HARDWARI LAL vs STATE OF U.P.

The Supreme Court held that the dismissal of the appellant, a constable in the Uttar Pradesh police, was invalid due to the non-examination of key witnesses, which violated the principles of natural justice. The Court emphasized that the testimonies of the complainant, Virender Singh, and witness, Jagdish Ram, were crucial for assessing the credibility of the complaint and the appellant's state of inebriation. Consequently, the Court quashed the dismissal order, ruling that the inquiry was not conducted properly as required under service law principles.