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 moreAjit Kumar, an assistant in a district education office, was accused of demanding ₹5,000 from a school employee to secure release of unpaid salary. Following a vigilance trap, the prosecution relied on marked currency allegedly recovered from Kumar's residence and a chemical test indicating contact with the notes. The trial court convicted him under the Prevention of Corruption Act and imposed concurrent four-year prison sentences and fines, which the Jharkhand High Court upheld. Although he had already served the imprisonment and paid the fines, Kumar pursued his Supreme Court appeal to clear his name.
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside both lower courts' judgments and cleared Kumar of the charges. It found substantial inconsistencies in the trap witnesses' accounts about where the payment, arrest and chemical testing occurred. The alleged payment was not witnessed by the trap team, the complainant's account lacked reliable corroboration, and independent witnesses admitted signing papers at vigilance officials' direction without knowing what had been recovered. Applying its earlier decisions, the Court held that recovery of marked money alone could not replace proof of the demand for and acceptance of a bribe. The prosecution had failed to establish those essential facts beyond reasonable doubt.
Recovering marked currency from a public servant does not by itself establish bribery under the provisions applied in this case. The prosecution must prove the essential demand and acceptance, and an accused can seek reversal of a wrongful conviction even after completing the sentence.
