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.
In 2000, while pay-revision litigation by employees of two sick public-sector fertiliser companies was pending before the Supreme Court, the Court ordered an interim, ad hoc monthly payment to the employees "without prejudice" to the final outcome, expressly stating it was not to be treated as a precedent. In 2003, the employees' underlying claim for a full pay revision was ultimately dismissed, and shortly before that, most employees had already exited under a Voluntary Separation Scheme when the companies' fertiliser units were shut down. Many employees then claimed before the gratuity Controlling Authority that the ad hoc interim payment should count as part of their "wages" for calculating gratuity, and several authorities and the Allahabad/Calcutta High Courts had accepted this view (partly relying on an earlier Supreme Court order favouring one individual employee, Kashi Prasad Tripathi), prompting the companies' appeal.
The Supreme Court held that "wages" under Section 2(s) of the Payment of Gratuity Act means only what is earned in accordance with the actual terms and conditions of employment, not an ad hoc, interim, without-prejudice payment made purely as a stop-gap measure during ongoing litigation. Since the Court's own 2000 and 2003 orders had explicitly said the ad hoc payment was without prejudice and not a precedent, and the employees' underlying claim for a permanent pay revision was ultimately rejected, that ad hoc amount could never form part of "wages" for gratuity purposes. The Court clarified that its earlier order in the individual Kashi Prasad Tripathi case had not actually decided this legal question, so it did not bind this larger batch. The appeals were allowed and the orders in favour of the employees were set aside, though the Court also protected already-paid employees by directing no recovery be made from them, given the passage of time and that some had since died.
An interim payment made by a court "without prejudice" and "purely as an ad hoc measure" during pending litigation does not automatically become a permanent employment benefit. If the underlying claim is ultimately lost, that interim relief cannot be treated as part of an employee's regular wages or salary for statutory calculations like gratuity.
