The court held that the punishment imposed was consistent with the BSF Act, 1968, factoring in the severity of the offense amidst the appellant's service history.

ORDER

1. Heard.

2. The appellant was a Sub-Inspector in the Border Security Force (for short, “BSF”) with 36 years of service and was accused of facilitating illegal cattle smuggling at Gate No.16 on the Indo-Bangladesh Border while performing the duties as a Post-Commander. The allegation was based preliminarily on an alleged confessional statement and physical signs at the site, however no cattle or illegal gratification was recovered and there was no independent preliminarily hearing and the evidence, the appellant was tried by General Security Force Court (for short “GSFC”) and was convicted under Section 40 of the BSF Act, 1968 on the ground of his conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline of the Force. After recording the evidence and complying with the principles of natural justice, the GSFC imposed a composite punishment of six months rigorous imprisonment and dismissal from service which was later confirmed by the authorities. The same came to be challenged by the appellant before the High Court contending inter alia and urging that the confession was obtained under coercion, the evidence relied upon is unreliable and dismissal from service was not permissible for conviction under Section 40 of the BSF Act, 1968 or in other words, the punishment inflicted on the appellant was disproportionate to the alleged offence and particularly in the backdrop of 36 years of service having been rendered by the appellant.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant reiterating the grounds urged and pleas put forward in the appeal would also add that in view of long service of appellant and being at the fag end of his career, pension could not have been denied to him due to dismissal order which punishment is highly disproportionate. Hence, he seeks for allowing the appeal.

4. Per contra, Ms. Vidhi Gupta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. Davinder Pal Singh, learned ASG would vehemently contend that the order of GSFC as well as the impugned order is in consonance with the settled principles, namely, there being no violation of principles of natural justice and full opportunity having been granted to the appellant to participate in the GSFC proceedings, it cannot be contended that those orders suffer from any infirmities whatsoever. Hence, she prays for dismissal of the appeal.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has also relied upon the dicta of this Court in the matter of Yasodhar Kamat Vs. Director General, Border Security Force and Ors., reported in (2021) 13 SCC 333 to contend that the prayer for grant of pension be considered sympathetically.

6. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties and after bestowing our attention to the rival contentions raised at the Bar, we notice that though several grounds were urged in the Writ Petition before the High Court, the same was restricted to one ground alone as is evident from paragraph No.16 of the impugned order namely that the order dated 22.01.2008 being a composite order of imposing six months’ rigorous imprisonment and punishment of dismissal from service and same being contrary to law. This has been dealt with by the High Court in detail by referring to the relevant provisions of the BSF Act, 1968 and rightly so has arrived at a conclusion that by virtue of Section 50 of the BSF Act, 1968 , a sentence of a Security Force Court in addition to, the punishment contemplated under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 48 being permissible namely any one or more of the punishments specified under the law can be imposed as found that therein, and as such there was no infirmity in the said order. The reasoning adopted by the High Court is in consonance with the provisions of the BSF Act, 1968 and as such we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order.

7. Insofar as prayer of the appellant for extending the benefit of pension in the teeth of Yasodhar Kamat’s referred to supra though at first blush looks attractive, on a deeper e