CONST. SUBHASH BABU Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petitioner challenges the order dated June 15, 2001 dismissing the statutory petition filed by the petitioner against the order dated August 24, 2000 wherein the Summary Security Force Court held the petitioner guilty of the charges framed against him and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and dismissed him from service.

(2.) THE factual backdrop leading to the filing of the present petition is that after taking cognizance of the offence report under Rule 43 and hearing the charge against the petitioner as per Rule 45 of the BSF Rules, 1969 and thereafter considering the Record of Evidence, the Commandant of the 162nd Battalion to which the petitioner was attached, took a decision that case was made out to frame a charge and try the petitioner at a Summary Security Force Court trial. Accordingly on August 20, 2000 a charge -sheet was framed and served upon the petitioner who was posted at the Border Out - Post Parlihat when the alleged incident constituting the offence took place, listing two distinct offences committed by the petitioner; namely for assaulting his superior officer, and for unauthorised absenteeism. The charges read as under: -

(3.) HC Rattan Singh PW -1 deposed that on the day of the incident, i.e. July 30, 2000, at around 19:30 hours CHM Balam Ram (PW -5) before proceeding for patrolling duty directed him to look after the BOP and asked him to ensure that no personnel leaves the out -post at night. At around 21:00 hours, he inquired from Ct.Bhia Ram (PW -2), the sentry on duty, whether any personnel had left the out -post and Ct.Bhia Ram informed him that the petitioner had left the BOP. Therefore he went to Parilahat village along with W/M G.P.Paranthaman (PW -3) to look for the petitioner. He found the petitioner sitting in a house with his hands on the shoulder of a woman. Using his torch, he signalled the petitioner and asked him to return to the BOP. Thereafter, he returned to the BOP. The petitioner did not return during the next 15 -20 minutes and therefore he re -visited the house at Parilahat village to fetch the petitioner. Finding the house empty he returned to the out -post. When he return he was informed by Ct.Bhia Ram that the petitioner had returned. At around 22:00 hours, he saw the petitioner near the sentry gate and asked him why he had left the out -post and why did he not return at the earliest. At that, the petitioner stood up and started using abusive language. The petitioner snatched his torch and tried to hit him. Ct.Upender Singh intervened to protect him. The Guard Comdr.HC Chaman Lal (PW -4) reached the spot and asked the petitioner to behave himself. At this, the petitioner again used abusive language and shouted at him, asking him what authority he had to question the petitioner. HC Chamal Lal replied that the matter would be reported to the superior officers the next morning. After he retired to his barrack, the petitioner came near his cot and started slapping him repeatedly. He tried to save his face and screamed. On hearing his screams, HC Chaman Lal intervened and saved him from the petitioner. On the next day, i.e. July 31, 2000 he reported the incident to his superior officers including CHM Balam Ram and Sub N.T.Lepcha, Officiating Coy Comdr. On being cross -examined by the petitioner, he stated that Ct.Bhia Ram never told him that the petitioner had left the out -post to attend the call of nature. He did not know the lady who was with the petitioner in the house. He stated that he could not report the matter to the CHM on the same day because the CHM was on patrolling duty. He was unaware of the presence of the Off.Coy Comdr. at the out -post, and thus, he did not report the incident to him. He did not speak to any other superior officer because he felt humiliated and helpless after the incident.