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 moreTwo FIRs arose from a family dispute in Maharashtra in November 2023: the first alleged the appellants assaulted a woman's family, including her father Prabhakar; the second, filed a day later, accused Prabhakar of sexually assaulting the original complainant over time and interfering with her marriage prospects. The Bombay High Court refused to quash either FIR, holding that a serious offence like rape (Section 376 IPC) could not be quashed merely because of a settlement. By the time the matter reached the Supreme Court, the complainant in the second FIR had filed an affidavit saying she had settled the dispute, received Rs. 5 lakh, married someone else, and no longer wished to pursue the case.
The Supreme Court acknowledged that quashing a serious, non-compoundable offence like rape purely on the basis of a private settlement is ordinarily discouraged. However, it found this case unusual: the second FIR followed immediately after an earlier FIR filed by the appellants' side, suggesting it may have been a reactionary counter-complaint; and the complainant's decision to withdraw support was clear, consistent, and made after she had moved on with her life through marriage. Weighing these specific facts, the Court held that continuing the prosecution would serve no meaningful purpose, would only cause further distress, and would amount to an abuse of the legal process. It quashed both FIRs and all related proceedings.
While courts are normally very reluctant to quash serious criminal cases like rape purely because of a compromise between the parties, they will look closely at the surrounding circumstances (such as whether a complaint may have been a retaliatory move in a family feud, and whether the complainant's decision to withdraw is genuine and unambiguous) before deciding whether continuing the case would serve any real purpose.
