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 appellant was convicted of murdering three people and causing grievous injury to two others during a knife attack in 2011, and was sentenced to death by the Sessions Court, a sentence confirmed by the Chhattisgarh High Court on the view that the crime fell in the "rarest of rare" category. The appellant challenged both his conviction and the death sentence before the Supreme Court, arguing in particular that the trial court had held the conviction and sentencing hearing on the very same day, without properly considering mitigating factors about him as an individual.
The Supreme Court held that the lower courts had not properly applied the "rarest of rare" doctrine from Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab, because they focused heavily on the brutality of the crime itself while failing to meaningfully weigh mitigating circumstances relating to the appellant as a person, including that he had no prior criminal record, had shown good conduct in prison, and had never been given a proper psychological evaluation on his potential for reform. The Court also noted the procedural lapse of combining the conviction and sentencing hearings into a single day, contrary to the mandated two-stage hearing process. On this basis it commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment; Kurian Joseph, J. additionally expressed broader views questioning the continued utility of the death penalty, a position the other two judges explicitly declined to join, noting that a Constitution Bench had already upheld the death penalty's validity.
Before imposing a death sentence, courts are required to seriously examine not just how brutal the crime was, but also whether the convicted person has a genuine chance of reform or rehabilitation: a death sentence can be set aside on appeal if this individualized assessment was skipped, even where the underlying conviction stands.
