Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
MR. AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, MR. R. MAHADEVAN, JJ
B. BERNARD DOROTHY JOSAIN – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE (L AND O) & ANR. – Respondent
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).5560/2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. judicial efforts to promote compromise in disputes. (Para 1) |
| 2. lack of genuine engagement in apology affects legal outcomes. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's disappointment with conduct regarding previously noted settlement initiatives. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. final dismissal reflects adherence to legal procedures. (Para 8 , 9) |
ORDER
The Court would at the beginning record the fact that it had made an extra effort, which even though not required, in the facts and circumstances of the case to ensure that the matter could be compromised between the two individuals as basically, they were colleagues and working in a school so that the atmosphere of the school remains congenial and is not vitiated.
2. On 03.02.2026, when the matter was taken up, it was the categorical stand of the learned counsel for the petitioner before the Court that the petitioner is ready to apologize and compromise with the complainant-respondent no.2. However, as the petitioner joined the proceeding virtually, but respondent no.2-complainant was not represented before the Court, we had adjourned the matter for 04.02.2026.
3. Yesterday i.e., on 04.02.2026, when the matter was taken up, by that time, still the petitioner had not extended any signal from her side to the complainant to indicate that she did regret the incident and had not even talked to the complainant seeking apology.
4. Today, as directed, both the parties are connected to the Court proceedings through video conferencing from the concerned Police Station.
5. On a query of the Court to the complainant-respondent no.2, she informed that till this time, the petitioner-accused has not apologized to her. The direct query put by the Court to the petitioner, as to whether, she had apologized to the complainant, her stand is that she denies the incident but she is ready to compromise and to apologize.
6. The Court is shocked at such conduct, which was not represented before the Court on the earlier two occasions.
7. Be that as it may, the Court tried its best to settle the matter between the two teachers in the larger public interest. However, with the stand taken and conduct of the petitioner, we are convinced that the law should take its course without any interference by this Court under its discretionary powers.
8. For reasons aforesaid, the Special Leave Petition stands dismissed.
9. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
