Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

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.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal Case Shots is built to help you quickly identify and understand relevant precedent. For citation in pleadings or filings, always verify against the full judgment PDF and current citation format (e.g., 2026 INSC ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

The holding is what the court legally decided. The lesson learnt translates that into a practical takeaway: what a lawyer should factor into case strategy or client advice as a result of this precedent.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

Both. Each case shows a distilled summary (case type, key holding, and lesson learnt) and links to the full judgment as a PDF for when you need the complete text for research or citation.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

Yes. Use Advanced Filters to narrow results by decision date and by practice area, including Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Service & Administrative Law, Family Law, Civil Property & Inheritance, and Labour & Industrial Law.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

Yes. You can filter judgments by the judge or bench that decided the case, which is useful for tracking how a particular judge has reasoned on similar issues across multiple rulings.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

Legal Case Shots is a searchable database of Supreme Court of India judgments, each broken down into the case type, the court's key holding, and a practical lesson learnt, with the full judgment available as a PDF for citation or deeper reading.

Criminal LawSupreme Court of India

Korukanti Kumar vs. State of Andhra Pradesh

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) · 2022 INSC 1148Decided 1 Nov 2022
Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 2816 of 2017
Sanjiv Khanna

Background

The petitioner had been convicted by the Trial Court for offences under Sections 376 (rape), 302 (murder) and 309 (attempt to suicide) of the Indian Penal Code. The High Court of Andhra Pradesh affirmed both the conviction and sentence in appeal. The petitioner's Special Leave Petition against that appellate decision was subsequently dismissed by the Supreme Court. He then filed this Review Petition asking the Supreme Court to reconsider its own dismissal order.

Decision Breakdown

The Court first condoned the delay in filing the review petition, allowing it to be heard despite being filed late. On merits, the Bench examined the grounds raised in the review petition and held that it found no "error apparent on the face of the record": the very narrow standard required to succeed in a review (as opposed to a fresh appeal on the facts). Since no such error was shown, the review petition was dismissed, leaving the conviction and sentence undisturbed.

Lesson Learnt

A review petition before the Supreme Court is not a second appeal. It succeeds only where the petitioner can point to an obvious, self-evident error on the face of the original order, not merely re-argue the facts or seek a fresh look at the evidence. Courts will condone delay in filing a review as a matter of procedure, but that does not lower the very high bar for actually winning one.

Korukanti Kumar vs. State of Andhra Pradesh – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware