Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

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.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal 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 ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

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.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

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.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

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.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

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.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

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.

Criminal LawDelhi High Court

Gaurav Jaiswal vs. The State (NCT of Delhi)

Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8151Decided 22 Sept 2026New Delhi Bench
BAIL APPLN. 2388/2026CNR: DLHC010270202026
Justice Girish Kathpalia

Background

The applicant met the prosecutrix through a matrimonial website in October 2024 and allegedly promised to marry her, on which basis she says she was induced into a sexual relationship on multiple occasions between December 2024 and August 2025, including once after he allegedly blackmailed her with obscene photographs. Investigation revealed the applicant had created and operated nine different fake matrimonial profiles (including one posing as a woman) with widely varying ages and qualifications, and he had reportedly admitted in an audio recording to having similarly cheated other women.

Decision Breakdown

The Court noted that a matrimonial-website witness had already proved that all nine fake profiles were created by the applicant using his own phone number and email IDs, lending credence to the prosecution's characterisation of him as a "predator." The confessional audio recording, though not yet forensically analysed due to the earlier investigating officer's lapse, had now been sent for analysis after a new IO took over. Given the trial was nearing completion, with only the IO left to be examined, and the risk that the applicant might abscond or that more victims might come forward once the forensic report was ready, the Court declined to grant bail.

Lesson Learnt

Creating multiple fake identities to target victims, when independently verified through platform records, is treated as serious corroborating evidence of predatory intent in "false promise of marriage" cases and weighs heavily against bail, particularly when a trial is close to conclusion.

Gaurav Jaiswal vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware