[2026:RJ-JP:24248] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7758/2004 URN: CW / 12560U / 2004 Bhagirath Singh S/o Shri Mangu Ram aged about 37 years R/o V & P. Lam Puwa, Via Ringus, Tehsil Srimadhopur, Distt Sikar. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs,New Delhi. 2. The Directorate General, Border Security Force (Disc & Lit Branch), BSF Head Quarter Block No.10, CGO Complex, Lodi Road, New Delhi. 3. The Commandanta, 11 BN BSF, Narayanpur Malda, West Bengal. 4. K.S. Rajawat, Commandant, 11 BN BSF. Recording Officer, Narayanpur, Malda West Bengal 5. The D.I.G. Border Security Force, Head Office Malda, West Bengal. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr. Praveen Singh Rajawat, Senior Panel Counsel (U.O.I.) HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH Order 01/07/2026 This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:- “It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that Your Lordships may graciously be pleased to accept and allow this writ petition and further be pleased to (i) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set aside the order dated 3.9.2003 (Annexure3) and order dated 10.6.2004 (Annexure-8) with all consequential benefits. (ii) Issue an appropriate with order or direction [2026:RJ-JP:24248] (2 of 4) [CW-7758/2004] directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in the service as Head Constable with all consequential benefits and back wages. (iii) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set aside any order or direction if issued by the respondents during the pendency of the aforesaid writ petition which is prejudicial to the petitioners and the same may also kindly be taken on record of the aforesaid writ petition. (iv) The Hon'ble Court would be pleased to call for the entire record of the above summary proceedings with regard to case of the petitioner from the respondents. (v) Any other order or relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may be passed in favour of the petitioner. (vi) Cost may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.” By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 03.09.2003 by which he has been dismissed from service as well as the order dated 10.06.2004 whereby the appeal filed on behalf of the petitioner against the order dated 03.09.2003 was dismissed. Brief facts of the case as mentioned in the reply of the writ petition reads as under:- “BRIEF HISTORY OF THE CASE : No.86003649 Head Const Bhagirath Singh was enrolled in BSF at CSWT Indore as Constable on 1.4.1986 and served in 07" Bn BSF, 127 Bn and 11 Bn BSF respectively. 2. In his entire service, petitioner earned O7cash rewards and was awarded 02 punishments as_ per details given below:- i) U/S 40 of BSF Act 1968. Awarded “Reprimand” on 06.01.2003 in which he at — Bn HQ, on the intervening night of 09/10 Oct 2001 while performing the duties of night patrolling party Comdr of BSF — Campus, Narayanpur, failedtocheck his patrol _ party during night hours as a result Const Baldev Krishan after the - duty, left for his Quarter No.17, Type-I and committed suicide after killing his wife and daughter. [2026:RJ-JP:24248] (3 of 4) [CW-7758/2004] ii) WS 26 of BSF Act 1968. Awarded ‘Severe Reprimand’ in which he, on 3.3.2003 was found in a state of intoxication while deployed at BOP Elendry on Indo-Bangladesh Border. 3. The petitioner was posted to “E” Coy of 11 Bn BSF and deployed at BOP Madhavpur on Indo- Bangladesh Border. During intervening night of 12/13 Aug 2003, the petitioner along with Constable Nag Raj and Constable Chander Sekhar was sent for ambush duty at ambush point No.2. On 13.08.2003 at about 0625 hrs, the ambush party returned to the BOP and gave OK report to Offg Comdr Subedar Swaran Singh. The routine work in the BOP was being Carried out under the supervision of Offg Coy Comdr. At 0930 hrs Offg Coy Comdr returned to his hut to attend routine official work of the Coy. The petitioner was. sitting near the gate of BOP _Madhavpur with the guard personnel on duty. immediately, - the petitioner went to barrack brought his personal weapon i.e. SLR Butt No.461 Body No.BF-8150 and came near the hut of Offg Coy Comdr. The Coy Comdr thought that pull through might have struck in the barrel and HC Bhagirath Singh was coming to report to the Coy-Comdr about this. But when he was approximately: 15 yards away from the hut where Coy Comdr was sitting, he fired from his rifle without any provocation, which hit on the top of the rest house. Offg Coy Comdr on seeing the firing 01 round by above HC, came out and caught the SLR from front hand guard and pressed it towards the ground. In the meantime, HC ’ Bhagirath Singh fired 02 more rounds and both the bullets hit the ground. On checking his physical condition it was revealed that he had consumed illicit liquor and was in the state of “intoxication. He was over powered by the troops and brought under control. Enroute to BN HQ, he was examined by the Medical Officer of 05 Bn BSF at Patiram, who confirmed about consumption of liquor by the said NCO. Accordingly, after observing all required formalities he was tried by Summary Security Force Court under Section 40 and 26 of BSF Act 1968 and was dismissed from the service with effect from 03.09.2003.” I have gone through the order passed by the competent authority as well as the Appellate Authority. [2026:RJ-JP:24248] (4 of 4) [CW-7758/2004] The allegation against the petitioner is that while he was in the state of intoxication, he has fired three rounds from his official rifle. Thereafter, he was over powered by the troops and brought under control. He was medically examined by the Medical Officer who confirmed the consumption of liquor by the petitioner. I have also considered the fact that proper procedure was followed by the respondents as prescribed under Sections 40 and 26 of the BSF Act, 1968 while passing the order of dismissal dated 03.09.2003. In my considered view, no illegality has been committed by the authorities in passing the order dated 03.09.2003 as well as the order dated 10.06.2004. Hence, no case is made out for interference by this Court under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. Hence, this writ petition stands dismissed. (INDERJEET SINGH),J JYOTI/51