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 victim, a married woman, went missing on 21.11.2018 and her dead body was found four days later hanging from a noose in a wooded area near her village. The FIR initially named one Ajay Kumar as the sole suspect, and after investigation only Ajay was charge-sheeted while the petitioner, Kallu Nat alias Mayank Kumar Nagar, was given a clean chit and dropped from the case. After the case was committed to the Sessions Court, the husband (first informant) applied under Section 193 CrPC to have the petitioner summoned as an additional accused based on witness statements and mobile call records suggesting his involvement; it took nearly five years for the trial court to decide this application, which it ultimately allowed. The Allahabad High Court dismissed the petitioner's revision against that summoning order, and he approached the Supreme Court against the High Court's order.
The Supreme Court framed the core legal question as whether a Court of Session, after a case is committed to it under Section 209 CrPC, can take fresh cognizance under Section 193 CrPC and summon a person not named in the police charge-sheet, or whether such summoning is possible only during trial under Section 319 CrPC. After an extensive review of precedent (including the Constitution Bench decision in Dharam Pal), the Court held that what is committed to the Sessions Court is the "case"/"offence," not merely the named "offenders," and that once the case is committed the Sessions Court assumes original jurisdiction and can summon any person who, on the material before it, appears prima facie involved, without needing to wait for a Section 319 application during trial. Applying this to the facts, the Court found no error in the Sessions Court's or High Court's view that the evidence (extra-judicial confession, witness statements, and call detail records) justified summoning the petitioner. The petition was accordingly dismissed, and the trial court was directed to frame charges (if not already done) and complete the trial within six months.
Being dropped from a police charge-sheet is not the end of the road. If a Sessions Court later finds credible material implicating a person in the same offence after the case is committed to it, it has the power (and indeed the duty) to summon that person to face trial, rather than being restricted to doing so only mid-trial under Section 319 CrPC.
