Liquor smuggling case: HC quashes dismissal of 26 Coast Guard personnel, cites procedural lapses

Quashing the dismissal orders of 26 Indian Coast Guard (ICG) personnel, who had been charged for smuggling liquor on board an ICG ship, over procedural lapses in proceedings against them, the Delhi High Court has ruled that procedural fairness and integrity are of utmost importance as they ensure an unbiased investigation and adjudication thereof.

The personnel concerned were posted on ICG Ship Sarthak, which was en route from Goa to Porbandar in Gujarat. Based on inputs, a search of the ship was carried out during which 1,512 bottles of liquor were found stashed in hidden places, in consequence of which they were dismissed from service in February 2024.

The 26 personnel fell under two categories based upon the type of proceedings they were subjected to. One category of 15 personnel faced summary trial proceedings and were awarded minor punishments. However, subsequently, the punishments were set aside and they were subject to fresh investigations by a board of inquiry (BOI), which ultimately led to their dismissal. The other was subjected only to BOI proceedings, based on the findings of which they were dismissed.

The petitioners submitted before the court that only 40 to 50 personnel of the total 112 on the ship were subjected to the BOI proceedings without any intelligible reason for the exclusion of others.

Further, they contended that the authorities did not follow the stipulated procedures, compelled into making admissions, and were not allowed to meaningfully take part in the BOI proceedings. Their signatures were forcefully taken on an undertaking/certificate to show the compliance of due procedure.

They also claimed that there were no eyewitnesses, no CCTV footage, no signatures on statements and no show-cause notice was issued to them. Further, the subsequent BOI proceedings could not have been initiated against some of them as the same is barred under Section 68 of the Act, which prohibits a second trial on the same allegations.

The bench of Justice Om Prakash Shukla and Justice C Hari Shankar, in their order of November 11, observed that there is nothing brought on record or argued to show that the dismissal orders were furnished along with other necessary documents.

“The handwritten statements carrying the signatures of the petitioners during the summary trial are disputed and objected to since they were allegedly made as a result of threats and force exerted by senior officers, therefore, their authenticity is questionable,” the bench held.

“Additionally, once the summary trial proceedings were set aside with the observation that it was conducted in a biased manner, any reliance on the evidence therein is misplaced,” the bench added.

The bench also observed that in accordance with rules, due opportunity must be given to the concerned personnel to be present throughout the BOI proceedings, to make any statement, furnish any evidence or witnesses and to cross-examine witnesses. The proceedings or any statement or confession or answer to any question made during such proceedings will not be admissible as evidence against a person. Except for typed statements without signatures, there is no other material on record to show participation of the petitioners in BOI proceedings, the bench pointed out.

The bench remanded the proceedings to the competent authority for fresh consideration from the stage of BOI proceedings in accordance with principles of natural justice and with due and effective compliance of the Coast Guard Act and Rules, to be conducted in a time-bound manner, preferably within eight weeks.