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 moreSeveral candidates from outside Delhi, belonging to the OBC category, had cleared the Central Teacher Eligibility Test (CTET) using a 5% relaxation in qualifying marks available to OBC candidates in their home states, and then applied for Special Education Teacher vacancies in Delhi. Since they did not hold a Delhi-issued OBC certificate, they could not claim OBC-reserved seats in Delhi, so they instead sought appointment against unreserved (general) category vacancies based on their rank in the merit list. The Central Administrative Tribunal and the Delhi High Court both ruled in the candidates' favour, relying on an earlier Supreme Court decision (Vikas Sankhala) permitting similar migration to the general category.
The Supreme Court held that the Vikas Sankhala precedent did not apply here because, unlike in that Rajasthan case, there was no mechanism in the Delhi recruitment that neutralised the advantage gained from relaxed CTET pass marks, and government office memoranda expressly state that candidates selected under any relaxed standard (including in qualification) must be counted against reserved vacancies only, not general ones. Since the respondents had cleared the CTET with marks below the 60% required for unreserved-category eligibility, and they held no valid OBC certification recognised by the Delhi government, they were not eligible for either the OBC quota or the general category in Delhi. The Court set aside the High Court's judgment and allowed the government's appeal, holding that allowing such migration would dilute merit standards in the unreserved category.
A qualification obtained using a relaxed standard meant for a reserved category (such as lower pass marks) cannot later be used to compete for general/unreserved category vacancies: reservation-based relaxations and open-category eligibility operate on different standards that cannot be mixed, even if an applicant otherwise scores well in the final test.
