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 long-running public interest litigation (originally filed in 1998, now tagged with connected appeals and diary matters) concerning implementation of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 across India, and related directions requiring National Law Universities to monitor compliance under a scheme called "Project Ability Empowerment." In an earlier judgment dated 12 September 2025, the Court had directed all States and Union Territories to appoint Nodal Officers to coordinate this compliance work, but by this hearing several States and Union Territories still had not complied, prompting the Court to express displeasure and warn that Chief Secretaries could be summoned personally if compliance continued to lapse.
Noting that a status report showed almost all States and Union Territories had by now appointed the required Nodal Officers, the Court held that the National Law Universities entrusted with "Project Ability Empowerment" could now proceed with a detailed, structured, and substantive assessment of how well the Disabilities Act is being implemented across the country, not a merely formal review. It specifically directed National Law University, Delhi to map the Union of India's own compliance, with the Department of Social Justice and Empowerment required to depute a Joint Secretary-level officer to coordinate. The Court also kept up pressure on the Union of India to respond to an unresolved query from its earlier judgment about reservation-related promotion policy, giving a final opportunity to respond, and listed the matter for further monitoring on 22 September 2026.
The Supreme Court can use continuing/ongoing supervisory jurisdiction (a "continuing mandamus") to keep monitoring a statute's real-world implementation for years after the original judgment, using institutions like universities as independent monitors and holding individual government officials personally accountable for compliance delays.
