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 moreThe appellant, arraigned as Accused No. 24 in an NIA case, was in custody since August 2022 in connection with an alleged multi-jurisdictional heroin-smuggling operation in which nearly 3,000 kg of heroin, allegedly originating in Afghanistan, was smuggled into India through Mundra Port concealed as talc powder. He was charged under the NDPS Act, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), and Section 120B IPC, on allegations that he coordinated the import through a proprietorship firm he controlled and that he had met a Dubai-based figure alleged to run the smuggling network. His regular bail plea was rejected by the Gujarat High Court, and he approached the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court reviewed the evidentiary material, including statements of protected witnesses linking the appellant to arranging the import documentation and to meetings with the alleged foreign network operator, and found the allegations, at this stage, serious enough that bail should not be granted. At the same time, the Court cautioned against overreach, holding it would be "premature and speculative" to extend the allegations to actual terror-financing merely because UAPA provisions had been invoked and the smuggling network had suspected transnational links, absent clear and compelling evidence connecting the appellant to any proscribed terrorist organisation. Balancing the concern against indefinite pre-trial detention with the seriousness of the case, the Court dismissed the bail appeal but gave the appellant liberty to renew his bail plea after six months or upon substantial progress in the trial, whichever comes first, and directed the NIA and the Special Court to expedite the recording of prosecution witness testimony.
In serious economic or narcotics offences under special statutes like the NDPS Act and UAPA, courts may decline bail based on the gravity of allegations even during prolonged pre-trial custody, but they will also guard against prosecutorial overreach: allegations of terror-financing require their own clear and compelling evidentiary foundation and cannot simply ride on the coattails of a smuggling charge; an accused denied bail is not without recourse and can seek it again as the trial progresses.
