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 moreIn a civil suit over an interim injunction, the Gujarat High Court noticed that one of the defendants (the present appellant) had filed two contradictory written statements at different stages of the case. Taking a serious view of this, the High Court, while dismissing the underlying appeal, also directed its Registrar to file a criminal complaint against the appellant under Sections 199/200 IPC (false evidence) by invoking Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The appellant challenged only this direction to prosecute him, not the main injunction ruling (the parties had separately settled that dispute).
The Supreme Court held that before ordering a Section 340 complaint, a court must properly form an opinion, following the settled two-step test from precedent (including the Constitution Bench ruling in Iqbal Singh Marwah), that there is a prima facie case of a false-evidence offence and that prosecuting it is genuinely expedient in the interests of justice, weighing the effect on the administration of justice rather than merely the fact of a contradiction. Finding that the High Court's order had not properly followed this procedure, and noting that the parties had since reached an amicable settlement on the underlying dispute, the Court held the matter needed to be "laid to rest" and set aside only the direction to initiate Section 340 proceedings.
A court cannot order someone to be criminally prosecuted for giving contradictory statements in litigation just because a contradiction exists: it must follow the proper legal procedure and specifically weigh whether prosecution genuinely serves the interests of justice, not treat it as an automatic consequence.
