central police forces refusing to grant no objection certificates for absorption in the borrowing organisation like intelligence bureau, c.b.i. etc. allegations have also been made ..... another department and courts normally hesitate in issuing a mandamus for grant of no objection certificate unless it can be shown that the parent department has acted capriciously or in an arbitrary manner amounting to violation of articles 14, 15 and 16 of the constitution of india. the parent department has discretion ..... policy is accepted and rules are framed for such absorption, before rejecting the application, there must be justifiable reasons. respondent 1 cannot act arbitrarily by picking and choosing the deputationists for absorption. the power of absorption, no doubt, is discretionary but is coupled with the duty not to .....

VipIn Kumar Vs. Union of India and Another

Court : Delhi

..... was the information disclosed by the respondents, and instead the respondents have tried to take shelter under the plea that the right to information act, 2005 is not applicable to the border security force. the petitioner, therefore, sent a legal notice dated 13th december, 2011. 9. aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not ..... , medical service shall thereafter, submit its report within two weeks after conducting the review medical board of the petitioner to the respondent no.2 inspector general, border security force, pers diet: rectt section, block no.10, cgo complex, lodhi road, new delhi-110003. in case the petitioner shall be found medically fit by ..... to determine the petitioner as medically unfit by the review medical board, the petitioner ought to have been examined in the manner prescribed in the border security force manual vol.ix medical directorate. the learned counsel for the respondents is, however, unable to produce any record which would indicate the compliance of the .....

Ex.Const./Gd Rana Pratap Singh Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

..... facts leading to filing of the present petition are that the petitioner was enrolled as a constable under border security force and was attached with the 23rd battalion and on 16.11.2008 was performing duties in the d coy on indo-bangladesh border at bops soldighi and nayabari. 2. the petitioner and ct.b.kapmilian pw-2, were detailed ..... from the rifle issued to him. the law officer summed up the evidence pertaining to petitioners intention or knowledge as under:- "third issue that the accused did act with requisite intention/knowledge as envisaged in section 300 ipc. as regards the intention and knowledge is concerned, these are mental attitude which are not capable of positive ..... court take this issue as well as charges as proved." 33. that sentence and findings of the security force court was confirmed by the confirming authority on 12.2.2010 and petitioners petition under section 117 of the bsf act being rejected by the dg (bsf) on 28.6.2011 the instant petition has been filed by the .....

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

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 148(2008)DLT267; 2008(101)DRJ207; 2008(3)SLJ388(Delhi)

..... petitioner was issued on 11.05.1998. it is further submitted that the petitioner's name was shown in the combined seniority list maintained by the directorate general border security force (personal), where he was shown as promoted on 24.08.1998. 12. we have given our anxious consideration to the submissions made at the bar. ..... benefits.2. the facts giving rise to the filing of the present writ petition may be summarized as under:3. the petitioner was a sub-inspector in the border security force (for short 'the bsf'). at the time of undergoing platoon commander (tactics) course (hereinafter referred to as 'pc(tac)') held between 13.01.1997 to ..... jlc and the u.n. mission, the petitioner choose to join the u.n. mission. disobedience of orders of the force headquarter, would have lead the respondent's to issue disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner under section 21 border security act, 1968, which reads as under:21. disobedience to superior officer. - (1) any person subject to this .....

Rakesh Kumar Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

..... to reporter or not?3. whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? 1. the petitioner, rakesh kumar was employed as a constable in the border security force and was attached to the 46th bn. which was stationed at cooch behar, west bengal in june 2007. on 20th december 2007, the petitioner was deployed at the ..... telephonically about the incident. that after a lot of persuasion and efforts by the officiating commandant and also a promise to punish the petitioner for his act they could manage to secure the release of the petitioner.8. pw-3 amina biwi the stated victim, deposed that on 20-12-2007 at about 18:30 hours when ..... dismissed from service. while passing the order, as recorded under the caption proceedings before sentence, the officiating commandant noted the petitioner being convicted for offences under the bsf act in the year 1993, 1994, 1996, 2000 and 2005. pertaining to the last conviction, the petitioner was awarded dismissal from service but the sentence was commuted to .....

