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 companies had been granted government permission to operate as Multi System Operators under the Cable Television Network Rules. This permission was later cancelled by the government after the Ministry of Home Affairs refused to grant the companies "security clearance," a mandatory requirement under the applicable rule. The companies challenged the cancellation in the Bombay High Court, arguing they were never given a hearing before the permission was withdrawn, but the High Court dismissed their writ petitions and upheld the cancellation.
The Supreme Court examined Rule 11C of the Cable Television Network Rules and found that grant of the operating permission was always conditional on obtaining security clearance from the Central Government, so a failure to get that clearance justified cancellation. On the fairness argument, the Court held that in matters involving national security, the strict requirement of prior notice and hearing does not apply, citing its own precedent that national security determinations are policy matters for the executive, not for judicial second-guessing, and that courts can examine sealed-cover material to satisfy themselves a genuine security concern exists (which it did here). Finding no merit in either appeal, the Court dismissed both, while leaving the companies free to apply afresh for permission in future.
Where a government licence or permission is explicitly made conditional on a security clearance, the clearing authority is not required to give the applicant advance notice or a hearing before withdrawing the permission if that clearance is refused: national security decisions get special deference from the courts.
