Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

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.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal 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 ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

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.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

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.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

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.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

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.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

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.

Criminal LawSupreme Court of India

Bohatti Devi vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. (listed as The State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Ashwani Kumar)

Criminal AppealDecided 30 Sept 2022
Criminal Appeal No. 1695 of 2022
M.R. Shah · Krishna Murari

Background

Respondent no. 2, an accused facing trial for murder and criminal conspiracy (Sections 302 and 120B IPC) in a 2014 FIR from Baraut, Baghpat (Uttar Pradesh), had earlier failed to get the case against him quashed, both before the High Court and on a subsequent special leave petition before the Supreme Court, and had been arrested in 2021 after a non-bailable warrant was issued. Despite this history, the Allahabad High Court granted him bail, and the original complainant (through the State) appealed against that bail order.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court found that the High Court's bail order was unsustainable because it failed to consider the seriousness and gravity of the murder and conspiracy charges, ignored the relevant material in the charge sheet, gave no cogent reasons germane to bail, and overlooked the accused's history, including his failed quashing attempts and his arrest on a non-bailable warrant. The High Court had also wrongly granted parity with co-accused without examining whether their roles and the allegations against them were actually comparable to those against respondent no. 2. The Court quashed the bail order and directed the accused to surrender within two weeks, failing which a non-bailable warrant would issue, while clarifying that the trial court should proceed with the trial uninfluenced by these bail-related observations.

Lesson Learnt

A bail order in a serious offence like murder must reflect genuine consideration of the gravity of the charge, the material in the charge sheet, and the accused's own conduct and litigation history: bail cannot be granted on parity with co-accused without comparing their actual roles, and the Supreme Court will readily cancel bail granted without such reasoning.

Bohatti Devi vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. (listed as The State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Ashwani Kumar) – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware