22 Oct 2013
Order issued
ConcludedThe Madhya Pradesh High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: (2014) 1 MPJR 45; (2014) 1 MPLJ 600; (2013) 10 MP CK 0231
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2013-0036Gwalior, Madhya PradeshJudgment 22 October 2013
BSF Constable (dismissed) vs Union of India and Others
BSF Constable was charge-sheeted on 29 March 2011 on a grave charge of sodomy and tried by a Summary Security Force Court at STC BSF Tekanpur, which found the charge proved and dismissed him from service with one year's rigorous imprisonment in civil jail on 18 May 2011, affirmed on appeal on 27 September 2011. He challenged the punishment contending the allegations were IPC offences not triable under the BSF Act, the convening authority was incompetent, and CrPC and Evidence Act procedures were not followed. The Madhya Pradesh High Court held the SSFC trial competent, that the CrPC and Evidence Act do not apply to SSFC trials, that the bar on the accused's friend cross-examining witnesses under Rule 157 is valid, and that no personal hearing is required under Section 117(2). The Court held the charges very grave and the punishment not harsh or excessive, and dismissed the writ petition. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.
Externally reportedV2
What this record means
This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.
How verification works →Detailed record
Report card
By judgment dated 22 October 2013 in Writ Petition No. 7455/2011, the Madhya Pradesh High Court (Coram: Sujoy Paul, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable (dismissed), 35th Battalion BSF.
- Register number
- MP 07 CW 0004
- Case reference
- Writ Petition No. 7455/2011 / (2014) 1 MPJR 45; (2014) 1 MPLJ 600; (2013) 10 MP CK 0231
- Court and date
- Madhya Pradesh High Court (Coram: Sujoy Paul, J.), 22 October 2013
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable (dismissed), 35th Battalion BSF
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section (SSFC trial) of the BSF Act, 1968; Section 117(2) of the BSF Act, 1968
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “As analyzed above, there is no substance in the petition. The charges established against the petitioner are very grave. It cannot be said that the petitioner is subjected to any harsh/excessive punishment.” (at para 13)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Disciplinary action upheld. Sentence: imprisonment and fine; maximum substantive term of 1 year.
- Present status of the proceedings
- No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
Current position
The Madhya Pradesh High Court judgment dated 22 October 2013 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
Evidence position
Recorded allegations
OtherPrimary
Material fact supported
Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.
Official finding: supports allegation.
Attributed to the court
What the court found
Holding not recorded separately.
“As analyzed above, there is no substance in the petition. The charges established against the petitioner are very grave. It cannot be said that the petitioner is subjected to any harsh/excessive punishment.” (para 13)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
Continuing record
Follow-up history
19 Sep 2026
(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))
Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.
Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.