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 moreDinubhai Solanki, a former Member of Parliament, was an accused (along with his nephew) in the 2010 murder of RTI activist Amit Jethwa, who had been campaigning against illegal mining near the Gir Forest Sanctuary. Solanki was granted bail by the Supreme Court in February 2014 (in this very appeal) subject to strict conditions, including not threatening or inducing witnesses. Criminal Appeal No. 492 of 2014 itself (challenging the transfer of investigation to the CBI) was already finally dismissed by the Supreme Court back in February 2014 (reported at (2014) 4 SCC 626); what this October 2017 judgment actually decides are later, connected matters that continued under the same case record: a complainant's 2015 application to cancel Solanki's bail (alleging witness-tampering), and fresh 2017 appeals challenging a Gujarat High Court order that had directed a complete de novo (fresh) retrial after 105 of 195 prosecution witnesses turned hostile, including 8 of the key eye-witnesses.
The Court found CBI's own affidavits corroborated the complainant's allegations that witnesses had been threatened and induced to turn hostile, making out a prima facie case for cancelling bail to protect a fair trial. However, instead of ordering a complete fresh retrial of all witnesses as the High Court had directed, the Supreme Court modified that direction to require re-examination of only 26 identified witnesses (not the entire trial), and set aside a separate High Court direction for administrative action against the trial judge. On bail, the Court cancelled Solanki's existing bail and ordered him taken into custody, but only for the duration needed to re-examine the 8 key eye-witnesses on a day-to-day basis; once their evidence was recorded, he was to be released again on the earlier 2014 bail terms, with an added condition that he stay out of Gujarat until the remaining evidence was complete.
Where there is credible evidence that an accused on bail is intimidating witnesses and derailing a fair trial, courts can cancel that bail, but the remedy will be calibrated to the actual harm (here, custody only until the directly-affected eye-witnesses are safely re-examined) rather than an open-ended or maximal response, and a full retrial order can itself be scaled back to just the tainted portion of the evidence.
