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 State of Rajasthan acquired the landowners' land in 1981 for an Army field firing range. Courts later fixed higher compensation, but the amount was never paid at that rate, and in 2001 the State issued a circular promising 15% developed residential land in lieu of compensation to such owners. The owners say the promised land was never allotted, and the Jaipur Development Authority (JDA) and the State contested their claims.
The Court held that the 13.12.2001 circular was an enforceable State policy, since the minister concerned had the authority to decide, and the State had already acted on it by allotting developed land to others. The State could not go back on that promise: the doctrine of promissory and equitable estoppel applied, and the burden lay on the State to explain on its own records why the policy was not meant to apply, which it could not do because the file could not be traced. The Court also held that the JDA, as the implementing body, could not avoid the owners' challenge on the ground that the decision was not its own. Relying on Article 142 to do complete justice, the Court allowed the appeals, set aside the High Court judgment, and directed that the owners be allotted 15% developed land at specified localities (Vidyadhar Nagar, Gokul Nagar, Truck Terminal and Vaishali Nagar) within six weeks, through a transparent process.
When a government publishes a policy promising a benefit and people rely on it, the government generally cannot simply walk away from it without a good reason it can prove from its own records. Long delays in paying land-acquisition compensation can still be put right by the courts.
