Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: bsf act in Sub.Inspector Gurbachan Singh vs Uoi & Ors. on 23 January, 2014Matching Fragments
"FIRST COMMITTING A CIVIL OFFENCE
CHARGE THAT IS TO SAY ATTEMPT TO
BSF ACT MURDER PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTION-46 SECTION-302 IPC:
in that he,
at STC BSF Ranidanga on 06 Dec
1981 fired a shot from .38 revolver,
Registered No.27634 at No 66788230
HC Rahmat Subba of 78 Bn BSF
attached to STC BSF Ranidanga with
intent to kill him.
SECOND USING CRIMINAL FORCE TO HIS
CHARGE SUPERIOR OFFICER:
BSF ACT
SECTION-20 in that he,
(a) at STC BSF Ranidanga on 06 Dec
1981 man handled No 67488050
Subedar Amrik Singh of 56 Bn BSF
attached with said STC.
THIRD USING CRIMINAL FORCE TO A
CHARGE PERSON SUBJECT TO THE BSF ACT
BSF ACT BEING HIS SUBORDINATE IN
SECTION-46 RANK:
in that he,
at STC BSF Ranidanga on 06 Dec
1981 man handled No 667882302 HC
Rahmat Subba of 78 Bn BSF attached
with STC BSF Ranidanga.
FOURTH INTOXICATION
CHARGE
BSF ACT in that he,
SECTION-26 at Ranidanga on 06 Dec 1981 at about
2000 hrs was found in a state of
intoxication"
23. The record of the case was forwarded to the Inspector General BSF, West Bengal in terms of Section 108 of the BSF Act, 1968 and the same were confirmed vide order dated May 4, 1983.
24. Aggrieved by the finding and sentence awarded by the GFSC which stood confirmed by the Inspector General, the petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before High Court of Calcutta. Vide order dated April 5, 1983 the High Court dismissed aforesaid petition on the ground that he has not exhausted alternative remedy available to him under Section 117(2) of the BSF Act, 1968 to assail the legality of finding and sentence of GFSC before invoking the jurisdiction of High Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India. However, liberty was granted to the petitioner to file petition under Section 117(2) of the BSF Act, 1968 to the confirming authority.
25. Thereafter the petitioner preferred petition under Section 117(2) of the Border Security Force Act, 1969 to the Director General, BSF, Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India, which petition was rejected vide order dated July 1, 1992.
26. Aggrieved by the aforesaid, the petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
27. Vide order dated July 16, 1992 this Court dismissed the aforesaid petition on the ground that on an earlier occasion the petitioner had approached the High Court of Calcutta to assail the finding and sentence of the GFSC. Such being the position, it was incumbent upon the petitioner to have approached the High Court of Calcutta only once his petition under Section 117(2) stood rejected by the department.
VI Section 58 of the BSF Act, 1968 prescribes that no person should be detained in custody for more than 48 hours without the charge in respect whereof he was arrested being investigated. In the instant case, the petitioner was arrested on December 06, 1981 and admittedly the hearing of charge under Rule 45 of the BSF Rules, 1969 in the case of the petitioner was conducted only on December 19, 1981. VII The Convening Officer amended one of the charges framed against the petitioner in complete violation of Rule 62 of the BSF Rules, 1969.