Tripura High Court Upholds BSF Personnel's Dismissal For Firing 20 Rounds While Drunk, Aiming Rifle At Superiors
LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
2 Sept 2026 7:28 PM IST
Representative image | PTI
The Tripura High Court has upheld the dismissal of a BSF Head Constable who, while on duty and allegedly in an inebriated state, indiscriminately fired 20 rounds from his service rifle in the air and subsequently aimed the rifle at his superior officers.
The Court found no violation of natural justice or other ground warranting interference with the disciplinary proceedings and dismissed his writ petition.
Justice Biswajit Palit remarked that: “The Petitioner in an inebriated state indiscriminately fired 20 rounds from his service weapon in the air without any reason/provocation. He thereafter aimed his service rifle towards the Offg. Coy Comdr & other officers.”
Background:
The petitioner, Som Nath, was serving as a Head Constable (General Duty) with the 42nd Battalion of the BSF. On December 6, 2023, while performing Observation Post duty, he allegedly fired 20 rounds from his service INSAS rifle into the air while in an inebriated state and subsequently aimed the rifle at his superior officers.
He was subsequently tried by a Summary Security Force Court for offences under Sections 20 and 22 of the BSF Act, 1968, and was found guilty. The SSFC consequently ordered his dismissal from service, which he challenged before the Tripura High Court.
The High Court held that its power to interfere with disciplinary proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution is limited. It cannot re-appreciate the evidence or reassess its adequacy, reliability, factual findings or the proportionality of punishment as an appellate authority.
The Court rejected the petitioner's contention that Sections 20 and 22 of the BSF Act were not applicable, noting that he had neither raised such an objection before the BSF Court during the proceedings nor challenged the charges before any other forum.
It further found that the petitioner failed to produce any material showing violation of the principles of natural justice or denial of an adequate opportunity to defend himself during the disciplinary proceedings.
Accordingly, finding no ground to interfere with the Disciplinary Authority's decision, the Court dismissed the writ petition and upheld the disciplinary action against the petitioner.
Case Name: Sri. Somnath v/s The Union of India
Case No.: WP ( C) No.497 of 2026
Date of Decision: 11.08.2026
