Explanation:

The Supreme Court has noted that the Centre’s notification extending the jurisdiction of the Border Security Force (BSF) in Punjab from 15 to 50 km only confers concurrent power on the BSF to prevent the commission of certain offences within the limits and does not take away the power of investigation from the state police.

The Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud while presiding over a three-judge bench further noted that it’s only preventive power. The power of investigation is not taken away. Therefore, nothing is taken away from the Punjab police.

The court underlined the rules while hearing a suit filed by the Punjab government against the Centre’s notification extending the jurisdiction of the BSF. The centre government in this regard has noted that in all border states, there is a power under the BSF Act to extend the jurisdiction of BSF so far as offences are considered. Since 1969, Gujarat has had 80 kms. In some states it was less. Now it is uniform 50 kms. And that would merely mean that with regard to some offences like illegal entry into India, Passports Act etc, BSF will also have jurisdiction. The centre has further clarified that the local police will continue to have jurisdiction. BSF is also concurrently conferred with the jurisdiction.

The state government while arguing against the has contended that there is a federal question involved. According to the state government, for instance in Punjab, the 50 km in which they have jurisdiction, it’s not just Passports Act but every cognisable offence, so entire IPC. For 50 km, they have the concurrent power along with the state police to exercise every power over every cognisable offence under IPC. When the jurisdiction of central agency is extended from 15 to 50 in a relatively small state like Punjab, all the major cities come under that. So that leads to two parallel jurisdictions thereby affecting the federal structure envisaged by the Constitution of India.