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 moreThe appellant was convicted of murder in 2002 and sentenced to life imprisonment, but was released on bail while his appeal remained pending before the Jharkhand High Court for over two decades without being listed for hearing. When the appeal finally came up in November 2024, the appellant's own counsel did not appear, so the High Court appointed a senior amicus curiae (a court-appointed lawyer to assist in the absence of the accused's counsel) without directly notifying the appellant. The amicus argued only one point, that the offence fell under a lesser exception to murder, and succeeded in getting the conviction reduced from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, with a 5-year sentence, but the appellant was then required to surrender to serve the balance of that term. The appellant then approached the Supreme Court, arguing he was never told his counsel had failed to appear or that an amicus had been appointed on his behalf, and that stronger grounds from his original memorandum of appeal were never argued.
The Supreme Court held that while the High Court was not strictly obligated to notify the appellant that an amicus had been appointed, doing so would have been a "desirable precaution," especially given that legal aid assistance must be "real and meaningful" and not a token formality. Because the appellant was deprived of a fair opportunity to have his own chosen grounds argued, the Court set aside the High Court's 2024 order and remanded the appeal for a fresh, de novo hearing before the same (or a similarly constituted) Division Bench, restoring the appellant to bail in the meantime. The Court also used the occasion to lay down a general going-forward direction: whenever an appellate court appoints an amicus curiae because a convict's counsel is absent, the court should also send notice to the convict's address (via the local police station if necessary) so the convict can instruct the amicus or arrange his own counsel, striking a balance between expeditious justice and genuine fairness to the accused.
Even when a court appoints a lawyer (amicus curiae) to represent an unrepresented accused or convict, real fairness requires that the person actually be informed of what is happening in their own case; going forward, appellate courts should send direct notice to a convict's known address before deciding an appeal solely on the strength of a court-appointed lawyer's arguments.
