PRAKASH CHAND SHARMA vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Date of decision: January 09, 2024

+ W.P.(C) 146/2024, CM APPL. 643/2024
PRAKASH CHAND SHARMA ….. Petitioner
Through: Mr. Nitin Joshi, Mr. Vaibhav Thaledi and Mr.Keshav Kant Sharma, Advocates
versus

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ….. Respondents
Through: Mr. Ajay Kumar Pandey, SPC with Mr. Rajat Choudhary, Advocate

CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE
J U D G M E N T

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J. (ORAL)

1. The prayers in this petition are the following:-
It’ therefore, most respectfully prayed that in view of the submissions made above and those to be urged at the time of hearing, Your Lordship may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order of direction in the nature of-

(i) Writ of certiorari seeking quashment of the impugned ‘Findings’ of the Ld. General Security Force Court (Confirmed) dated 21.04.2023 in the General Security For9e Court trial of the Petitioner, being declared null and void, being bad in the eyes of law and malicious with intent of penalizing and victimizing the Petitioner; and

(ii) Writ of certiorari seeking quashment of the impugned ‘Disposal of Pre-Confirmation Petition’ submitted by the Petitioner dated 13.11.2023 being declared null and void, being bad in the eyes of law; and

(iii) Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to reinstate the services of the Petitioner with all consequent benefits/ accrued. benefits, which the Petitioner would have been/ was entitled of had he not been arrayed as accused and subsequently terminated after confirmation; and

(iv) Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4 to pay a sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- (rs. Twenty Five lakhs only) as the costs/damages of malefic prosecution and illegal detention/custody therein, and

(v) Any other writ, order or direction which your Lordship may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be issued in favour of the Petitioner and against the Respondents.

2. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner, apart from submitting the post confirmation petition to the Director General of the Border Security Force he has also filed an application for suspension of sentence under Section 128 and Section 130 of the BSF Act, 1968.
3. We have been informed by the learned counsel for the respondents on instructions that the said application for suspension of sentence shall be considered and decided by the Director General, BSF within two days from today as an outer limit. He further submits that insofar as the confirmation petition is concerned, the same shall be decided within twelve weeks as an outer limit.
4. Noting the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondents on instructions, we dispose of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner, if he is aggrieved by the order to be passed on the application for suspension of sentence, to seek such remedy as available in law.
5. The petition is disposed of.

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J

SAURABH BANERJEE, J
JANUARY 09, 2024/rr

W.P.(C) 146/2024 Page 3 of 3