UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Vs. PRAMOD KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) While serving as a constable/cook under the Border Security Force (in short, BSF), the respondent herein, namely, Promod Kumar was tried by Summary Security Force Court (in short, SSFC) on the charge of having married second time during the life-time of his first wife. The respondent pleaded guilty to the charge and the SSFC, while convicting him under Sec. 46 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as "the BSF Act") read with Sec. 494 Penal Code awarded sentence of dismissal from service. The respondent accordingly stood dismissed from service with effect from 8.6.98. The respondent impugned his conviction and also the sentence passed against him on several grounds in Civil Rule No. 312/98. The appellants herein resisted the Civil Rule by contending, inter alia, that there was no legal infirmity in conducting the SSFC or in convicting the respondent herein and/or in sentencing him to dismissal from service. By judgment and order, dated 03.09.2001, passed in Civil Rule No. 312/1998 aforementioned, the learned Single Judge, while not interfering with the conviction of the accused, set aside the sentence of dismissal from service passed against the respondent herein and remanded the case to the authority concerned from awarding any punishment other than dismissal and/or removal from service. The directions, so given, stand impugned in the present appeal.

(2.) We have heard Mr. K. Bhattacharjee, learned Assistant Solicitor General, for the appellant and Mr. S. Deb, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. S. P. Debnath, learned counsel, for the respondent.

(3.) Challenging the correctness and legality of interference with the sentence passed against the respondent herein, Mr, Bhattacharjee, learned Asstt. Solicitor General, has submitted that having affirmed the conviction of the accused-respondent on the charge of bigamy proved against him at his trial by the SSFC, the learned Single Judge was wrong in interfering with the sentence of dismissal from service passed against the respondent herein, for, according to Mr. Bhattacharjee, the BSF is a para-military disciplied force and in such a force, it will be undesirable to have a person, who is required to undergo imprisonment for his conviction under Sec. 494 Penal Code. At any rate, submits Mr. Bhattacharjee, the SSFC having imposed punishment of dismissal from service, the learned Single Judge ought not to have interfered with the sentence so passed, when the sentence, according to Mr. Bhattacharjee, is not biased, irrational or shocking to the conscience.