1. The present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioner seeking (i) quashing of the Findings and Sentence Order dated 14.09.2022 passed by the General Security Force Court1 (ii) quashing of order dated 25.09.2023 passed by Directorate General, Border Security Force2 whereby the petitioner's statutory petition against the order of dismissal came to be dismissed (iii) a direction to reinstate the petitioner in 1 "GSFC" hereinafter 2 "BSF" hereinafter W.P.(C) 1027/2024 Page 1 of 14 Signature Not Verified Signed By:GUNN Signing Date:30.10.2025 16:18:33 service (iv) call for the entire record of Court of Inquiry3, Record of Evidence4, and proceedings in GSFC.

2. The brief factual matrix is that the petitioner herein was serving as a Sub-Inspector in the BSF. It is alleged that around June-July 2019, WhatsApp communication commenced between the petitioner and one Ms. X, the wife of a fellow Constable, who resided in the same building, and their acquaintance thereafter allegedly developed beyond just friendship. It is also alleged that the petitioner, on several occasions, gifted Ms. X a mobile phone, gold locket and a dress/frock, and purportedly began to visit her at her residence in the absence of her husband. Thereafter, vide letter dated 27.08.2020, an explanation was sought for violation of professional ethics and moral conduct regarding his alleged illicit relationship with "another lady" (referring to Ms. X) from his block despite having a family of his own. It is stated that the petitioner submitted his written reply denying the allegations in toto and terming them as baseless rumours.

3. Thereafter, the husband of Ms. X who was a fellow constable submitted a written compliant to Inspector General, North Bengal Frontier, BSF alleging that the petitioner maintained an illicit relationship with his wife, visited their quarter in his absence, and attempted to and/or established physical relations. Accordingly, on 12.04.2021, COI was convened against the petitioner.

(emphasis supplied)

19. Therefore, it is settled that the power of a Writ Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is limited, and it is difficult to re-appreciate evidence at this stage. Further, interference is limited to cases where there is violation of principles of natural justice or such irregularity as to term then to be a cause for failure of justice.

20. The case of the petitioner is that respondent's case relies on the statement of prosecutrix which was made under coercion and hence, is inadmissible. Therefore, in the absence of any corroborating evidence, the petitioner cannot be convicted based on such evidence. The respondents have refuted the said challenge by relying on the consistency of statements of Ms. X which were recorded three times.

21. At the outset, it can be seen from the material placed on record that plea of petitioner is overshadowed by the consistent and unwavering statement made by Ms. X during the COI proceedings, ROE and the trial before the GSFC. Moreover, this Court finds that the GSFC, while convicting the petitioner, did not solely rely on the W.P.(C) 1027/2024 Page 10 of 14 Signature Not Verified Signed By:GUNN Signing Date:30.10.2025 16:18:33 testimony of Ms. X. It can be seen from the record that the testimonies of PW1, 2 & 3 were also relied upon which strongly corroborate the case of prosecution. The regular communication via text messages, phone and video calls, gifts and the alleged recovery of images by PW- 3 cannot be side lined. Further, from the chain of incriminating circumstances, it has been established by material evidence that these events consistently point towards the criminal act performed by the petitioner, for which he has been charged. As noted above, that this Court cannot re-appreciate evidence at this stage. It is also pertinent to note that no plea of procedural irregularity has been raised, and it is not the case of petitioner that the GSFC proceedings were not conducted in compliance with the Act and the BSF Rules. It also evident from the record that, the petitioner was afforded full opportunity of entering into a proper defence including cross-examination of witnesses.

22. The GSFC, while holding that charges against the petitioner are proved, held as follows:

23. Pertaining to the second charge, considering the admission of the petitioner of giving gifts to Ms. X, the GSFC did not find any merit in W.P.(C) 1027/2024 Page 11 of 14 Signature Not Verified Signed By:GUNN Signing Date:30.10.2025 16:18:33 the plea of the petitioner that that there was no averment to the effect that gifts were given to seek sexual favours. We also do not find any merits in the said defence of the petitioner.

24. Further, we note that, no reasonable justification has been given as to why gifts were given by the petitioner to Ms. X. The said act gains predominance in the background that there appears no formal, familial or professional relationship between the petitioner and Ms. X that would ordinarily justify such gestures. The act of a married individual presenting gifts to another married individual of the opposite sex (who is not their spouse), without legitimate context, may reasonably be presumed as unusual and calls for an appropriate clarification. The burden in all these kinds of situations where there are such exchange of gifts lies heavily on the person, who enters such a defence. At this juncture, it is pertinent to note that the provisions of Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act or Section 103 of Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, offers some guidance on this aspect. However, we do not find any such defence has been cultivated or proved by the petitioner. In the peculiar facts of the present case, the GSFC found that the items were given in a "clandestine" manner and concluded that the petitioner had presented the gifts in exchange of sexual favours because had the petitioner given the items in exchange for money, he could have disclosed it to the husband of Ms. X and got the requisite amount in return, which the petitioner did not do. There is no substantial plea relating to the challenge of any the recoveries made from the phone. We are not convinced that the finding of the GSFC merits interference.

25. Hence, in the present case, in the absence of procedural irregularity or violation of principles of natural justice or any illegality leading to failure of interest of justice, the petitioner is unable to attract this Court's limited power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

26. At this juncture, we also cannot restrain ourselves from commenting on the conduct of the petitioner in the present matter. In this regard, we deem it important to refer to the decision in Charanjit Lamba v Army Southern Command8 , wherein it was underscored that an officer belonging to a disciplined force bears the duty to maintain the highest standards of honesty and morality and abstain from any conduct that is inconsistent and unbecoming of the rank held by such officer.

27. It is pertinent to note that the petitioner had established an illicit relationship with the wife of his colleague by offering presents and making frequent visits, which is morally distressing and goes against the very ethos of the uniform the petitioner wears. We cannot be oblivious to the petitioner's conduct, which is not only dishonourable but also unfit for an official tasked with the onerous responsibility of protecting the country. This Court cannot turn a blind eye to such a violation of institutional and moral principles since such dishonest behaviour undermines public confidence in the integrity of the Armed 8 (2010) 11 SCC 314 W.P.(C) 1027/2024 Page 13 of 14 Signature Not Verified Signed By:GUNN Signing Date:30.10.2025 16:18:33 Forces and is repugnant to the conscience of every citizen.

28. In view of the aforesaid, the present writ petition is dismissed.

29. The pending applications if any, are accordingly dismissed.

OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J.

C.HARI SHANKAR, J.

OCTOBER 30, 2025/AT/gunn W.P.(C) 1027/2024 Page 14 of 14 Signature Not Verified Signed By:GUNN Signing Date:30.10.2025 16:18:33