Real judgements, distilled
Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1094
An older qualification must still satisfy the eligibility rules governing the appointment sought. Here, the certificate's early date did not secure reinstatement, and rejection of eligibility should not be confused with a conclusive finding that the certificate was forged.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1095
A party benefiting from a conditional stay must meet its deposit requirement or face enforcement. The additional ₹15 crore deposit secures the pending dispute; it does not settle the land's final compensation or amount to an immediate payment to the landowners.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1093
An alleged attempt to kill does not become a lesser offence simply because the victim avoided a fatal injury. Restoring this charge means the accusation must be tried; it does not establish that the accused is guilty.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1090
For the assessment in this case, assistance reducing ordinary manufacturing costs was taxable even though the government wanted to encourage industry. The purpose and actual operation of the particular subsidy mattered more than its general development label.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1091
Proof that someone caused a serious injury does not by itself prove the additional ingredients of robbery. A court can substitute a lesser offence supported by the evidence; the sentencing reduction here depended on Appa's particular circumstances.
Special Leave Petition (Civil) · 2026 INSC 1092
Someone challenging an election must ensure that the personal-presentation requirement is met and can be proved. Merely entering the court building does not establish compliance, and a filing defect can end the challenge before the election allegations are examined.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1088
An employee who retires on 30 June may be entitled to the increment that falls due on 1 July after completing a year of service. Authorities that delay paying the amounts due must pay interest after the deadline set by the court.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1089
Recruitment must follow the qualifications stated in the advertisement and the governing Recruitment Rules. A court will not override a merit-based eligibility decision made under those rules merely because the candidate concerned was higher in the written test.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8797
A person who occupied property only because of employment has no independent right to remain once the employment and decree end. Even when a petition fails, courts can make practical arrangements to let a person recover personal belongings.
14543 more judgements for members
You're seeing the newest cases. Log in — it's free — to keep scrolling, search by name or judge, and filter by court or legal area.
Log in to see moreA Village Administrative Officer (A-1) and a Village Assistant working under him (A-2) were convicted for demanding and accepting a Rs. 500 bribe from a man seeking a Community Certificate needed to join government service. A trap was laid by the anti-corruption police: marked currency notes were handed over, A-2 collected and held the money on A-1's instructions, and a chemical test confirmed A-2 had handled the treated notes. Both were convicted by the trial court and the Madras High Court upheld their convictions, leading to this joint appeal.
The Supreme Court upheld A-1's conviction, since the evidence clearly proved he twice demanded the bribe and directed its collection, but reduced his sentence to the statutory minimum of one year given his advanced age (68), the small amount involved (Rs. 500), and the two-decade delay since the 2004 offence. For A-2, the Court applied Supreme Court precedent (including the Constitution Bench ruling in Neeraj Dutta) holding that a conviction under the anti-corruption law requires proof that the accused personally demanded illegal gratification: merely accepting money on someone else's instructions, without a separate abetment charge and without evidence of active connivance, is not enough. Since A-2 was never charged with abetment and there was no proof he shared in the corrupt intent, his conviction was set aside and he was acquitted entirely.
Under India's anti-corruption law, simply handling or collecting money on a superior's instructions is not itself a crime: a bribery conviction requires proof that the accused personally demanded the bribe, or was formally charged with abetting someone else's demand; and courts can reduce even a proven sentence to the statutory minimum where age, the triviality of the amount, and prolonged litigation delay justify leniency.
