Delhi High Court upholds BSF constable’s dismissal over Pakistan operative ‘link’

“The petitioner has not denied the fact that he was in contact with a stranger on Facebook and Messenger and later passed on information considered sensitive by the respondents on Whatsapp to the stranger apart from receiving an amount of Rs.5,000/- from the said person in his savings account, the penalty of dismissal is justified and ought not to be interfered with,” the April 30 order read. 

Justices V Kameswar Rao and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora pointed out that the charge needs to be proved beyond reasonable doubt in a criminal case.

The Delhi High Court was hearing the plea filed by Pravin Bataniya, who challenged his dismissal from service in November 2020 on grounds of misconduct affecting national security.

Facebook friendship, job dismissal

The petitioner, who was a constable in the Border Security Force (BSF), has challenged his dismissal from service by an order of November 30, 2020. 

It was claimed by the petitioner that while he was posted in Jammu and Kashmir in 2018, he received a friend request from a girl named Krishna on his social media. 

As per the petition, she claimed to be a native of Chandigarh and is residing in Dubai for studies. The petitioner alleged that the girl initiated the contact primarily through Facebook and Messenger and solicited his pictures in uniform and enquired about his place of posting, which he had never disclosed. 

It was further stated that in September, 2018, while the petitioner was on leave, the said girl asked for the petitioner’s bank account number to buy a gift for the petitioner’s son and transferred a sum of Rs 5000 into his account. 

The petitioner claimed that once he found out that the account of the transferor belonged to one Srinivas, then he became suspicious of the intentions of the said girl. Then, he allegedly broke all contact with the girl on suspicion of intel-collection. 

After two or three months, he allegedly received a call from an unknown number asking him to delete all the contents/ data relating to the said girl. 

The authorities later alleged that the constable shared sensitive information, including details relating to unit deployment and movement, during these interactions.

It was claimed that, in November, 2020, the BSF allegedly received security inputs that the petitioner is in constant touch with Pakistani Intelligence Operatives (PIO).

Later, he was interrogated and found liable for misconduct following a Staff Court of Inquiry (SCOI).

Simultaneously, a complaint was made, and an FIR was registered against the petitioner with the Meghalaya Police. However, the investigating officer later concluded that no concrete evidence was found against him, leading to his discharge in the criminal case.

Following this, the constable sought reinstatement in June 2023, but his representation was rejected in September 2023, prompting him to approach the Delhi High Court, challenging his dismissal.

Sufficient reasons

• The high court found that there were sufficient reasons for the authorities to dispense with the show cause notice and the proceedings of the security force court.  
• The court further emphasised that the disclosure of sensitive operational details could jeopardise the security of the nation.
• The court clarified that there cannot be any comparison between a criminal case and a departmental inquiry, as the nature of the evidence required in a criminal case is of a higher degree.
• The court also added that the charge needs to be proved beyond reasonable doubt in a criminal case.
• It was further added that in the case of a departmental inquiry, the misdemeanour has to be proved on the anvil of preponderance of probability. 

Making false submissions

Appearing for the petitioner, advocate S S Hooda submitted that the BSF have resorted to making false submissions since the petitioner has neither admitted nor confessed to sharing any secret or classified information with any person outside the force. 

It was added that the petitioner only stated that he was contacted by a lady on social media, and he has only interacted with the said profile casually and shared photographs of himself in uniform and general scenery with her. 

It was contended that the petitioner was not provided with any documents or information in respect of the SCOI conducted against him. 

He also alleged that the petitioner was kept in complete darkness throughout the proceedings before SCOI, and no details were shared with him. 

Blameworthy petitioner

Senior Panel Counsel Manish Kumar, representing BSF, submitted that stated that this petition should be dismissed as the petitioner had acted in a manner which was prejudicial to the national security and national interest. 

He stated that the petitioner was found blameworthy for sharing sensitive/secret information with the PIO in the SCOI. 

He further stated that after careful examination of facts and circumstances of this case, his reinstatement in service was rejected by the inspector general on September 20, 2023.

He contended that, even if the petitioner neither revealed the real identity of the person with whom he was in contact nor shared personal details, the same is in itself a violation of the guidelines issued by the BSF regulating the usage of social media.