Ex.Const.Jandel Singh. Vs. Uoi and ors.

Court : Delhi

..... see the judgment?2. to be referred to reporter or not?3. whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? pradeep nandrajog, j.1. the petitioner, enrolled with the border security force as a constable was sent to its academy at tekanpur in the year 1980 and after completing his basic training was appointed as a constable with the ..... he, at bn.hq pokaran on 15.01.95 at about 2300 hrs was found in a state of intoxication. charge no.ii bsf act-1968 sec-40 an act prejudicial to good order and discipline of the force in that he, at bn.hq pokaran on 15.01.95 at about 2340 hrs assaulted no. 94633949 const.puran mal yadav the line ..... translated and read over to the petitioner and on the petitioner pleading not guilty to the 3 charges, the trial commenced.8. record evidences that dy.commandant jai deo singh acted as the friend of the accused and the charge was read over to the accused i.e. the petitioner who pleaded not guilty to the 3 charges, but it stands .....

Naresh Kumar Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

..... 3. whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? 1. the petitioner, naresh kumar was holding the post of a constable in the border security force when on 8.10.2007 at the border outpost asmeralga he allegedly picked up an unnecessary quarrel with hc onkar chand and assaulted him.2. the commandant vineet kumar of the unit, ..... commandant of the battalion. thus, he himself considered the record of evidence and opined that a summary security force be convened. it not being in dispute that the commandant of the unit is to act as the court, bhagwan singh acted as the court and on 6th may, 2008 informed the petitioner that the court would convene on 7th ..... by the appellate authority.5. at the forefront of the submission urged by learned counsel for the petitioner is that only the commandant could have acted as the court and since the summary security force court proceedings were conducted by the officiating commandant, the same are void.6. vide sub-clause (f) of sub-section 1 of section .....

Ram Chander Singh Vs. Uoi and ors.

Court : Delhi

..... r/o village kalyani, distt.north 24 pargnas for giving him safe passage for smuggling of the goods across the border, from his area of responsibility."3. with respect to the charge the petitioner was tried at a summary security force court presided over by the commandant and when the court convened on 21.5.1999, on the charge being read ..... remuneration, as a reward for showing in the exercise of his official functions, favour to any person, punishable u/s 7 of prevention of corruption act, 1988 in that he, at bop kalyani, on 13 nov 98, accepted a sum of `400/- (rupees four hundred only), from bhakto halder s/o shri nemia ..... the record of evidence and submitted the same to the commandant, who on perusal of the record of evidence framed a charge under section 46 of the bsf act as under:-"bsf act committing a civil offence that sec-46 is to say, being a public servant, accepting from any person, for himself, any gratification whatever, other than legal .....

Mahipal Singh Raghav Vs. Uoi and ors.

Court : Delhi

..... no.dh-6819 caused the death of no. 92009255 const.m.balakrishnan of the same unit.3. with respect to the charge the petitioner was tried at a general security force court. when the court assembled, the petitioner pleaded not guilty.4. 13 prosecution witnesses and 1 defence witness was examined at the trial.5. before noting the ..... a constable with bsf in the year 1988. in the year 2002 he was attached with the 67th bn.bsf which was deployed at bop natwartola at indo-bangladesh border. while on duty with late ct.l.balakrishnan, the petitioner admittedly shot late ct.balakrishnan who died.2. the matter needed an investigation. complying with the provisions ..... above the right knee joint."14. it is not the case of the department that the petitioner intentionally fired at his colleague. as per the department, the petitioner acted negligently. per contra, the petitioner claims to have killed his colleague accidently.15. now, not only does the petitioner claim, but even hc vijoy ram sharma pw- .....