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.
In 1920, the colonial government leased a large tract of agricultural land to one Lala Khushi Ram under the Government Grants Act, 1895; the lease conditions (Clause 9) restricted the lessee's right to transfer the land except with payment or relinquishment of a share to the government, but exempted ordinary agricultural sub-leases from this restriction. The land passed to Harikishan Lal, who sub-leased about 2.49 acres to Hardev Singh for agricultural purposes. Decades later, when land-ceiling authorities under the 1960 Ceiling Act declared surplus land in Harikishan Lal's (the government lessee's) hands, that surplus included the plot sub-let to Hardev Singh. Hardev Singh objected, arguing that as a sub-lessee he had become an independent "tenure holder" in his own right under the Ceiling Act's definitions, so his land could not be clubbed with and confiscated as part of the original lessee's surplus holding. His objections were rejected at every stage (by the Prescribed Authority, in a ceiling appeal, and finally by the Uttarakhand High Court) leading to this appeal.
The Supreme Court held that although the Ceiling Act's definitions of "holding" and "tenure holder" could, read alone, suggest a sub-lessee becomes an independent tenure holder, those definitions must be read together with the actual terms of the original government lease and sub-lease. The sub-lease itself specified that Hardev Singh could only acquire full, independent rights by formally exercising a buy-out option within five years under Clause 5 of the sub-lease (in conformity with Clause 9 of the government lease), which he never did. The Court relied on its own precedent in Escorts Farms Ltd. to hold that government grants under the Government Grants Act (as amended for U.P.) override ordinary tenancy law, and grantees cannot transfer land, nor can their sub-lessees acquire independent rights, contrary to the grant's terms, so a sub-lease for agriculture, while permitted, could not by itself create a standalone tenure holder immune from the ceiling calculation. Hardev Singh therefore remained merely an "ostensible holder," while the original government lessee remained the "real holder" whose entire landholding (including the sub-let portion) was correctly counted for ceiling purposes. Both connected appeals were dismissed with no order as to costs.
A sub-lease of government-granted land does not automatically confer independent land rights on the sub-lessee: special statutory conditions attached to the original government grant can override general definitions in other land laws, and a tenant/sub-lessee must actually complete any formal buy-out or conversion procedure specified in the lease documents to claim independent ownership status, not merely rely on possession or years of cultivation.
