IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE Present:-

The Hon’ble Justice Madhuresh Prasad And The Hon’ble Justice Prasenjit Biswas F.M.A.138 of 2024 HOSHIYAR SINGH VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS.

For the Appellant : Mr. Debdutta Basu, Ms. Sayani Roy Choudhury.

For the UOI :Mr. Nandalal Singhania, Ms. Sayani Roy Choudhury, Mr. Ashok Halder, Ms. Ayantika Paul.

Judgment on : February 25, 2026.

Madhuresh Prasad, J.:

1. Heard the learned advocate for the writ petitioner/appellant as well as the learned advocate representing the Union of India.

D

2. The appellant/petitioner, a constable in the “ ” Company of 108 of the Border Security Force, was proceeded against by a charge sheet dated 08.05.2008.

3. The charge she"eTth ceo natcaciunseedd tNhoe. f8o8ll2o1w01in2g9 5c hHaCrg eGsy:a ni Ram and No. 02145545 CT Hoshiyar Singh of 108 Bn BSF is charged with:-

1ST CHARGE BSF ACT SEC-46 COMMITTING A CIVIL OFFENCE, THAT IS TO SAY CRIMINAL MISCONDUCT FOR HAVING BEEN A PUBLIC SERVANT BY ABUSING THEIR POSITION AGREES THEMSELVES FOR ANY PECUNIARY AUVANTAGE FOR AN OFFENCE SPECIFIED IN SEG 13 (1) (E) OF THE PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988, PUNISHABLE U/S 13 (2) OF THE SAID ACT In that they on the intervening night of 09/10 Nov 07, when No. 882101295 HC Gyani Ram and No. 02145545 CT Hoshiyar Singh of 'D' Coy 108 Bn BSF who were deployed at addl ambush point No 4 of BOP Chapghati, connived with an un-identified civilian boy and agreed to accept Rs 7000/- per pair for crossing of cattle heads for themselves by abusing their position as a public servant for pecuniary advantage, while performing border ambush duty of said ambush point and allowed to cross over 12 to 15 pairs of cattle heads from India to Bangladesh side between 1930 hrs to 2000 hrs through their AOR.

2ND CHARGE BSF ACT SEC-40 AN ACT PREJUDICIAL TO GOOD ORDER AND DISCIPLINE OF THE FORCE In that they.

on the night intervening of 09/10 Nov 07, while performing ambush duty at Addl. Ambush Point No.4 Ex-BOP Chapghati has allowed to cross 12 to 15 pairs of cattle heads from India to Bangladesh side between

1930 to 2000 hrs through their AOR with connivance of smugglers.”

SSFC’

4. Upon conduct of a Summary Security Force Court (in short ‘ ) against the petitioner, he was awarded a punishment which he assailed by way of a writ petition. The writ petition was registered as W.P. 7572(W) of 2009 and was dismissed by an order dated 04.08.2023, by the Hon’ble Single Judge which is the subject matter of the present intra court appeal.

5. The learned advocate for the writ petitioner/appellant raised the following issues before the learned Single Judge so as to allege that the finding in the SSFC was unsustainable.

6. The appellant/petitioner raised an issue of discrimination in the matter of award of punishment to the petitioner. According to him, another member of the force, namely, Head Constable Gyani Ram, who was at the relevant point of time was on duty with the petitioner/appellant was proceeded against on common charges and the charge no.2, which was found proved in respect of the petitioner/appellant is the self-same charge for which Gyani Ram was also found to be guilty. Gyani Ram, however, had been awarded a much lesser punishment of reversion; whereas the petitioner/appellant has been dismissed from service.

7. In so far as the proceeding in the SSFC, he has raised following issues:



 The findings are perverse and based on no evidence.

Petitioner’s confession was recorded in the SSFC, without  consent and under threat and duress.

The informant who brought the allegation to the notice of the authorities was a vital witness, but not examined in the proceeding depriving the petitioner an opportunity to cross-

 examine the informant.

The proceeding was based only on hearsay.

8. The Hon’ble Single Judge considered all the submissions and citations relied upon. Taking into consideration all the decisions, and upon going through the records, the Hon’ble Single Judge found that alto