Back
2025:DHC:165
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
NAVIN CHAWLA, SHALINDER KAUR, JJ.
Sumit Sangwan – Appellant
Versus
Union of India and Others – Respondents
W.P. (C) No. 13248 of 2022
Decided On : 15-01-2025
Advocates Appeared :
For the Appellants : Ankur Chhibber, Anshuman Mehrotra
For the Respondents : Mukul Singh, Ira Singh, Aryan Dhaka
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the petitioner challenges dismissal from service. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. factual background of charges against the petitioner. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. trial process and outcomes regarding charges. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. arguments made by the petitioner. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 5. arguments made by the respondents. (Para 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 6. court's observations on the dismissal order. (Para 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 7. interpretation of sections and rules related to termination. (Para 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 8. judicial principles regarding administrative actions. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
| 9. evidence and findings concerning the first charge. (Para 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46) |
| 10. final judgment and reasoning of the court. (Para 48 , 49) |
JUDGMENT :
NAVIN CHAWLA, J.
1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the Order dated 06.02.2022 passed by the respondent no.1, whereby the petitioner has been dismissed from service with immediate effect.
2. The petitioner further prays for directions to the respondents to reinstate the petitioner back in service with effect from 06.02.2022, and grant him all service benefits from the said date, including seniority, rank, pay, arrears etc. with interest @ 18% p.a.
BRIEF FACTS
3. The petitioner joined the Border Security Force (BSF) as an Assistant Commandant (AC) (Direct Entry) on 19.11.2012, whereafter he was posted to the 145th Bn.
4. In terms of the Order dated 26.02.2016 issued by the Deputy Inspector General (DIG), a Board of Officers (BOO) was detailed to conduct a surprise check of the entire troops deployed at the BOP Srimantapur to verify and look into the alleged smuggling activities taking place in the area.
5. In furtherance of the same, on the morning of 27.02.2016, Sh. Ganesh Kumar, who was the Presiding Officer of the BOO, along with the other team members of the search party came to the BOP Srimantapur and started the search operation. During the search, Rs.2.54 lakhs in cash was recovered from the petitioner.
6. On 29.02.2016, the respondents conducted a Staff Court of Inquiry (SCOI) to inquire into the circumstances under which troops of the 145th Bn, BOP Srimantpur, were found in possession of various amounts of cash by the BOO on 27.02.2016.
7. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner was charged with the following three charges by way of Charge Sheet dated 02.05.2017, issued by the Commandant of the 168th Bn, BSF:
| FIRST CHARGE BSF ACT 1968 SECTION- 46 | COMMITTING A CIVIL OFFENCE THAT IS TO SAY CRIMINAL MISCONDUCT FOR HAVING BEEN A PUBLIC SERVANT IN POSSESSION OF PECUNIARY RESOURCES DISPROPORTIONATE TO HIS KNOWN SOURCE OF INCOME FOR WHICH HE CANNOT SATISFACTORY ACCOUNT FOR AN OFFENCE SPECIFIED IN SECTION 13(1)(e) OF PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT 1988, PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 13(2) OF THE SAID ACT while deployed as Coy Comdr at BOP Srimantpur, "C" Coy, 145 Bn BSF on 27 Feb 2016 was found in possession of Rupees 2,54,000/- (Rupees two lakh fifty four thousand) which is disproportionate to his known source of income for which he could not satisfactorily account for. |
| SECOND CHARGE BSF ACT 1968 SECTION- 46 | COMMITTING A CIVIL OFFENCE THATIS TO SAY CRIMINAL MISCONDUCTFOR HAVING BEEN A PUBLIC SERVANTIN POSSESSION OF PECUNIARYRESOURCES DISPROPORTIONATE TOHIS KNOWN SOURCE OF INCOME FORWHICH HE CANNOT SATISFACTORY ACCOUNT FOR AN OFFENCESPECIFIED IN SECTION 13(1)(e) OFPREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT 1988, PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION13(2) OF THE SAID ACT in that he, while deployed as Coy Comdr at BOP Srimantpur, "C" Coy 145 Bn BSF and proceeded on 08 E/Leave w.e.f. 29.01.2016 to 05.02.2016 extended by 05 days E/L with 02 days OSL upto 13.02.2016 deposited an amount of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand) in his own Bank account No. 017401537618 at ICICI bank Panipat, Haryana on 29.01.2016 by cash which is disproportionate to his known source of income for which he could not satisfactorily account for. |
| THIRD CHARGE BSF ACT 1968 SECTION- 22(e) | NEGLECTING TO OBEY LOCAL ORDER in th |
Termination of service is permissible under Section 10 of the Border Security Force Act when the trial is deemed impracticable or inexpedient, especially after non-confirmation of charges by the Conf....
Punishments must be proportionate to the misconduct and not shock the conscience of the court.
The principle of double jeopardy and the authority of the Confirming Authority to confirm findings and sentences under the Army Act.
The Summary Security Force Court proceedings were flawed due to significant delay and lack of adherence to natural justice, rendering the dismissal of the petitioner unlawful.
Dismissal without a formal inquiry under the BSF Act is justified if it's found impracticable due to security concerns. Authority must record reasons, but discretion remains with the competent author....
The court's decision emphasized the limited scope of interference under Article 226 of The Constitution of India and the principle that the High Court shall not reappreciate the evidence or act as a ....
The decision to dismiss an individual from service without a departmental inquiry must be based on reasonable grounds, especially when national security implications are involved.
Judicial review under Article 226 extends to the examination of the decision-making process in disciplinary proceedings, ensuring the findings are rational and supported by credible evidence.
Confirming authority must provide clear justifications for disagreeing with Security Force Court findings and follow principles of natural justice in disciplinary actions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the lack of jurisdiction of the DIG, BSF to alter the charge and direct retrial of the appellant, as well as the violation of principles of natural....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
