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 appellant-wife and respondent-husband married in 2002 and had two children. Both parties alleged mistreatment by the other: the wife alleged dowry-related cruelty and being driven out of the matrimonial home, while the husband alleged persistent abusive conduct and irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. The Family Court at Bokaro granted the husband a divorce in 2022 on grounds of cruelty and desertion under Sections 13(1)(ia) and 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, awarding the wife a lump-sum maintenance of Rs. 6,00,000. The Jharkhand High Court dismissed the wife's appeal and affirmed the divorce, relying partly on an earlier undertaking she had given to maintain cordial relations and on the couple's son's testimony supporting the cruelty allegations.
The Supreme Court held that the findings of cruelty and desertion by both the Family Court and the High Court were concurrent findings of fact based on evidence, and since no perversity was shown in that appreciation, it declined to disturb them. The Court noted that the parties had been separated since 2018 (with the marriage itself dating to 2002), which reinforced that the matrimonial bond had broken down irretrievably with no prospect of reconciliation, further supported by the strained relationship between the appellant and her children. On the separate question of financial support, however, the Court found the earlier lump-sum award of Rs. 6,00,000 insufficient and, in the interest of complete justice, modified it to a recurring monthly maintenance of Rs. 10,000 payable from the date of the order.
The Supreme Court generally will not re-appreciate concurrent factual findings of cruelty/desertion made by lower courts unless perversity is shown, but it retains flexibility to revisit and improve the adequacy of maintenance/financial relief even while upholding the divorce itself, showing that divorce and maintenance are treated as distinct issues that can be decided differently.
