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 moreDuring a 2008 village fair quarrel in Karnataka, a group of accused allegedly assaulted three victims with iron rods and clubs following a longstanding land-boundary dispute. The trial court acquitted the accused of all charges, finding the prosecution's witnesses contradicted each other and the evidence unreliable. The State appealed, and the Karnataka High Court reversed the acquittal, convicting the accused under IPC provisions for rioting, wrongful restraint, criminal intimidation, and causing grievous hurt.
The Supreme Court held that an appellate court should not overturn a well-reasoned acquittal unless the trial court's findings were clearly unreasonable or based on a wrong appreciation of the evidence. Reviewing the record, the Court found serious contradictions between witnesses, most eyewitnesses turning hostile, suspicious circumstances around the recovery of blood samples and weapons, and no clear evidence tying several of the accused to any specific act. Since two views of the evidence were reasonably possible, the benefit of doubt had to go to the accused. The Court restored the trial court's acquittal, set aside the High Court's conviction, and ordered the appellants' release from custody.
An acquittal carries a strong presumption of innocence, and a higher court should not reverse it just because it might have viewed the same evidence differently: it may only do so if the trial court's reasoning was clearly unsound. Inconsistent or hostile witness testimony can be fatal to a criminal prosecution.
