As per case facts, the appellant, a Pilot Officer in the Indian Air Force, faced a complaint from his wife, Mrs. Roopa Malhotra, alleging illicit relations, torture, and bigamy with ... Miss Anna Suja John. A Court of Enquiry led to a show-cause notice for compulsory retirement based on charges including illicit relations, ill-treatment of his wife, and contracting a "plural marriage." The appellant appealed, contending that his initial marriage was void due to his wife's pre-existing marriage, thus negating the "plural marriage" charge and undermining the basis for the retirement order. The question arose whether the order of compulsory retirement, significantly influenced by the 'plural marriage' accusation, could be sustained if that specific charge was unproven, and if the remaining allegations constituted sufficient misconduct for such a severe disciplinary action. Finally, the Supreme Court ruled that despite the 'plural marriage' charge not being established due to the appellant's first marriage being void ab initio, his overall conduct, including living with another woman, cruel treatment of his legal wife, and other disgraceful acts, amounted to 'unbecoming conduct' and 'misconduct' under Air Force regulations. The Court affirmed that these actions prejudiced good order and discipline within the Air Force, concluding that the compulsory retirement order was not disproportionate and did not warrant interference.