Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

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.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal Case Shots is built to help you quickly identify and understand relevant precedent. For citation in pleadings or filings, always verify against the full judgment PDF and current citation format (e.g., 2026 INSC ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

The holding is what the court legally decided. The lesson learnt translates that into a practical takeaway: what a lawyer should factor into case strategy or client advice as a result of this precedent.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

Both. Each case shows a distilled summary (case type, key holding, and lesson learnt) and links to the full judgment as a PDF for when you need the complete text for research or citation.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

Yes. Use Advanced Filters to narrow results by decision date and by practice area, including Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Service & Administrative Law, Family Law, Civil Property & Inheritance, and Labour & Industrial Law.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

Yes. You can filter judgments by the judge or bench that decided the case, which is useful for tracking how a particular judge has reasoned on similar issues across multiple rulings.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

Legal Case Shots is a searchable database of Supreme Court of India judgments, each broken down into the case type, the court's key holding, and a practical lesson learnt, with the full judgment available as a PDF for citation or deeper reading.

Service & Administrative LawSupreme Court of India

Aarav Jain vs. The Bihar Public Service Commission

Civil AppealDecided 23 May 2022
Civil Appeal No. 4242 of 2022
S. Abdul Nazeer · Vikram Nath

Background

Eight candidates who had cleared the 30th Bihar Judicial Services Examination (for 349 posts of Civil Judge, Junior Division) and scored higher marks than the last selected candidates in their categories had their candidature cancelled by the Bihar Public Service Commission because they failed to produce certain original certificates (such as character certificates or NOCs) at the time of interview, even though they had submitted attested copies and later furnished the originals. The Patna High Court dismissed their writ petitions, and they appealed to the Supreme Court.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court held that the Commission's rejection of these candidates purely on the technical ground of delayed submission of original certificates was improper, unjustified and too harsh, especially since none of the underlying certificates were alleged to be false and the originals were in fact submitted before the Commission's final decision. The Court noted vacancies still existed in the general category and directed that the five general-category appellants be adjusted against those vacancies, while the State was left to accommodate the remaining three (EBC, SC, BC category) appellants against future vacancies or by borrowing posts from later recruitment. The appellants were to be given notional seniority and benefits but no back-pay/arrears. A related application by an intervenor (Jyoti Joshi) based on a conflicting Patna High Court judgment was rejected because that judgment had ignored the Supreme Court's own earlier interim orders.

Lesson Learnt

In recruitment matters, disqualifying an otherwise meritorious and eligible candidate for a purely technical/procedural lapse (like delay in submitting original documents that are not themselves found false) can be struck down by courts as disproportionate, especially when vacancies exist to accommodate the candidate.

Aarav Jain vs. The Bihar Public Service Commission – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware