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.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1073
In circumstantial-evidence cases, forensic and DNA evidence must actually corroborate the alleged crime: a conviction cannot survive where the most crucial scientific evidence, on its own terms, points away from rather than toward the prosecution's theory.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1074
A conviction based purely on circumstantial evidence requires every link in the chain, timeline, witness credibility, forensic matches, and motive, to be proven beyond reasonable doubt; gaps or suppressed evidence at any link entitle the accused to the benefit of the doubt, even in a serious case like a double murder.
Criminal Miscellaneous Case · 2026:DHC:8505
Courts will not quash a criminal case merely because the accused has a plausible alibi-type defence; unless that defence is conclusive and undisputed, the matter must be tested through the ordinary trial process.
Criminal Miscellaneous Case · 2026:DHC:8547
A private compromise between victim and accused cannot by itself secure quashing of a case involving serious, heinous allegations like attempted murder with a weapon: such matters must proceed to trial regardless of settlement.
First Appeal from Order · 2026:DHC:8563
Railway Claims Tribunals cannot reject a bona fide passenger's death claim based on speculative inferences when there is no direct evidence of an alternative cause of death; the compensation scheme under the Railways Act is to be interpreted generously in favour of victims' families.
Criminal Miscellaneous Case · 2026:DHC:8559
In matrimonial offences, courts can and do quash criminal proceedings once a genuine compromise is verified directly with the complainant, sparing both parties a prolonged and pointless trial.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8541
A co-accused's bail does not automatically extend to another accused where their actual roles in the offence differ materially; delay caused by one's own defence counsel cannot later be used as a ground for bail.
Execution Petition · 2026:DHC:8567
An arbitral award must be adequately stamped before a court can enforce it; courts give only a limited window to cure such defects, after which the award becomes legally unusable until the deficiency is fixed.
Arbitration Petition · 2026:DHC:8555
A genuine settlement reached through mediation renders a pending arbitration-related court petition moot, allowing parties to close out litigation quickly once they resolve their dispute privately.
7878 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.
Land was acquired decades ago from several villages near Manesar, Gurgaon for an industrial township, and compensation rates were fixed and revised multiple times across a long chain of litigation. In an earlier judgment (Wazir v. State of Haryana, 2019), the Supreme Court had fixed a lower final compensation rate (~Rs. 29.77 lakh/acre) specifically for landholders of three villages (Bas Khusla, Bas Haria, Dhana) than what those landholders had already been paid (~Rs. 37.40 lakh/acre) under earlier interim orders, and had directed that any excess be refunded. The landholders from these three villages filed the present applications seeking clarification/relief from having to refund the excess amount they had already received and spent.
The Court rejected the landholders' argument that compensation could never have been reduced below what they already received, noting its earlier remand had left all compensation questions open to be decided afresh on the facts. However, it found a genuine "anomaly": these landholders had, in good faith and without any security being demanded, already received Rs. 37.40 lakh/acre under court-supervised disbursal orders, while the acquiring authority had separately recovered even larger sums from subsequent land allottees. Exercising its special "complete justice" power under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Court held that these landholders would not be required to refund the excess over their revised entitlement, modifying the refund direction from the earlier Wazir judgment to this extent, while leaving the corrected compensation rate itself (Rs. 29.77 lakh/acre) unchanged. A connected batch of related SLPs by other landholders from the same acquisition was also disposed of by applying the same ruling.
Even after a court finally fixes compensation at a lower rate than earlier paid, the Supreme Court can use its special constitutional power (Article 142) to protect ordinary landowners who received and spent money in good faith under earlier court orders, shielding them from ruinous refund demands when equity so requires.
