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 moreMala Devi's husband, Om Prakash Maharaj, worked for the Eastern Indian Railways as a "Summer Waterman" and later a substitute Guard/Shuntman, dying in a fatal work accident in 1996 after 9 years, 8 months and 26 days of continuous service: just short of the 10-year threshold the Railways and Central Administrative Tribunal treated as necessary for family pension, since his post had never been formally "regularized." Her claim for family pension was rejected by the Tribunal and then by the Patna High Court, both relying on the reasoning that family pension is not payable where the deceased employee's service was not regularized.
The Supreme Court held that Rule 18(3) read with Rule 75(2)(a) of the Railway Service (Pension) Rules, 1993 extends family pension and death gratuity to the families of temporary railway servants who die in harness after just one year of continuous service, with no requirement that the post be regularized, and no distinction drawn between temporary and regularized posts. The Court found the deceased had already passed the Screening Committee stage for regularization and had served continuously (as a genuine substitute, not a mere casual labourer) until his death, so denying pension for falling short of 10 years by about three months was against the rules' purpose of supporting long-serving employees' families. The appeal was allowed, both lower orders were set aside, and the Railways were directed to pay family pension with arrears within four months; the Court also invoked its special power under Article 142 of the Constitution to additionally award Rs. 5 lakh ex-gratia given the widow's decade-long litigation.
For railway (and similarly-structured government) employees who die while in continuous service, family pension eligibility under the applicable pension rules can turn on the length of continuous service and completion of screening, not necessarily on formal "regularization" of the post, so dependents denied pension solely on regularization grounds should check whether the specific rules actually require it.
