ASHOK KUMAR Vs. DG BSF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner urges on the proportionality of the punishment inflicted upon the petitioner and gives up all other points urged in the writ petition.

(2.) THE backdrop facts are that on 18.3.1996 petitioner was charge sheeted for having committed an offence punishable under Section 26 of the BSF Act 1968. It was alleged that on 26.2.1996, petitioner was detained for dak duty at BOP Rania, which he did not perform and was found in a state of intoxication.

(3.) PETITIONER made a statement contemplated by Rule 48(3) of the BSF Rules 1969 stating that he left BOP Rania without collecting dak as he has to make an urgent call to his wife as their relationship were strained and he wanted to counsel her. Being stressed, on the way back to BOP Rania, he consumed alcohol and since he was so drunk which rendered him incapacitated he requested the civilian to report to Coy Commander.