Srinagar/New Delhi, Nov 18, KDC: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has ruled that there is no legal bar on conducting departmental proceedings alongside a criminal trial, while hearing a case involving serious allegations of rape on the false promise of marriage levelled by a woman Assistant Sub-Inspector (ASI) of the Border Security Force (BSF) against Assistant Commandant Akhanda Prakash Shahi.
Justice Sanjay Dhar delivered the verdict while dismissing two petitions filed by Shahi, who had sought quashing of the departmental enquiry initiated under Rule 173 of the BSF Rules and challenged the repeated extensions of his suspension.
Earlier, the woman ASI lodged a complaint in New Delhi, stating that Shahi contacted her in 2020 after she circulated a message expressing her intention to marry. She alleged that he repeatedly assured her of marriage and engaged in sexual relations with her at hotels in Dwarka, Mahipalpur, and the Delhi Airport area between December 2020 and March 2021.
She further claimed that she later discovered Shahi had relationships with another woman from Meghalaya and eventually got engaged to someone else. Feeling deceived, she filed a complaint leading to FIR No.108/2022 under Section 376 of the IPC at Police Station Dwarka (North), accusing him of rape on the pretext of marriage. A chargesheet has been filed, and the criminal trial is underway before the Additional Sessions Judge, Dwarka.
Following the FIR, Shahi was placed under suspension in April 2023, and a Staff Court of Enquiry was ordered to examine allegations of rape, blackmail, and misconduct with a junior member of the Force. His suspension was reviewed and extended several times, most recently until January 7, 2026.
Although the FIR in the case was registered in New Delhi and the criminal trial is being conducted by a Dwarka court, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh heard the matter because the petitions filed by Assistant Commandant Akhanda Prakash Shahi related to service and departmental actions taken by the BSF in Jammu and Kashmir, where he was posted at the time. Shahi had approached the J&K High Court to challenge his suspension orders and the Staff Court of Enquiry initiated under BSF Rules, both of which were issued by BSF authorities based in the Union Territory. As the cause of action for these administrative decisions arose within J&K, the High Court had full territorial jurisdiction to hear his pleas.
Shahi argued before the High Court that the allegations were false, stemmed from a failed relationship, and that the departmental proceedings should be halted until the criminal trial concluded. He also claimed the prolonged suspension was punitive.
Rejecting his contentions, the High Court observed that the allegations involved both criminality and misconduct and that there was no justification for putting departmental proceedings on hold. The court noted that the case did not involve complicated legal or factual issues that would cause prejudice to the officer if both proceedings ran simultaneously.
“No prejudice would be caused to the petitioner if both criminal and departmental proceedings are allowed to proceed simultaneously,” the court said, according to news agency Kashmir Dot Com (KDC), pointing out that Shahi had already disclosed his defence in multiple representations, bail applications and pleadings.
The court also noted that the suspension persisted largely because Shahi had himself obtained a stay on the enquiry in December 2023, and therefore could not blame the authorities for delay.
Finding no merit in Shahi’s pleas, the High Court dismissed both writ petitions as well as a connected contempt petition. With the verdict, the departmental enquiry and the criminal trial will continue in parallel. (KDC)
