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 moreIn December 2016, a five-year-old girl went missing from her village in Ajmer, Rajasthan, and was later found by villagers bleeding from her private parts after being sexually assaulted by an unknown boy who lured her away on the pretext of buying toffee. An FIR was registered against an unknown person, and the accused-appellant, Dhanraj, was arrested about two months later and identified by the victim in a Test Identification Parade (TIP). He was convicted by the trial court under the POCSO Act and IPC provisions including Section 376 (rape) and sentenced to life imprisonment, a conviction the Rajasthan High Court upheld, leading to this appeal to the Supreme Court after Dhanraj had already spent over nine years in custody.
The Supreme Court found two fatal flaws in the prosecution's case. First, the medical evidence showed the victim's injuries were 5-7 days old at the time of examination on 7 December 2016, meaning the assault could not have occurred on 5 December 2016 as alleged in the FIR: a material discrepancy going to the root of the case. Second, and more critically, despite the accused being physically present in court when the victim testified, neither the prosecuting counsel nor the trial judge ever had the victim identify Dhanraj in the courtroom during her deposition, relying solely on the earlier police-conducted TIP, even though the accused had never been named in the FIR itself and the victim admitted police had told her his name. The Court held that trial judges have a duty to actively participate in eliciting truth (not just passively record proceedings), and that this omission, combined with the medical timeline discrepancy, meant the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Given the accused had already spent over nine years in custody, the Court declined to order a retrial, set aside both lower court judgments, and acquitted him.
A conviction cannot rest merely on an out-of-court identification parade when the prosecution had every opportunity, and a corresponding duty, to have the witness identify the accused directly in the courtroom during trial, and judges are expected to actively ensure such crucial evidentiary gaps are filled rather than remaining passive umpires.
