Harish Tandon, J. - (1.) THE challenge is made to the charge sheet as well as the order dated 9th September, 2014, by which an additional charge was framed and the order was passed that the matter would be tried by the General Security Force Court.
(2.) THE challenge is basically founded on two grounds -firstly that the commandant after exercising his discretion in referring the case to the competent superior officer to be dealt with on administrative side, there is no justification in remitting the matter to the General Security Force Court; secondly the trial before the General Security Force Court can only be done, if the commandant applies to a competent officer or the authority empowered in this regard. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts involved in this writ petition pertain to certain monetary claims for official tour under the travelling allowances. According to the petitioner, he was allowed by an authority to undergo certain programmes and he was to stay in the hotels and the bills received from the respective hotels are required to be reimbursed as the petitioner is entitled to 'travelling allowances'. The Account Branch of 95 Battalion, Border Security Force, raised certain objections and it was decided that a proceeding should be initiated against the petitioner for his act, which amounts to defraud as envisaged under Section 30(f) of the Border Security Force Act, 1968. The original charge sheet as it appears contains three articles of charge, which are reproduced below: "CHARGE -ISEC. 30(f) BSF ACT 1968DOES ANY THING WITH INTEND TO DEFRAUD In that he, at HQ, 95 Bn BSF, Radhabari, on 03/04/2012 with intend to defraud submitted a TA claim of Rs. 15503/ - to the PAD BSF, New Delhi in respect of his tour to Kolkata in connection with review medical of one candidate for recruitment of Const (GD) in CAPF 2011 -12, by attaching a false and fabricated hotel bills bearing Bill No. 6300 dated 05/03/12 of Hotel Tiger Inn, Kolkata. CHARGE -IISEC. 30(f) BSF ACT 1968DOES ANY THING WITH INTEND TO DEFRAUD In that he, at HQ, 95 Bn BSF, Radhabari, on 03/04/2012 with intend to defraud submitted a TA claim of Rs. 48,980/ - to the PAD BSF, New Delhi in respect of his tour to Kolkata in connection with review medical of one candidate for recruitment of Const (GD) in CAPF 2011 -12, by attaching a false and fabricated hotel bills bearing Bill No. 6275 dated 21/02/12 of Hotel Tiger Inn, Kolkata and bill No. 3661 dated 10/02/12 of Hotel Astron, Kolkata; CHARGE -IIISEC. 40 BSF ACT 1968ACT PREJUDICIAL TO GOOD ORDER AND DISCIPLINE OF THEFORCE In that he, at HQ, 95 Bn BSF, Radhabari, submitted a false and fabricated TA bills in respect of his tour to Kolkata in connection with review medical of one candidate for recruitment of Const (GD) in CAPF 2011 -12, to PAD, BSF, New Delhi, which is improper on the part of officer and prejudicial to good order and discipline of the force."
(3.) RULE 45 -B of the Border Security Force Rules, 1969 framed in exercise of the Rule making power provided under Sub -section 1 and 2 of Section 141 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 provides the hearing on the charge where the officer is not an enrolled person, by commandant. Under the said provision the statement of the witness and the relevant documents shall be recorded and the said commandant after hearing may either dismiss the charge or remand the accused for preparation of record of evidence or preparation of abstract of evidence against the accused.;