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 Punjab Public Service Commission advertised posts with reservations for "ex-servicemen." The appellant, a former Army Captain, was appointed under this category. A rival candidate (respondent no.4), who had served and was released from the Indian Military Nursing Service (IMNS), was initially rejected as not qualifying as an "ex-serviceman," but the Punjab & Haryana High Court's Division Bench ruled in her favour and directed she be appointed if found meritorious.
The Supreme Court held that the IMNS, constituted under the Military Nursing Service Ordinance, 1943, is legally part of the armed forces of the Union, and its personnel who complete their service and receive gratuity squarely satisfy the definition of "ex-serviceman" under Rule 2(c) of the Punjab Recruitment of Ex-Servicemen Rules, 1982. The Court rejected the State's reliance on Kendriya Sainik Board clarifications excluding IMNS, holding that such administrative clarifications for welfare schemes cannot override the State's own statutory recruitment rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution. It upheld the High Court's ruling in respondent no.4's favour but, considering the appellant had already served in the post for years without any fault of her own, protected her appointment too, directing that respondent no.4 be considered for appointment with notional (not back-dated) benefits, without disturbing the appellant's continued service.
Eligibility for a state's reservation categories is governed by that state's own statutory definitions, not by clarifications from unrelated welfare bodies; service in the Indian Military Nursing Service counts as service in the armed forces for "ex-serviceman" reservation purposes.
