Current Affairs

DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS (26 MARCH 2025)

by | Mar 26, 2025

Supreme Court judgments on Allahabad HC’s attempt to rape case, Haryana’s Dalit boycott probe, and seniority in request-based government job transfers.

Supreme Court stays Allahabad HC’s ruling on attempt to rape, warns Haryana over Dalit boycott probe, and rules that request-based transfers don’t retain seniority.

DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS (25 MARCH 2025)

SUPREME COURT STAYS ALLAHABAD HC ORDER ON ATTEMPT TO RAPE CASE

Case Name: IN RE: ORDER DATED 17.03.2025 PASSED BY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD IN CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 1449/2024 AND ANCILLARY ISSUES | SMW(Crl) No. 1/2025

The Supreme Court has put on hold the judgment of the Allahabad High Court that stated that grabbing a minor’s breasts breaking his pyjama string and making an attempt to drag him under a culvert do not constitute an attempt to rape. The Court found the said decision rather insensitive and legally faulty and ordered a review.

Legal Provision 
  • Section 376 IPC, Section 18 POCSO Act (attempt to commit penetrative sexual assault), Section 354-B IPC (assault with intent to disrobe).

Source: Supreme Court of India

SUPREME COURT WARNS HARYANA OVER NON-COOPERATION IN DALIT SOCIAL BOYCOTT PROBE

Case Name: JAI BHAGWAN AND ORS. vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. | W.P.(Crl.) No. 293/2019

Haryana has been warned by the Supreme Court not to make itself a party in contemptuous non-cooperation with the committee probing into the social boycott allegedly inflicted on Dalits in Bhatia village. The directive sent repeated requests from the State for providing logistical support but to no avail. The Court cautioned initiation of contempt proceedings if compliance was not ensured.

Legal Provision 

  • Article 17 (Abolition of Untouchability), SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

Source: Supreme Court of India

SUPREME COURT: REQUEST-BASED TRANSFER DOES NOT RETAIN SENIORITY

Case Name: THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE & ANR. vs. K.C. DEVAKI

The Supreme Court held that if a government employee is transferred at his own request, he cannot claim seniority from his previous post. It overruled a Karnataka HC ruling that originally sanctioned the claim of seniority to the employee who had voluntarily changed caders for medical reasons.

Legal Provision
  • Service Rules, Karnataka Administrative Tribunal Act, Supreme Court precedent in M.K. Jagadeesh v. The Registrar General, High Court of Karnataka (2007).

Source: Supreme Court of India

Also Read– DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS (25 MARCH 2025)

 

 

Written By Vishakha Khatri

My name is Vishakha Khatri. I am an engineering graduate and a civil service aspirant with a passion for spreading knowledge about Indian polity. I believe that understanding our political system is crucial for every citizen, and I am committed to making this information accessible to everyone in my own easy way. Through my experiences in civil service preparation and my unique perspective as an engineering graduate, I hope to inspire and educate others on the importance of Indian polity.

Related Posts