Back
M. A. CHOWDHARY
Sumanta Dutta, S/o. Late Sudhangsu – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, through Home Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India, New Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Petitioner through the medium of this petition filed in terms of Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeks following reliefs :
(ii) To issue direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for re-instatement and to allow the petitioner to join and perform his duties on the post of Constable on which the petitioner was working prior to his dismissal from service and to release the salary in favour of the petitioner and to give all other consequential benefits to the petitioner for which the petitioner is entitled and also to treat the period from the date of dismissal to the date of the petitioner re-joins the duty as "on duty" by issuance of writ of mandamus:
(iii) To issue direction to the respondents restraining them to implement the order dated 29.11.2004 and restraining the respondents to fill up the post of petition
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.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the proceedings conducted in accordance with the BSF Act and Rules, and the plea of guilty entered by the petitioner during the Summary Securi....
A Summary Security Force Court cannot try charges under Section 46 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968, summarily without established immediate necessity, and procedural violations in recording a ....
The plea of guilt must be recorded in accordance with the procedural rules, and the absence of the accused's signature on the minutes of the proceedings can impact the credibility of the plea.
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.
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....
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 court upheld the dismissal from service based on the lack of prejudice from procedural irregularities and the petitioner's failure to contest the charges during the Summary Security Force Court p....
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
