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

Krishnamurthy vs State Rep. By Inspector of Police

Criminal AppealDecided 1 Sept 2022
Criminal Appeal No. 63 of 2011

Background

Following a quarrel between neighbours over a missing goat, Krishnamurthy (accused no. 2) and two others went to the deceased Samidurai's house at 2 a.m. armed with an iron pipe and a wooden log. Krishnamurthy struck the deceased on the head with a wooden log; the other two accused also assaulted him. Samidurai died from his injuries, chiefly a head injury causing a subdural haematoma. The trial court convicted Krishnamurthy of murder under Section 302 IPC (life imprisonment); the High Court confirmed his conviction while reducing the other two accused's convictions to lesser offences. Only Krishnamurthy appealed to the Supreme Court.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court accepted that Krishnamurthy had indeed struck the fatal blow with a wooden log, but found no evidence that he intended to kill the deceased: the attack arose from a sudden quarrel, not a premeditated intent to cause death. It noted the High Court itself had observed the act was "not done intentionally to cause death" yet still convicted him of murder, an inconsistency the Supreme Court corrected. Since at most Krishnamurthy could be said to have known his act was likely to cause death (without intending it), his conviction was altered from Section 302 IPC (murder) to Section 304 Part II IPC (culpable homicide not amounting to murder). He was sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment, which he had already served, and ordered released immediately.

Lesson Learnt

A killing is only "murder" if the perpetrator intended to cause death or knew the injury was so serious it would almost certainly kill; where the evidence shows only that death was a foreseeable risk without a clear intent to kill, the correct charge is the lesser offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder: the distinction can significantly reduce a sentence.

Krishnamurthy vs State Rep. By Inspector of Police – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware