Express News Service
The Centre on Friday before the Supreme Court defended its decision to extend the jurisdiction of the Border Security Force (BSF) in Punjab from 15 to 50 km along the India-Pakistan border.
Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, the senior law officer of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), appeared before the top court and defended the decision.
“This only means that in some offences like passport, and others, the BSF has jurisdiction along with the local police,” SG Mehta told a bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud.
Mehta further said that the amendment only increased the distance and the local police were not deprived of the jurisdiction as there was concurrent jurisdiction.
He also said that the Punjab government filed the petition in 2021 and the situation has changed since then.
In December 2021, the Punjab government had moved the Supreme Court against the Centre’s decision to extend the BSF’s jurisdiction in the state from 15 to 50 km along the Indo-Pak border, saying it went against federalism and would lead to chaos.
Opposing the decision of the Centre, lawyer Sadan Farasat, appearing for the Punjab government, said that the decision amounts to creating a parallel jurisdiction, taking away police powers of the state.
“We feel (prima facie) state police’s power is not taken away. In cognisable offences, BSF won’t be investigating. So nothing goes away from state police,” the CJI said.
“But since it’s a suit, we will have to hear both parties. First let us frame the issues,” the bench added. Follow channel on WhatsApp
The Centre on Friday before the Supreme Court defended its decision to extend the jurisdiction of the Border Security Force (BSF) in Punjab from 15 to 50 km along the India-Pakistan border.
Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, the senior law officer of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), appeared before the top court and defended the decision.
“This only means that in some offences like passport, and others, the BSF has jurisdiction along with the local police,” SG Mehta told a bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud.googletag.cmd.push(function() {googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); });
Mehta further said that the amendment only increased the distance and the local police were not deprived of the jurisdiction as there was concurrent jurisdiction.
He also said that the Punjab government filed the petition in 2021 and the situation has changed since then.
In December 2021, the Punjab government had moved the Supreme Court against the Centre’s decision to extend the BSF’s jurisdiction in the state from 15 to 50 km along the Indo-Pak border, saying it went against federalism and would lead to chaos.
Opposing the decision of the Centre, lawyer Sadan Farasat, appearing for the Punjab government, said that the decision amounts to creating a parallel jurisdiction, taking away police powers of the state.
“We feel (prima facie) state police’s power is not taken away. In cognisable offences, BSF won’t be investigating. So nothing goes away from state police,” the CJI said.
“But since it’s a suit, we will have to hear both parties. First let us frame the issues,” the bench added. Follow channel on WhatsApp
