The Delhi High Court has ordered that mandatory regular trainings be provided to Officers holding the Summary Security Force Court (SSFC) proceedings under the Border Security Force (BSF) Act and Rules. A division bench comprising Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Shalinder Kaur observed that the Court was coming across a number of cases where the SSFC proceedings were being conducted in a lackadaisical and perfunctory manner by disregarding the rules and procedures. It said that the any deviation from the Rules and the laid down procedure during the trial not only compromises the rights of the accused but also results in grave injustice especially in cases where the trials, pertaining to misconduct committed by the Force personnel, ends with an award of a major penalty of dismissal from service. “It, thus, becomes incumbent upon the Officers conducting the SSFC proceedings to be properly trained and sensitized of the manner in which the SSFC proceedings ought to be conducted, i.e. by giving due regard to the rules and procedures outlined in the BSF Act and Rules,” the court held. It said that the Presiding Officers holding the SSFC proceedings must understand that the trials are not just mere formalities but are a fundamental aspect of ensuring justice and maintaining discipline in the Force by following the prescribed procedure. “The Presiding Officers have to be sensitized on these matters in order to safeguard the rights of the accused as well as the commitment of the Force in upholding the rule of law and maintaining the highest standards of discipline within its ranks. Failure thereof, will only result in miscarriage of justice, for both the individuals as well as the Force,” it said.

The court made the observations while allowing a plea moved by a BSF Constable against dismissal of his service in January 2022. He was convicted on the basis of his purported “plea of guilty” for his alleged role in smuggling of phenesdyl from Bangladesh to India. He also sought reinstatement in service with all due benefits accruing to him. The bench observed that the SSFC proceedings were conducted in a “most slipshod manner” with the Commandant, who was the Presiding Officer, having prepared the record in advance. The court noted that all the pages of the proceedings were pre-typed and only some blanks were left to be filled for recording the answer of the Constable to plead guilty or not guilty. “Though, it is seriously disputed by the petitioner, even if, we were to accept the respondent‟s plea and assume that he had pleaded „guilty‟ it is evident that the procedure as prescribed by Rule 142(2) was not followed in its true letter and spirit, thereby making the recording of the plea of "guilty", a mere formality. We seriously doubt that the petitioner understood the contents of the Charge and consequences thereof, as well as those of his pleading guilty to the same,” the court said. The bench held that the SSFC proceedings, including the award of sentence of dismissal from service awarded to the Constable, were vitiated. “We direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service w.e.f. the date of his dismissal from service i.e. 19.01.2022 with all consequential benefits. However, taking into account the nature of Charge levelled against the petitioner, we grant the respondent liberty to conduct a de novo trial and direct that the same be concluded within three months,” the court ordered.