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.

Criminal LawSupreme Court of India

Abhishek vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

Criminal AppealDecided 20 May 2022
Criminal Appeal No. 869 of 2022
Dinesh Maheshwari · Aniruddha Bose

Background

A complainant alleged he was kidnapped, threatened at knifepoint and extorted by the appellant and others. Based on the appellant's alleged involvement in this and several other cases with a common "team leader," the police obtained approval to invoke MCOCA (a stringent law targeting organised crime syndicates) and later formal sanction to prosecute him under it. The appellant, who had also been declared an "absconder" during the investigation, challenged the sanction before the Bombay High Court and, having lost there, before the Supreme Court.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding that for the purpose of showing a "continuing unlawful activity" under MCOCA, what matters is that chargesheets had been filed and cognizance taken in multiple linked cases, not whether those cases eventually ended in acquittal or discharge, since witnesses turning hostile is itself one of the problems MCOCA is meant to address. It held the sanctioning authority had properly relied on a detailed body of evidence (not merely a co-accused's confession, though such confessions are admissible as corroborative evidence under Section 18 of MCOCA), and had not considered any irrelevant material. The Court also noted that the appellant's status as a declared absconder weighed against granting him relief, and that he would still get a full opportunity to challenge the sanction's validity at trial.

Lesson Learnt

Under organised-crime laws like MCOCA, a pattern of chargesheeted, cognizance-taken cases against a person can establish the required "continuing unlawful activity" even if some of those cases later end in acquittal, and courts give no indulgence to persons who have absconded from the law.

Abhishek vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware