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 moreA candidate sought admission to an engineering course under the physically-handicapped quota in the Odisha Joint Entrance Examination 2012, relying on a certificate from a district hospital stating he had 40% visual disability. The examination prospectus, however, barred candidates from submitting their own medical certificates and required disability percentage to be certified by a specially constituted Medical Board, which had assessed him at only 20% disability. The Orissa High Court nonetheless relied on the hospital's 40% certificate and directed his consideration under the quota.
The Supreme Court held that the High Court's finding, that candidates were required to produce a physically-handicapped certificate, was factually contrary to the prospectus, which expressly prohibited this. The Court emphasized that the percentage of disability must be determined exclusively by the Medical Board constituted under the prospectus's own rules, and that a court cannot itself assess or override a technical medical determination made by the properly constituted expert board. Since the Board had found only 20% disability (below the 40% threshold required), the High Court's interference with the selection process was unjustified. The appeals were allowed and the High Court's order was set aside.
In disability-quota admissions governed by a specific prospectus or regulation, the disability percentage must be certified by the officially designated medical board, not by an outside hospital certificate, and courts will not substitute their own assessment for that of the properly constituted technical authority.
