HARISH CHANDRA SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Harish Chander Singh, Constable, joined the service in Border Security Force on 15.9.1997. According to the petitioner he had not only worked satisfactorily but because of the services rendered by him, he was rewarded twice by the Commandant, once for winning the first prize in shooting and the second time for good maintenance of arms. He was posted on the strength of 'B' Coy of 124 Battalion of respondent no.4 in Mamdot, Ferozpur, and Punjab. On 23rd and 24.5.2002, the petitioner was tried by a Summary Security Force Court for the following charges: - (A) Charge-I Bsf Act, 1968 Leaving His Picquet Without Orders Section 16(D) From His Superior Officer In That He, While Deployed At Section P.P. Gazni Khunder Minor Bridge On 03 Mar 02, Left The Said Picquet At About 1230 Hrs Without Orders From His Superior Officer (B) Charge? Ii Section 20 (A) Assaulting His Superior Officer In That He, After Visitng Bop Drd Nath On 03 Mar 02 At About 1330 Hrs Assaulted No. 66422456 Si Puran Singh Of 'B' Coy With His Uniform Belt Resultantly Si Puran Singh Sustained Injuries On His Head/Shoulder. True Copy Of Charge Sheet Is Annexed As Annexure P-1.

(2.) After the said trial, the petitioner was found guilty of the article of charges and was awarded a sentence of 'DISMISSAL FROM SERVICE'. Name of the petitioner was struck off the strength of the Unit on 24.5.2002 itself, vide an order of the same date. Copy of the said order has been annexed to the writ petition as Annexure 1. The petitioner being aggrieved from the said order and after having received a copy of the proceedings of the trial, preferred a statutory appeal on 16.8.2003. The statutory appeal of the petitioner was also rejected by respondent no.2, the Director General, Border Security Force, vide his order dated 4.9.2003.

(3.) It is the pleaded case of the petitioner that he was available at his post at the time of occurrence and he was seen entering his post at about 1325- 1330 hrs. by PW6, Constable Kashmir Singh. It is also pleaded that the post where he was deployed i.e. Ghazni Khunder minor bridge was nearly 5 kms away from the place of occurrence, as such he could not have committed the offence for which he was charged. The petitioner had not pleaded guilty of all the articles of charges and the findings of the Commandant that he was guilty of charges was not based on any evidence. In fact, according to the petitioner neither any complaint was made nor anybody was injured. The petitioner was not afforded any opportunity to make his statement. The statements of 10 prosecution witnesses were recorded on 6.3.2002 and 7.3.2002 and the petitioner was also asked to make his statement, which he declined, as such the entire enquiry was contrary to law.