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 moreNine persons were tried for murder after posters threatening to kill a man named Siva appeared on public walls in Coimbatore in 1991; Siva was later stabbed to death by some of the accused. The appellant (accused no. 6) was convicted only under Section 120-B IPC (criminal conspiracy) for allegedly hosting the meeting at his house where the plan to kill Siva was hatched, and was sentenced to life imprisonment. He appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing the two prosecution witnesses who placed him at that meeting (a tea-stall owner and his tea-boy) were unreliable "chance witnesses."
The Supreme Court held that an appellate court under Article 136 of the Constitution should be slow to re-appreciate evidence already concurrently accepted by two lower courts unless the findings are perverse or made without evidence. On examining the testimony of the two witnesses itself, the Court found it natural, consistent, and uncontradicted on any material point, and noted the appellant had chosen not to cross-examine either witness. The Court held that physical presence at the actual killing was not necessary for a conspiracy conviction, hosting the meeting where the plan was hatched was sufficient to sustain guilt under Section 120-B IPC read with Section 302 IPC. The appeal was dismissed and the conviction and life sentence upheld.
A person can be criminally liable for conspiracy to murder even without being present at the actual killing, if evidence shows they participated in planning it; and failing to cross-examine a witness on alleged inconsistencies can later bar a party from challenging that witness's credibility on appeal.
