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.

Service & Administrative LawSupreme Court of India

Harkirat Singh Ghuman vs. Punjab and Haryana High Court & Ors.

Civil AppealDecided 29 Aug 2022
Civil Appeal No. 5874 of 2022
Ajay Rastogi · C.T. Ravikumar · B.V. Nagarathna as the second judge

Background

The appellant, a candidate in the 2019 Punjab/Haryana Superior Judicial Service Examination, was not selected after the written test. He challenged the selection process before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, alleging that the minimum-qualifying-marks condition was not authorized by the governing rules, that marks obtained were wrongly withheld from him, and, most significantly, that the Criminal Law question paper (Paper V) was found to be missing one question when distributed, with a supplementary question sheet handed out only an hour into the exam. The High Court dismissed his writ petition at the preliminary stage itself, without even calling for a response from the authorities.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court agreed that the missing-question defect in Paper V was a serious and undisputed lapse, not a mere technicality, and that it could not simply be ignored. Rather than cancelling the entire exam (which would unfairly penalize hundreds of candidates and further delay a recruitment already running years behind), the Court directed that the four undisputed questions of Paper V (160 of the original 200 marks) be revalued on their own, excluding the belatedly-supplied question, and that a fresh result of the written exam be declared on that basis. Candidates who now qualify are to be called for a fresh, uniformly-conducted interview by one common board, rejecting the plea that previously-interviewed candidates be spared re-interview. The High Court's dismissal was set aside and the appeal allowed with these directions, to be completed within two months.

Lesson Learnt

A demonstrable, undisputed defect in the conduct of a competitive examination, such as a missing question, cannot simply be brushed aside by declaring "no prejudice," but courts will look for a proportionate fix (like excluding the flawed portion) rather than voiding an entire selection process when that better serves fairness to all candidates.

Harkirat Singh Ghuman vs. Punjab and Haryana High Court & Ors. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware