Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

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.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal 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 ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

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.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

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.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

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.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

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.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

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.

Criminal LawSupreme Court of India

Hare Ram Yadav vs. State of Bihar

Not available · 2024 INSC 936Decided 3 Dec 2024
Not available
Justice B.R. Gavai · Justice K.V. Viswanathan

Background

The appellant, a tenant, got into a dispute with his landlord's family after bricks belonging to him were removed from near his door. He began abusing the landlord's wife, who warned him and, according to one witness, dared him to act on his anger. The appellant then stabbed her once with a knife in the chest; she died during treatment. The trial court convicted him of murder under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment, and the High Court affirmed this.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court found the prosecution had proved, through five consistent eyewitnesses (family members of the deceased), that the appellant caused the death: relationship to the deceased alone does not discredit a witness's testimony. However, on closer examination of the evidence, the Court found there was no premeditation: the fatal assault occurred in the heat of the moment during a sudden quarrel triggered by a trivial dispute over bricks, involving a single knife wound with no evidence of cruelty or undue advantage taken. This entitled the appellant to the benefit of the "sudden and grave provocation" exception to murder. The Court therefore converted his conviction from murder (Section 302 IPC) to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Part I of Section 304 IPC), and since he had already served about nine years and ten months in custody, sentenced him to time served and ordered his immediate release.

Lesson Learnt

A killing is not automatically "murder" in the eyes of law. If it happens in a sudden fight, without premeditation and without cruelty, it can be treated as the lesser offence of culpable homicide. Also, a witness being a relative of the victim does not by itself make their testimony unreliable; it only calls for closer scrutiny.

Hare Ram Yadav vs. State of Bihar – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware