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 moreFifteen men were accused of forming an unlawful assembly that chased a villager and his wife, set fire to part of their house, and then caught the villager's nephew and shot him dead; gunfire from two of the accused also injured several bystanders. The trial court convicted all fifteen for murder (with the help of the provision making every member of an unlawful assembly liable for an offence committed in pursuit of its common object) and other offences, and the High Court of Patna confirmed these convictions. The convicted persons appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that guilt for the murder itself should not have been extended to those who did not personally fire the fatal shot.
The Supreme Court held that only the accused who actually fired the fatal shot could be held guilty of murder, because the evidence did not establish that the rest of the group shared a "common object" to kill, as required to extend liability under Section 149 IPC to the whole group. It accordingly modified the convictions: the shooter's conviction and sentence were confirmed in full; one co-accused had died during the appeal and that appeal abated; four others were acquitted of murder but their convictions for lesser offences (like rioting and arson) were upheld with sentence reduced to time already served; and the remaining nine accused, including the lead appellant Bal Mukund Sharma, were acquitted of all charges for lack of credible evidence of their specific involvement. The appeals were thus allowed in part, with sentences tailored to each individual's proven role rather than treating the whole group alike.
Being part of a mob at the scene of a crime does not automatically make every member guilty of the most serious offence committed by one of them: courts require proof of a shared "common object" or a specific, proven individual role before extending liability for murder to the entire group.
