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 moreAppellant No. 1 (Ayyub Malik) and Appellant No. 2 (Shahzadi), a married couple, appealed against a Uttarakhand High Court order that had refused to quash a criminal case against Appellant No. 1 for kidnapping and offences under IPC Sections 363, 368, 376(2)(d) and provisions of the POCSO Act. The FIR, filed by Shahzadi's father in 2020, alleged that Ayyub Malik enticed away his then-minor daughter; however, the appellants had in fact married on 29 May 2020, before the FIR was lodged on 1 June 2020. The High Court had declined to quash the proceedings largely because the State's counter-affidavit stated the victim was a minor at the time of the alleged incident.
The Supreme Court noted that the appellants were husband and wife, living together peacefully, with Appellant No. 1 caring for Appellant No. 2, and that continuing the criminal prosecution would serve no purpose consistent with justice. Citing its own recent precedent in K. Kirubakaran v. State of Tamil Nadu (a case with similar facts), the Court held that in the interest of complete justice between the spouses, the criminal proceedings should be brought to a final end. The Court set aside the High Court's order and quashed the underlying criminal case and all connected proceedings, allowing the appeal without imposing any conditions on Appellant No. 1, while expressing hope that he would continue to care for his wife.
Courts retain discretion under Section 482 CrPC to quash even serious criminal proceedings, including those alleging offences under special statutes like POCSO, where the parties are validly married adults living together and continuing prosecution would not serve the interests of justice, though this remains a case-specific, discretionary remedy rather than a general rule.
