Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

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.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal 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 ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

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.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

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.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

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.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

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.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

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.

Service & Administrative LawSupreme Court of India

Chirag Bhanu Singh & Anr. vs High Court of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.

Not available · 2024 INSC 660Decided 6 Sept 2024
Not available
Justice Hrishikesh Roy · Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra

Background

The petitioners, Chirag Bhanu Singh and Arvind Malhotra, were the two seniormost District and Sessions Judges in Himachal Pradesh who had been recommended by the High Court Collegium in December 2022 for elevation as High Court judges. The Supreme Court Collegium deferred their case in July 2023 and, in January 2024, directed that their names be reconsidered by the Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court. The petitioners alleged that, instead of the matter going back to the full High Court Collegium for fresh collective deliberation, the Chief Justice alone took an individual decision on their suitability, while names of judicial officers junior to them were recommended for elevation instead.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court held that under settled constitutional law (the Second and Third Judges cases), reconsideration of a collegium recommendation must involve collective consultation and deliberation among High Court Collegium members. It cannot be decided unilaterally by the Chief Justice alone. Finding that this is exactly what had happened here, the Court ruled the process procedurally and substantively flawed. It held the writ petition maintainable since it questioned the absence of effective consultation, and directed that the High Court Collegium must now properly reconsider the petitioners' names collectively, in line with the Supreme Court Collegium's January 2024 resolution.

Lesson Learnt

Recommendations for judicial appointments must go through genuine collective deliberation by the full High Court Collegium, not be decided by the Chief Justice individually: procedural fairness in judicial appointments is itself a matter courts will enforce.

Chirag Bhanu Singh & Anr. vs High Court of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware