Back
NELSON SAILO
Zakaria Ahmed. No. 990065375 Constable (GD), S/o Lt. Abu Bakkar Siddique – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. B. Lalramenga, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Zairemsangpuii, learned CGC for the respondents Union of India.
[2] By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged (i) the impugned Order dated 07.12.2018 passed by the General Security Force Court (GSFC), by which he has been found to be guilty of the charge punishable under Section 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO), (ii) the impugned confirmation Order dated 06.02.2019(Annexure-9), by which the pre-confirmation petition dated 12.12.2018 submitted by the petitioner against the finding dated 7.12.2018 was rejected and the findings was confirmed and (iii) the Order dated 01.03.2019 (Annexure-10) by which the petitioner on being found guilty under Section 10 of the POCSO Act was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for 5 years and also dismissed from service.
[3] Brief facts of the case is that the petitioner was appointed as a Constable in the Border Security Force (BSF) on 30.04.1999 and was working as such till he was punished and dismissed from service. On 06.03.2018, one girl namely, Suchana Chakma aged about 12
Point of Law : No limitation on the part of the High Court under the Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the High Court can definitely interfere with the findings of the GSFC if it finds tha....
The sufficiency of evidence, compliance with procedural rules, and the gravity of the offence committed by the petitioner were the central legal points established in the judgment.
Consent obtained through deception, as in false promises of marriage, constitutes rape. The procedural integrity in disciplinary actions should not violate natural justice principles.
The Summary Security Force Court lacked jurisdiction to try civil offences under Section 46 of the BSF Act, except for simple hurt or theft, as per Rule 47 of BSF Rules.
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.
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 judgment emphasizes the importance of adherence to relevant statutory provisions and principles of natural justice in proceedings related to sexual misconduct allegations.
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
