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.
Under Section 3(1)(b) of the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975, buildings used "principally" for religious, charitable or educational purposes are exempt from building tax. The State of Kerala levied building tax on a convent building used to house nuns undergoing religious training, and separately on hostel buildings attached to various educational institutions, arguing that pure residential accommodation, even for nuns or students, was not itself a "religious" or "educational" use. The Kerala High Court (in a Division Bench judgment and a later Full Bench judgment) held in favour of the convent and the educational institutions, exempting these buildings from tax, and the State appealed a batch of such cases to the Supreme Court; one lone appeal was also filed by an assessee (a hospital) against a decision that had gone the State's way.
The Supreme Court held that an exemption for buildings used "principally" (not "exclusively") for religious, charitable or educational purposes must be read to cover not just the core activity but purposes directly and integrally connected to it: such as housing nuns next to a convent so they can receive religious instruction, or housing students in hostels attached to their school or college. It distinguished this from, say, renting out a neighbouring building purely for profit even if the rent is used for religious purposes, which would not qualify. The Court also noted that treating such residential buildings as taxable "residential buildings" would create an absurd result by exposing them to a separate luxury tax meant for exclusively residential premises. Applying the principle that beneficial exemption provisions should be construed liberally in line with their object, the Court dismissed all of the State's appeals (upholding the exemptions) and allowed the one appeal filed by the assessee-hospital, setting aside the ruling against it.
A tax exemption for buildings used "principally" for a stated purpose (religious, charitable, educational) extends to supporting activities that are integrally connected to that purpose, such as housing for the people carrying it out, and courts will interpret such beneficial exemptions liberally rather than in the narrow, strict manner normally applied to ordinary tax exemptions.
