MUKHTIAR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) While serving as Lance Naik in the Border Security Force, the petitioner was put to trial by Summary Security Force Court on 3 counts for disobeying the lawful command, using threatening language and for intoxication. After holding the necessary investigation under the Act, the trial was conducted where the petitioner pleaded guilty to all the charges. He was accordingly found guilty of three charges preferred against him and was sentenced to be dismissed from service. Aggrieved against the finding and sentence awarded to him, the petitioner preferred the petition under Section 172 of the Border Security Force Act. Copy of the same is annexed as Annexure P-5. The said petition, however, was rejected on 29.04.2003. He has now filed the present writ petition against the trial and the award of punishment,. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1457 of 2003 2 The facts in brief are that the petitioner was deployed at Border Out Post Harmukh while he was serving with 21 Battalion BSF. On 5.7.2002, he was detailed for observation post duty when he requested his Platoon Havildar Subhash Chand not to detail him on the observation post and to detail him to perform the duty of Langar. It is stated that after having performed his duty in Langar when the petitioner returned to Barrack, Subhash Chand came there and started abusing him. Despite pleadings by the petitioner, the said Subhash Chand did not refrain from hurling abuse at him and thereafter took the petitioner before Sub Inspector Ram Chand. The petitioner was sent to medical examination, which was conducted by Dr. Mukesh Saxena. The doctor opined that the petitioner had consumed liquor. On the basis of medical report and the report made by Havildar Subhash Chand that the petitioner had disobeyed to perform the duty at BOP post, he was charge sheeted on the 3 counts as noted.

(2.) Having been so charged and after holding the preliminary investigation, the petitioner was informed that he would be tried by SSFC on 07.12.2002. The petitioner allegedly made prayer for engaging the counsel, which was refused. Thereafter, he claimed that he was informed that he stood dismissed from the service. He accordingly pleads that the trial conducted by the SSFC is illegal or without complying with the statutory rules and regulations. The petitioner pleads that his plea was just recorded without giving him any opportunity to defend himself. He has also claimed that he had not pleaded guilty but the plea of guilty was recorded and the Commandant had failed to follow the prescribed procedure under Criminal Writ Petition No. 1457 of 2003 3 Rule 143 of the BSF Rules.

(3.) In response to the notice issued, the written statement has been filed on behalf of the respondents, it is pleaded that in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India versus Maj. A.Hussein AIR 1998 S.C. 577, this Court can not re-appreciate the evidence to come to a different finding. It is also pointed out that this Court would have a limited jurisdiction to interfere in such like proceedings and in this regard reference is made to some case law.