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.
Transfer Petition (Criminal) · 2026 INSC 1060
Where a marriage has irretrievably broken down and the parties reach a genuine, voluntary settlement, including on alimony, the Supreme Court can use its Article 142 powers to grant a mutual-consent divorce and close out all related litigation in one stroke, without requiring the usual statutory waiting period.
Writ Petition (Civil) · 2026 INSC 1061
In long-running, complex litigation involving apportioned government liabilities across states, the Supreme Court can use a mechanism like a retired-judge committee plus periodic compliance affidavits to bring genuine finality, including firm timelines, transparency obligations, and interest for delayed payment, rather than leaving matters open-ended.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1062
In an "as is where is" liquidation auction, a bidder who voluntarily accepts the auction terms cannot later resile from a forfeiture clause by citing regulatory caps or after-the-fact excuses for non-payment: courts will enforce the auction notice's own conditions.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8338-DB
Once someone is released from custody because the police failed to properly communicate the grounds of arrest, the police cannot simply re-arrest them by adding new charges: a specific, court-supervised procedure with senior-officer accountability must be followed, or the re-arrest itself becomes illegal.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8308
In economic-offence cases, bail can still be granted where the method used to quantify the alleged financial evasion is not adequately justified, and where the apprehension of re-offending is speculative rather than evidence-based.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8323
A parole claim must be backed by a genuine, verifiable application to the competent jail authority: courts will scrutinise irregularities like an incomplete address, an unexplained thumb mark, or reliance on a mere friend's affidavit rather than close family.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8337
Courts can grant short, strictly time-bound interim bail purely on humanitarian/compassionate grounds (such as caring for a seriously ill family member), even while a case remains pending trial and an earlier bail plea has failed.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8312
Courts will not repeatedly re-examine a bail plea already rejected on merits unless the applicant can point to a genuine change in circumstances since the earlier order.
First Appeal from Order · 2026:DHC:8334
Under the no-fault compensation scheme for railway accidents, a valid ticket-holder injured while attempting to board a train, even carelessly, is generally entitled to compensation unless the railway can show a deliberate, conscious exposure to danger, not mere negligence.
6171 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 moreLegal 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 ___).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Associations of motor transport operators in Kerala challenged 2005 amendments to two Kerala state laws (the Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1976 and the Motor Transport Workers' Welfare Fund Act, 1985) which effectively required transport vehicle owners to first pay their pending contribution to the workers' welfare fund before their vehicle tax payment (and hence their transport permit) would be accepted as valid. The operators argued this improperly used a "welfare" law to indirectly control transport permits, a subject they said was exclusively occupied by the central Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, making the state amendments unconstitutional as repugnant to central law. The Kerala High Court had already rejected this challenge and dismissed their writ petitions and appeals, prompting the further appeal to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that the state legislation and the central Motor Vehicles Act operate in different fields: the central Act governs the grant, duration and conditions of transport permits, while the state laws govern the separate subject of levying and collecting vehicle tax and welfare fund contributions, a field the central Act does not occupy. Applying the "pith and substance" doctrine, the Court found no real repugnancy: the state provisions did not suspend or interfere with the permit itself but only made the permit practically usable only once tax (and, indirectly, the linked welfare contribution) was paid, reinforcing rather than contradicting the central Act's own requirement that permit-holders keep their vehicle tax paid up. The Court noted the transport operators did not dispute they owed both the tax and the welfare contribution, and had in fact been complying with the scheme for years, making the constitutional challenge largely academic. It also noted appeal/review safeguards remained available to operators disputing their welfare-fund arrears. The appeals were accordingly dismissed with costs, upholding both amendments as constitutionally valid.
A state law does not become unconstitutional merely because it touches upon a subject also covered by central legislation. Courts look at the real "pith and substance" of the law, and states may validly link related regulatory or fiscal obligations (like tax and worker welfare contributions) so long as they do not create a genuine conflict with central law.
