Srinagar/New Delhi, Nov 18: In a significant order, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed two petitions filed by BSF Assistant Commandant Akhanda Prakash Shahi—an officer accused of repeatedly raping a woman colleague at hotels in the national capital on the false promise of marriage—while allowing the Border Security Force to continue its departmental enquiry alongside the ongoing criminal trial.
Justice Sanjay Dhar, while pronouncing the judgment, held that there is no legal hurdle in conducting departmental proceedings even when a criminal case on similar allegations is pending, provided the issues are not so complex as to create prejudice for the accused.
Complaint Accusing Officer of Rape at Delhi Hotels
The case relates to a complaint lodged by a woman Assistant Sub-Inspector (ASI) of the BSF, who alleged that Shahi contacted her in 2020 after she circulated a message expressing willingness to marry. According to the FIR, he repeatedly assured her of marriage and established sexual relations with her at hotels in Dwarka, Mahipalpur and the Delhi Airport area between December 2020 and March 2021.
She later discovered that Shahi was simultaneously in a relationship with another woman from Meghalaya and was later engaged to someone else. Feeling deceived, she lodged FIR No. 108/2022 at Police Station Dwarka (North) under Section 376 of the IPC, accusing him of rape on the pretext of marriage. Delhi Police have filed a chargesheet, and the case is under trial before the Additional Sessions Judge, Dwarka.
Suspension, Enquiry and Jurisdiction
Following registration of the FIR, the BSF placed Shahi under suspension in April 2023 and ordered a Staff Court of Enquiry to probe allegations of rape, blackmail, and misconduct with a subordinate woman officer. His suspension was reviewed and extended several times—most recently up to January 7, 2026.
Shahi approached the J&K High Court challenging the departmental enquiry and the extensions of his suspension, even though the criminal case is being tried in Delhi. The court clarified that it had full territorial jurisdiction since the challenged administrative actions—suspension orders and enquiry directives—were issued by BSF authorities based in Jammu and Kashmir, where Shahi was posted.
HC Rejects Officer’s Pleas; Says No Prejudice in Parallel Proceedings
Shahi contended that the allegations were false and arose out of a failed romantic relationship. He argued that the enquiry should be halted until the criminal trial concluded and that his prolonged suspension was punitive.
The High Court rejected all his arguments.
Justice Dhar noted that the allegations against Shahi had both criminal and disciplinary dimensions, and the issues involved were not legally or factually complicated.
“No prejudice would be caused to the petitioner if both criminal and departmental proceedings are allowed to proceed simultaneously,” the court observed, adding that Shahi had already revealed his defence in bail applications, representations, and pleadings.
The court also recorded that much of the delay in disciplinary proceedings occurred because Shahi himself obtained a stay on the enquiry in December 2023.
Verdict Clears Way for Departmental Action
With the dismissal of both writ petitions and a related contempt plea, the High Court has paved the way for the BSF to continue with the Staff Court of Enquiry even as the criminal trial proceeds in Delhi.
Both proceedings will now run in parallel, determining the officer’s criminal liability and service accountability independently. (KDC)
