Supreme Court judgment 2025 - The Legal Chamber

The Supreme Court held that natural justice violations must cause actual prejudice to invalidate disciplinary proceedings. Technical non-compliance with procedural rules doesn't automatically vitiate departmental action. Courts assess whether different outcomes would emerge if procedures were followed. Preponderance of probability standard applies in disciplinary cases, not criminal proof standards. Facts Of The Case: S. Janaki Iyer was appointed as a Hindi trained graduate teacher at Kendriya Vidyalaya Sanghathan, Bangalore on probation from January 11, 1989, and became permanent from April 16, 1992. Since her husband worked in Mumbai, she sought transfer from Bangalore to Mumbai or Pune. A transfer order dated October 1, 1991, allegedly signed by VK Jain, Assistant Commissioner (Headqu...

The Supreme Court held that High Courts possess inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC (or Section 528 BNSS) to quash proceedings initiated under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, as these applications are filed before Criminal Courts (Magistrates). However, such power must be exercised sparingly and only in cases of gross illegality or abuse of process, considering the civil nature of DV Act remedies and its objective as social welfare legislation. The Court clarified that proceedings under the DV Act, though heard by Criminal Courts, remain predominantly civil in character. Facts Of The Case: Vidhi Rawal (Respondent) married Prateek Tripathi on December 12, 2019, in Dewas, Madhya Pradesh. After two years, on December 8, 2021, she complained to Dewas police against Pr...

Tag: Supreme Court judgment 2025

Supreme Court Upholds Teacher’s Dismissal Over Fake Transfer Order – Natural Justice Principles Explained