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.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1073
In circumstantial-evidence cases, forensic and DNA evidence must actually corroborate the alleged crime: a conviction cannot survive where the most crucial scientific evidence, on its own terms, points away from rather than toward the prosecution's theory.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1074
A conviction based purely on circumstantial evidence requires every link in the chain, timeline, witness credibility, forensic matches, and motive, to be proven beyond reasonable doubt; gaps or suppressed evidence at any link entitle the accused to the benefit of the doubt, even in a serious case like a double murder.
Criminal Miscellaneous Case · 2026:DHC:8505
Courts will not quash a criminal case merely because the accused has a plausible alibi-type defence; unless that defence is conclusive and undisputed, the matter must be tested through the ordinary trial process.
Criminal Miscellaneous Case · 2026:DHC:8547
A private compromise between victim and accused cannot by itself secure quashing of a case involving serious, heinous allegations like attempted murder with a weapon: such matters must proceed to trial regardless of settlement.
First Appeal from Order · 2026:DHC:8563
Railway Claims Tribunals cannot reject a bona fide passenger's death claim based on speculative inferences when there is no direct evidence of an alternative cause of death; the compensation scheme under the Railways Act is to be interpreted generously in favour of victims' families.
Criminal Miscellaneous Case · 2026:DHC:8559
In matrimonial offences, courts can and do quash criminal proceedings once a genuine compromise is verified directly with the complainant, sparing both parties a prolonged and pointless trial.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8541
A co-accused's bail does not automatically extend to another accused where their actual roles in the offence differ materially; delay caused by one's own defence counsel cannot later be used as a ground for bail.
Execution Petition · 2026:DHC:8567
An arbitral award must be adequately stamped before a court can enforce it; courts give only a limited window to cure such defects, after which the award becomes legally unusable until the deficiency is fixed.
Arbitration Petition · 2026:DHC:8555
A genuine settlement reached through mediation renders a pending arbitration-related court petition moot, allowing parties to close out litigation quickly once they resolve their dispute privately.
7878 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.
This batch of matters arose from several companies whose insolvency resolution plans had been approved by the National Company Law Tribunal, after which successful resolution applicants took over management, but various creditors, including central and state government departments (such as income tax, service tax, VAT and mining-royalty authorities), continued to demand payment of dues that had arisen before the resolution plan's approval and were not included in it. The appellants argued that once a resolution plan is approved under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (I&B Code), all prior claims not part of the plan should stand extinguished, giving the revived company a "clean slate," while the government creditors argued they remained entitled to recover their dues and that a 2019 amendment clarifying this position should not apply retrospectively to older resolution plans.
The Supreme Court held that once a resolution plan is approved by the adjudicating authority under Section 31(1) of the I&B Code, it binds all stakeholders, including the Central Government, State Governments and local authorities, even in respect of statutory dues like income tax, VAT, or mining royalties. It ruled that the 2019 amendment to Section 31, which expressly extinguished all claims not part of the resolution plan, was clarificatory and declaratory of the law as it always stood, and therefore applied retrospectively, even to resolution plans approved before the amendment. Consequently, no creditor can initiate or continue any proceeding to recover a debt from the corporate debtor that arose before the resolution plan's approval date if that claim was not part of the approved plan; all such claims stand extinguished, and the successful resolution applicant takes over the company free of them. The Court allowed the appeals, quashed the contrary High Court judgments, and declared that the various government respondents were not entitled to recover any dues accruing prior to the transfer date in each case.
Once a company's insolvency resolution plan is approved, it draws a "clean slate" line: creditors, including tax authorities and government departments, cannot later chase the revived company for old dues that were not included in the plan, so all claims must be filed and considered during the resolution process itself, not afterward.
