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 moreBimal Gurung, President of the Gorkha Janmukti Morcha (GJM), led the Gorkhaland statehood agitation in the Darjeeling hills of West Bengal. As the agitation intensified in 2017 (including violence and a bomb blast), roughly 300 FIRs were registered against GJM members, with Gurung himself named in about 31 of them, covering offences ranging from unlawful assembly to more serious charges. Gurung filed a writ petition under Article 32 asking the Supreme Court to transfer investigation of all these FIRs from the West Bengal Police to an independent agency like the NIA or CBI, to extend the same to any future FIRs connected to the agitation, and to grant him anticipatory bail and police protection, arguing the West Bengal Police could not investigate fairly against a political opponent of the state government.
The Court examined the settled legal principles on when investigation can be transferred to an independent agency under Article 32, generally reserved for cases of proven bias, persecution of an individual, or a demonstrated failure of the state machinery, and reviewed the precedents cited by the petitioner, finding each turned on its own distinguishable facts (mostly cases where victims, not accused persons, sought transfer). The Court held that merely being a political figure facing multiple FIRs during a state-wide agitation, without concrete proof of mala fide targeting or persecution by the state authority, did not meet the threshold for a mass transfer of all investigations to an outside agency. It concluded this was not a fit case for exercising Article 32 jurisdiction to transfer the FIRs en masse, and that the petitioner was not entitled to anticipatory bail or police protection either. The writ petition was accordingly dismissed.
Transfer of a criminal investigation to an independent agency under Article 32 is an extraordinary remedy that requires concrete evidence of bias or persecution by the state machinery: a political leader facing numerous FIRs during a mass agitation cannot get investigations transferred away from the state police merely by alleging a political rivalry with the government.
