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 moreCandidates applying for direct recruitment to the Uttar Pradesh Higher Judicial Service (UPHJS) in 2018 challenged Rules 8(1) and 12 of the UP Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1975, which fix an upper age limit of 45 years (48 for SC/ST candidates) and require recruitment at intervals of up to three years. The petitioners had been allowed to sit the preliminary and main examinations under interim Supreme Court orders, with their results kept in a sealed cover, but were otherwise barred for having crossed the prescribed age limit.
The Court upheld the constitutional validity of both Rules 8 and 12, holding that fixing a cut-off age for recruitment is a matter of policy within the rule-making authority's discretion and can only be struck down if it is arbitrary or "wide off the reasonable mark", which was not shown here. It held that the time-schedule directions in Malik Mazhar Sultan for filling judicial vacancies do not create any individual right to age relaxation outside the applicable recruitment rules. It also declined to invoke Article 142 to grant the petitioners relief merely because they had been permitted to appear in the exams on an interim basis, distinguishing an earlier case where results had already been declared. The writ petitions and the connected civil appeal were all dismissed, with no order as to costs.
Courts give wide latitude to age and recruitment cut-offs fixed under service rules, and permission to sit an examination under an interim court order does not by itself create a right to have the age bar relaxed or the result declared.
