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.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1073
In circumstantial-evidence cases, forensic and DNA evidence must actually corroborate the alleged crime: a conviction cannot survive where the most crucial scientific evidence, on its own terms, points away from rather than toward the prosecution's theory.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1074
A conviction based purely on circumstantial evidence requires every link in the chain, timeline, witness credibility, forensic matches, and motive, to be proven beyond reasonable doubt; gaps or suppressed evidence at any link entitle the accused to the benefit of the doubt, even in a serious case like a double murder.
Criminal Miscellaneous Case · 2026:DHC:8505
Courts will not quash a criminal case merely because the accused has a plausible alibi-type defence; unless that defence is conclusive and undisputed, the matter must be tested through the ordinary trial process.
Criminal Miscellaneous Case · 2026:DHC:8547
A private compromise between victim and accused cannot by itself secure quashing of a case involving serious, heinous allegations like attempted murder with a weapon: such matters must proceed to trial regardless of settlement.
First Appeal from Order · 2026:DHC:8563
Railway Claims Tribunals cannot reject a bona fide passenger's death claim based on speculative inferences when there is no direct evidence of an alternative cause of death; the compensation scheme under the Railways Act is to be interpreted generously in favour of victims' families.
Criminal Miscellaneous Case · 2026:DHC:8559
In matrimonial offences, courts can and do quash criminal proceedings once a genuine compromise is verified directly with the complainant, sparing both parties a prolonged and pointless trial.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8541
A co-accused's bail does not automatically extend to another accused where their actual roles in the offence differ materially; delay caused by one's own defence counsel cannot later be used as a ground for bail.
Execution Petition · 2026:DHC:8567
An arbitral award must be adequately stamped before a court can enforce it; courts give only a limited window to cure such defects, after which the award becomes legally unusable until the deficiency is fixed.
Arbitration Petition · 2026:DHC:8555
A genuine settlement reached through mediation renders a pending arbitration-related court petition moot, allowing parties to close out litigation quickly once they resolve their dispute privately.
7878 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.
Two solar power companies won contracts under a Karnataka government scheme to build solar plants, and signed Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) with BESCOM that was approved by the state electricity regulator (KERC) on 17.10.2016. The PPA required the developers to commission their plants within 12 months of this "Effective Date," failing which BESCOM could impose damages and cut the agreed tariff from Rs. 6.10/kWh to a lower rate. A dispute arose over whether the 12-month deadline ("Scheduled Commissioning Date") fell on 16.10.2017 or 17.10.2017: a single day that determined whether the developers were late. KERC ruled the deadline was 16.10.2017 and upheld BESCOM's penalty and tariff cut; the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity reversed this, and BESCOM appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court undertook a detailed textual analysis of the PPA's definitional clauses, holding that the contract's specific definition of "Month" (as a calendar month "excluding the date of the event") governed over a more general clause about inclusive date ranges. Applying this, the Court held that 17.10.2016 (the date the PPA was approved) should be excluded when counting 12 months, making the Scheduled Commissioning Date 17.10.2017, not 16.10.2017 as KERC had found. Since the undisputed evidence showed the plants began injecting power into the grid on 17.10.2017, there was no delay at all, meaning BESCOM had no basis to impose damages or cut the tariff. The Court applied classic contract-interpretation principles, that a contract's words must be read in their full context and natural meaning, yielding to business common sense, and upheld the Appellate Tribunal's decision, dismissing BESCOM's appeals.
In contracts with strict performance deadlines and financial penalties, how a "month" or date range is defined (inclusive vs. exclusive of the starting date) can be legally decisive: parties drafting or relying on time-bound contracts should pay close attention to definitional clauses, since a single day's difference in interpretation can determine whether a penalty applies at all.
