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.
Land belonging to BSK Realtors LLP in Delhi's Chattarpur village was acquired decades ago under the old Land Acquisition Act, 1894. In 2016, relying on the Supreme Court's then-prevailing view in Pune Municipal Corporation v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki, the Delhi High Court held the acquisition had "lapsed" under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Land Acquisition Act because possession was not taken/compensation not fully paid. The Delhi Development Authority's appeal against that ruling was dismissed in 2016. In 2020, however, a 5-judge Constitution Bench in Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal overruled Pune Municipal Corporation, holding that lapse requires both non-payment of compensation AND non-taking of possession together. The Government of NCT of Delhi then sought to reopen the BSK Realtors matter (and dozens of similarly-situated, tagged cases across Delhi) in light of this changed law, raising questions about whether a second round of litigation was even legally permissible.
A three-judge bench decided this lead case together with over 80 connected land acquisition matters, sorting them into groups based on their procedural posture. The Court held that the doctrine of merger did not bar the Government from bringing fresh appeals despite the earlier round having been dismissed, given the intervening authoritative change in law by the Constitution Bench. Rather than deciding each case individually on technical grounds, the Court invoked its special constitutional power under Article 142 to do "complete justice," and issued a uniform, practical scheme: acquiring authorities were given one more year (from 1 August 2024) to complete fresh acquisition and pay compensation, various procedural requirements of the newer 2013 Act (like a fresh Social Impact Assessment) were dispensed with to speed things up, and old notifications under the 1894 Act were treated as valid preliminary notifications for this purpose. Cases where fraud or subsequent-purchaser disputes were alleged were sent back to the High Court for fact-finding, and a handful of unrelated/wrongly tagged matters were separated out for independent listing.
When thousands of similarly situated land-acquisition disputes are affected by a single change in Supreme Court law, the Court can use its Article 142 powers to craft one uniform, practical roadmap for everyone rather than forcing each landowner and authority through years of repetitive individual litigation, but affected landowners must still watch for and respond to the fresh acquisition/compensation process within the timelines set.
