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 moreDilbag Rai paid Rs.10 lakh under an agreement to purchase a small plot of land in Kurukshetra, but the seller never handed over possession or completed the sale. After an Economic Crime Cell initially assessed the dispute as civil in nature, Rai successfully got an FIR registered through a Magistrate's direction under Section 156(3) CrPC, and police investigation revealed the plot actually belonged to the seller's wife, not the seller herself. A chargesheet was filed, charges were framed, and the trial had begun with five witnesses examined: at which point the Punjab and Haryana High Court quashed the entire FIR and proceedings, holding that the complaint, on its face, showed no criminal intent and was merely a failed property sale.
The Supreme Court held that the High Court had erred in using its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to quash the case at such a late stage, after investigation, chargesheet, and framing of charges had already occurred. It emphasized that the High Court overlooked a crucial fact that had emerged during investigation: that the accused did not actually hold title to the property she purported to sell, yet still induced the complainant to part with Rs.10 lakh, which could support an inference of criminal intent rather than a purely civil default. The Court held that whether these allegations are ultimately true was a matter to be decided through trial, not foreclosed at the quashing stage. The appeal was allowed and the High Court's quashing order was set aside, restoring the criminal proceedings, while the Supreme Court expressly clarified it was expressing no view on the merits of the actual accusations, which remain for the trial court to decide.
High Courts should be cautious about quashing a criminal case once investigation has progressed to a chargesheet and framed charges: if facts uncovered during investigation (such as a seller lacking title to property she agreed to sell) could support a criminal intent, the case should ordinarily proceed to trial rather than being cut short.
