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.
Transfer Petition (Criminal) · 2026 INSC 1060
Where a marriage has irretrievably broken down and the parties reach a genuine, voluntary settlement, including on alimony, the Supreme Court can use its Article 142 powers to grant a mutual-consent divorce and close out all related litigation in one stroke, without requiring the usual statutory waiting period.
Writ Petition (Civil) · 2026 INSC 1061
In long-running, complex litigation involving apportioned government liabilities across states, the Supreme Court can use a mechanism like a retired-judge committee plus periodic compliance affidavits to bring genuine finality, including firm timelines, transparency obligations, and interest for delayed payment, rather than leaving matters open-ended.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1062
In an "as is where is" liquidation auction, a bidder who voluntarily accepts the auction terms cannot later resile from a forfeiture clause by citing regulatory caps or after-the-fact excuses for non-payment: courts will enforce the auction notice's own conditions.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8338-DB
Once someone is released from custody because the police failed to properly communicate the grounds of arrest, the police cannot simply re-arrest them by adding new charges: a specific, court-supervised procedure with senior-officer accountability must be followed, or the re-arrest itself becomes illegal.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8308
In economic-offence cases, bail can still be granted where the method used to quantify the alleged financial evasion is not adequately justified, and where the apprehension of re-offending is speculative rather than evidence-based.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8323
A parole claim must be backed by a genuine, verifiable application to the competent jail authority: courts will scrutinise irregularities like an incomplete address, an unexplained thumb mark, or reliance on a mere friend's affidavit rather than close family.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8337
Courts can grant short, strictly time-bound interim bail purely on humanitarian/compassionate grounds (such as caring for a seriously ill family member), even while a case remains pending trial and an earlier bail plea has failed.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8312
Courts will not repeatedly re-examine a bail plea already rejected on merits unless the applicant can point to a genuine change in circumstances since the earlier order.
First Appeal from Order · 2026:DHC:8334
Under the no-fault compensation scheme for railway accidents, a valid ticket-holder injured while attempting to board a train, even carelessly, is generally entitled to compensation unless the railway can show a deliberate, conscious exposure to danger, not mere negligence.
6171 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 moreLegal 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 ___).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
In 1998, the appellant, then a two-year-old child, was travelling in an autorickshaw with her parents in Chennai when a car driven rashly and negligently collided with it, causing her very serious, life-altering injuries. Her compensation claim (limited to Rs. 30 lakhs) was initially dismissed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal on the technical ground that the car had been sold before the accident and the actual owner was not impleaded. The Madras High Court, on appeal, referred her to a Medical Board, which, examining her nearly two decades later, assessed her locomotive disability at 75% and neuro-physical disability at 40% (effectively close to 100% overall disability), and the High Court set aside the Tribunal's dismissal and awarded Rs. 13,34,000 with 7.5% interest. Dissatisfied with the quantum, the appellant sought enhancement before the Supreme Court.
The Court, applying the principle of "just compensation" under Section 168 of the MV Act and drawing on precedents like Kajal v. Jagdish Chand and Rajkumar v. Ajay Kumar, reviewed each head of compensation. It upheld the High Court's chosen multiplier of 15 for victims injured before age 15 (settling an inconsistency between conflicting precedents by following the three-judge bench in Reshma Kumari's case). It substantially enhanced compensation under several heads: attendant charges were recalculated using the multiplier method (from Rs. 1 lakh to Rs. 18 lakhs, a net increase of Rs. 17 lakhs) given her lifelong need for two attendants; pain, suffering and loss of amenities were raised by Rs. 3 lakhs (since disability above 90% warrants at least Rs. 6 lakhs under this head per precedent); Rs. 3 lakhs was newly granted for loss of marriage prospects (previously nil); future medical treatment was increased by Rs. 1 lakh; and an additional Rs. 90,000 was granted for special dietary needs. This resulted in a total enhancement of Rs. 24,90,000, with directions that the insurance company deposit the amount with 7.5% interest, part to be kept as a protected fixed deposit for the appellant's ongoing care and part released to the family, given the two decades of expenses already incurred.
In cases of severe, near-total permanent disability caused by a motor accident, courts will scrutinize each head of compensation (attendant care, pain and suffering, marriage prospects, future medical needs) individually against established precedent rather than accept a lump-sum figure, and can enhance an award well beyond the amount originally claimed to ensure truly "just compensation," while also directing safeguards (like fixed-deposit protections) for how large awards to vulnerable claimants are disbursed.
