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 moreA father (Ashok Kumar Mehra) and his son (Kushwant @ Sukhwant Kumar Mehra) were tried for the murder of one Inderjit Dhiman; the trial court acquitted both, but the High Court of Punjab & Haryana reversed the acquittal on appeal by the State and the complainant, convicting both under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentencing them to life imprisonment. Both father and son appealed to the Supreme Court, but the father died while the appeal was pending, and separately the son claimed for the first time before the Supreme Court that he had been a juvenile (17 years and 5 months old) on the date of the offence.
The Supreme Court held that the father's appeal stood abated by reason of his death and dismissed it as abated, without going into its merits. On the son's claim of juvenility, the Court applied its recent three-judge bench decision in Raju v. State of Haryana, holding that a claim of juvenility can be raised at any stage, even for the first time before the Supreme Court after final disposal of a case, and that an accused who was under 18 at the time of the offence is entitled to the protections of juvenile justice law regardless of when the plea is raised. Since the son's birth certificate was on record, was never disputed by the prosecution, and had already been accepted by the Supreme Court once before (when granting him bail on the same ground), the Court accepted his juvenility without further inquiry, and since he had already spent in custody far longer than the three-year maximum a juvenile could be sent to a special home, his appeal was allowed and his conviction set aside.
A person's claim that they were a minor (juvenile) at the time of an alleged offence can be raised at any stage of the legal process, even for the first time in the Supreme Court, years later, and if proven, it entitles them to the protective, rehabilitative treatment of juvenile justice law rather than an adult criminal sentence.
