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 moreAn NGO, Lok Prahari, filed a Public Interest Litigation (originally before the Allahabad High Court, then taken to the Supreme Court) arguing that once a legislator is convicted of an offence that triggers disqualification under Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, the legislator's seat becomes vacant immediately from the date of conviction and cannot be revived even if an appellate court later stays the conviction. The dispute arose from a case where a former UP MLA, convicted and sentenced for certain offences, had obtained a stay of both his sentence and his conviction from the appellate court, and the High Court had held that this stay prevented the disqualification from operating.
The Supreme Court traced a consistent line of its own prior decisions, Rama Narang, Navjot Singh Sidhu, Ravikant Patil, and Lily Thomas, holding that an appellate court does have the power under Section 389 CrPC, in rare and appropriate cases, to stay not just the sentence but the conviction itself, provided it is specifically asked to and is made aware of the disqualification consequences. Once a conviction itself (not merely the sentence) is validly stayed, the disqualification under Section 8 of the RP Act simply does not operate during that stay, because the disqualification is a direct legal consequence of the conviction. Finding this legal position already settled and that no separate relief was warranted regarding notification procedures (since the Election Commission had already issued adequate instructions in 2015), the Court dismissed the writ petition, with no order as to costs.
A legislator's seat does not automatically remain vacant forever once a conviction occurs: if a higher court specifically stays the conviction itself (not just the sentence), the resulting disqualification is also put on hold for as long as that stay lasts, because disqualification under election law is a direct legal consequence that depends on the conviction remaining in force.
