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 moreIn May 2011, a young man and young woman went missing after visiting a popular meeting spot (Suruli Falls) in Tamil Nadu; their decomposed bodies were later found in the forest, and post-mortem examination showed both had died violent, homicidal deaths. The prosecution's case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence, including a claim that the appellant had earlier approached another couple at the same spot demanding jewellery, a "last seen" theory placing him near the victims, and his subsequent arrest, an alleged confession, and recovery of items said to be linked to the crime. The trial court convicted the appellant, and the Madras High Court upheld the conviction, leading to this appeal before the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court undertook a detailed, circumstance-by-circumstance review of the entire chain of evidence (the alleged encounter with the other couple, the last-seen theory, and the arrest, confession and recovery) and found significant gaps and unreliability in each link. It held that in a case built purely on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish an unbroken chain of circumstances pointing only to the guilt of the accused and excluding every other reasonable hypothesis of innocence, a standard the prosecution failed to meet here. Finding none of the circumstances conclusively proved, the Court held the chain of circumstantial evidence did not point to the singular hypothesis of the appellant's guilt, vacated the conviction, and ordered his immediate release. The Court also added significant observations (citing its own recent PMLA ruling) about the injustice of long pre-acquittal incarceration and flagged, without deciding, the broader question of compensation for wrongful, prolonged imprisonment following a "clean acquittal," directing that the judgment be circulated to all High Courts and state police for training on proper investigation and evidentiary safeguards.
A criminal conviction based only on circumstantial evidence cannot stand unless the entire chain of circumstances is fully and reliably proved and excludes every reasonable possibility of innocence: gaps or weaknesses in any single link (last-seen evidence, confession, or recovery) can be fatal to the prosecution's case, and courts are increasingly alert to the human cost of prolonged incarceration that precedes a later acquittal.
