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 moreFollowing a boundary dispute between neighbours, the appellant's father allegedly called the victim out of his house, picked a quarrel, and instigated the appellant and his brother to attack him; the appellant allegedly stabbed the victim in the abdomen and his brother stabbed him in the back as he tried to flee. The victim gave a statement to a doctor before dying, which was treated as a dying declaration. The trial court acquitted all four accused, but the State's appeal led the Calcutta High Court to convict the appellant (the co-accused having died or been found a juvenile during the appeal). The appellant challenged this conviction before the Supreme Court, arguing the eyewitnesses (the victim's own son and wife) were unreliable interested witnesses and that the dying declaration was shaky.
The Supreme Court held that close relatives of a victim are not automatically "interested" witnesses merely by relation: a witness is only "interested" if they stand to gain some benefit from the case's outcome beyond seeing justice done, and here the son's and wife's testimony was found consistent, natural, and unshaken in cross-examination. The Court also upheld reliance on the dying declaration, noting it was recorded by an independent doctor with no connection to either side, was corroborated by the eyewitness accounts, and that there was no rule requiring a dying declaration to be independently corroborated if it was otherwise found trustworthy. Finding the High Court had properly re-appreciated the evidence and given valid, substantial reasons for reversing the trial court's acquittal, the Supreme Court found no ground to interfere and dismissed the appeal, upholding the conviction.
A victim's close family members are not disqualified as witnesses simply because they are related to the victim: courts look at whether their testimony is consistent and credible, not merely at the relationship, and a trustworthy dying declaration corroborated by eyewitnesses can safely sustain a conviction even after an initial trial-court acquittal.
