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 moreA long-running dispute concerned how reservation rules under UP Act No. 4 of 1994 apply to recruitment of lecturers in aided degree colleges: specifically whether vacancies across different colleges could be "clubbed" for applying the reservation roster. A Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court had decided this in "Dr. Vishwajeet Singh's case," which the Supreme Court affirmed on appeal in 2017. When a fresh writ petition raised doubts about that very decision, a five-Judge Full Bench of the High Court was asked to resolve the question afresh, but it declined, holding itself bound by the Supreme Court's 2017 affirmance. The present petitioners challenged that refusal to refer the matter to a larger bench.
The Supreme Court held that since it had already specifically agreed with and affirmed the Division Bench's reasoning in Dr. Vishwajeet Singh's case while dismissing the earlier civil appeals, that decision had legally "merged" into the Supreme Court's own order under the doctrine explained in Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala. Consequently, the High Court's five-Judge bench was correct that it could not revisit or refer the same question to a still-larger bench, since doing so would mean sitting over a point the Supreme Court itself had already approved. Finding no fresh ground to revisit the issue, the Court dismissed the special leave petitions challenging the High Court's refusal to refer.
Once the Supreme Court dismisses an appeal while expressly agreeing with and affirming the High Court's reasoning (not merely declining to interfere), that reasoning becomes binding Supreme Court law through the doctrine of merger: lower courts cannot reopen or refer the same question to a larger bench afterward.
