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 moreThis is a suo motu (self-initiated) case taken up by the Supreme Court over severe, long-standing pollution of the Jojari, Luni, and connected river systems in Jodhpur, Pali, and Balotra districts of Rajasthan, caused largely by untreated industrial effluent discharge. The Court had earlier (November 2025) modified an interim stay on National Green Tribunal directions and set up a High-Level Ecosystem Oversight Committee, chaired by a retired High Court judge, to investigate and monitor remedial action. This order follows a series of hearings in which the Committee submitted status reports documenting the extent of contamination, inadequate effluent and sewage treatment infrastructure, and administrative inaction by the State of Rajasthan and its agencies including RIICO (the state industrial development corporation).
The Court found that the Committee's field findings fully substantiated the earlier concerns about grave and worsening environmental degradation, and identified a pattern of administrative apathy and regulatory inaction by the State and its instrumentalities despite repeated warnings. It issued a wide-ranging set of interim directions: the State must examine setting up a dedicated environmental restoration and compensation fund, identify and initiate disciplinary action against negligent or complicit officials, and ensure sustainable (not ad-hoc tanker-based) potable drinking water supply to affected villages. Noting that warnings and regulatory directions alone had failed to produce compliance, the Court directed that Special Courts be established in Jodhpur, Pali, and Balotra districts (with the Rajasthan High Court's cooperation) for expeditious prosecution of environmental offences, and grounded all these directions in the fundamental right to life under Article 21, which it held includes the right to clean water and a pollution-free environment. The Committee was directed to file a further status report before the next hearing, listed for 21 July 2026.
The right to a clean environment and safe drinking water is treated by the Supreme Court as part of the fundamental right to life under Article 21, enforceable through continuing judicial monitoring, and persistent non-compliance by government authorities can lead to court-ordered special courts, compensation funds, and personal accountability for negligent officials, not just repeated warnings.
