Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, July 14: High Court dropped contempt proceedings against the Deputy Inspector General, Border Security Force and granted liberty to the petitioner for his release before the concerned authority.
The petitioner-Ram Nivas has sought initiation of proceedings for Contempt of Court against the Deputy Inspector General, SHQ Border Security Force, Gurdaspur, Punjab on the ground that despite he having been admitted to bail by the order of this Court, has been detained and taken into custody by the DIG.
“In the present case, since the authority under Section 80 of the aforesaid Act has exercised its jurisdiction for trial of the accused by the Security Force Court and detained the accused in Force custody, such act does not amount to violation and, as such, the proceedings for Contempt of Court cannot be initiated against the respondent”, Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul concluded.
Court granted liberty to the petitioner to make an appropriate application before the Authority for release, if permissible under law. The FIR No.101/2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 458/354 IPC read with Section 9 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act) was registered against the petitioner/accused with the Police of Police Station Akhnoor.
The said FIR was registered on the basis of a complaint filed on 16.05.2019 through BSF Authorities for the allegation against the petitioner/accused was that on 04.11.2018, he entered into the quarter, BSF Campus Akhnoor of the father of the victim and misbehaved with his elder daughter by touching her body when her parents were not present.
The prosecutrix reported the matter to the BSF Authorities with regard to the occurrence where-after the aforesaid complaint was made. The High Court, while dealing with the bail application, admitted the petitioner/accused on bail while he was in judicial custody and the case was before the Court below.
Thereafter on 28.04.2021, the Deputy Inspector General SHQ BSF exercised its option to conduct the trial in the case and made a request to the trial court regarding the same. It is submitted by the petitioner that the respondent-DIG, after opting to conduct the trial of the accused, had taken him into custody, as such, the has violated the order of this Court by virtue of which he has been admitted to bail.
Court after perusal of Section 80 and 81 of the aforesaid Act said, it shall be in the discretion of the Director General, or the Inspector General or the Deputy Inspector General within whose command, the accused person is serving or such other officer as may be prescribed, to decide before which Court the proceedings should be instituted and if he decides that the proceedings should be instituted before a Security Force Court, he is required to direct that the accused person shall be detained in the Force Custody.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel