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 moreThe Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh, held a written recruitment test for one post of Law Officer. A disputed multiple-choice question (Q.73) asked which Schedule of the Constitution is immune from judicial review for violating fundamental rights; the recruiting body treated "Ninth Schedule" as correct, while candidate Amit Kumar Sharma (the third respondent) answered "None of the above" and was marked wrong, costing him marks. Charan Preet Singh (the appellant) was selected instead of Sharma based on this marking. Sharma's writ petition was dismissed by a Single Judge but allowed by the Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, prompting this appeal.
The Supreme Court reviewed the constitutional case law on Article 31B and the Ninth Schedule (from Shankari Prasad through Kesavananda Bharati and I.R. Coelho) and found that both answers to Question 73 had reasonable constitutional support: the correct answer was genuinely debatable even among High Court judges, so it could not fairly be expected of law graduates sitting a recruitment exam. Rather than favouring one candidate over the other, the Court directed the Municipal Corporation to accommodate both candidates by creating a supernumerary post and appointing Sharma as well, with Charan Preet Singh (already working) to be treated as senior. The appeal was disposed of on these terms.
When a recruitment exam question turns out to be genuinely ambiguous or legally contested, even among judges, courts may resolve the resulting dispute practically (e.g., accommodating both affected candidates) rather than penalizing either party for the examiner's flawed question.
