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.
Transfer Petition (Criminal) · 2026 INSC 1060
Where a marriage has irretrievably broken down and the parties reach a genuine, voluntary settlement, including on alimony, the Supreme Court can use its Article 142 powers to grant a mutual-consent divorce and close out all related litigation in one stroke, without requiring the usual statutory waiting period.
Writ Petition (Civil) · 2026 INSC 1061
In long-running, complex litigation involving apportioned government liabilities across states, the Supreme Court can use a mechanism like a retired-judge committee plus periodic compliance affidavits to bring genuine finality, including firm timelines, transparency obligations, and interest for delayed payment, rather than leaving matters open-ended.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1062
In an "as is where is" liquidation auction, a bidder who voluntarily accepts the auction terms cannot later resile from a forfeiture clause by citing regulatory caps or after-the-fact excuses for non-payment: courts will enforce the auction notice's own conditions.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8338-DB
Once someone is released from custody because the police failed to properly communicate the grounds of arrest, the police cannot simply re-arrest them by adding new charges: a specific, court-supervised procedure with senior-officer accountability must be followed, or the re-arrest itself becomes illegal.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8308
In economic-offence cases, bail can still be granted where the method used to quantify the alleged financial evasion is not adequately justified, and where the apprehension of re-offending is speculative rather than evidence-based.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8323
A parole claim must be backed by a genuine, verifiable application to the competent jail authority: courts will scrutinise irregularities like an incomplete address, an unexplained thumb mark, or reliance on a mere friend's affidavit rather than close family.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8337
Courts can grant short, strictly time-bound interim bail purely on humanitarian/compassionate grounds (such as caring for a seriously ill family member), even while a case remains pending trial and an earlier bail plea has failed.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8312
Courts will not repeatedly re-examine a bail plea already rejected on merits unless the applicant can point to a genuine change in circumstances since the earlier order.
First Appeal from Order · 2026:DHC:8334
Under the no-fault compensation scheme for railway accidents, a valid ticket-holder injured while attempting to board a train, even carelessly, is generally entitled to compensation unless the railway can show a deliberate, conscious exposure to danger, not mere negligence.
6171 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 moreLegal 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 ___).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The liquidator of a corporate debtor challenged an NCLAT order dated 8 December 2025 by filing an appeal under Section 62 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The appeal was filed 7 days beyond the 45-day limitation period (within the 15-day grace period), but was marked defective by the Registry, and after curing the defects it was re-filed with a further 82-day delay. The liquidator sought condonation of both delays, partly relying on an earlier order where the Supreme Court had condoned a re-filing delay in a related IBC matter involving the same appellant.
The Court held that Section 62 IBC allows only 45 days to file an appeal, extendable by a maximum grace period of 15 days (60 days total), and that this outer limit is a strict jurisdictional bar beyond which the Court has no power to condone delay. It clarified that curing defects in a defectively-filed appeal is permitted only within 28 days of the Registry's notification; once that 28-day window lapses, there is no scope for further "re-filing delay" applications because the appeal itself becomes time-barred. The Court distinguished the appellant's reliance on an earlier order (which had condoned delay in a related Section 61 appeal before the NCLAT) as confined to its own facts and not a precedent for repeated indulgence. Finding the explanations for both delays unconvincing and the statutory bar insurmountable, the Court dismissed the appeal as time-barred and dismissed all connected applications.
Under the IBC, deadlines for approaching appellate forums are treated as strict and largely non-negotiable. Once the statutory outer limit (45 days plus a 15-day grace period, and 28 days to cure defects) lapses, courts generally lack the power to excuse the delay, regardless of the reasons offered. Litigants relying on the IBC's appellate remedies must act well within these fixed windows, since one favourable condonation order in an earlier round of litigation does not carry forward as a precedent for future delays.
