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.
Transfer Petition (Criminal) · 2026 INSC 1060
Where a marriage has irretrievably broken down and the parties reach a genuine, voluntary settlement, including on alimony, the Supreme Court can use its Article 142 powers to grant a mutual-consent divorce and close out all related litigation in one stroke, without requiring the usual statutory waiting period.
Writ Petition (Civil) · 2026 INSC 1061
In long-running, complex litigation involving apportioned government liabilities across states, the Supreme Court can use a mechanism like a retired-judge committee plus periodic compliance affidavits to bring genuine finality, including firm timelines, transparency obligations, and interest for delayed payment, rather than leaving matters open-ended.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1062
In an "as is where is" liquidation auction, a bidder who voluntarily accepts the auction terms cannot later resile from a forfeiture clause by citing regulatory caps or after-the-fact excuses for non-payment: courts will enforce the auction notice's own conditions.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8338-DB
Once someone is released from custody because the police failed to properly communicate the grounds of arrest, the police cannot simply re-arrest them by adding new charges: a specific, court-supervised procedure with senior-officer accountability must be followed, or the re-arrest itself becomes illegal.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8308
In economic-offence cases, bail can still be granted where the method used to quantify the alleged financial evasion is not adequately justified, and where the apprehension of re-offending is speculative rather than evidence-based.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8323
A parole claim must be backed by a genuine, verifiable application to the competent jail authority: courts will scrutinise irregularities like an incomplete address, an unexplained thumb mark, or reliance on a mere friend's affidavit rather than close family.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8337
Courts can grant short, strictly time-bound interim bail purely on humanitarian/compassionate grounds (such as caring for a seriously ill family member), even while a case remains pending trial and an earlier bail plea has failed.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8312
Courts will not repeatedly re-examine a bail plea already rejected on merits unless the applicant can point to a genuine change in circumstances since the earlier order.
First Appeal from Order · 2026:DHC:8334
Under the no-fault compensation scheme for railway accidents, a valid ticket-holder injured while attempting to board a train, even carelessly, is generally entitled to compensation unless the railway can show a deliberate, conscious exposure to danger, not mere negligence.
6171 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 moreLegal Case Shots is built to help you quickly identify and understand relevant precedent. For citation in pleadings or filings, always verify against the full judgment PDF and current citation format (e.g., 2026 INSC ___).
The holding is what the court legally decided. The lesson learnt translates that into a practical takeaway: what a lawyer should factor into case strategy or client advice as a result of this precedent.
Both. Each case shows a distilled summary (case type, key holding, and lesson learnt) and links to the full judgment as a PDF for when you need the complete text for research or citation.
Yes. Use Advanced Filters to narrow results by decision date and by practice area, including Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Service & Administrative Law, Family Law, Civil Property & Inheritance, and Labour & Industrial Law.
Yes. You can filter judgments by the judge or bench that decided the case, which is useful for tracking how a particular judge has reasoned on similar issues across multiple rulings.
Legal Case Shots is a searchable database of Supreme Court of India judgments, each broken down into the case type, the court's key holding, and a practical lesson learnt, with the full judgment available as a PDF for citation or deeper reading.
The petitioner-husband and respondent No. 1-wife married in 2019 and had a son in 2023, but began living separately from June 2025. The wife and child filed a maintenance petition under Section 125 CrPC before the Family Court, claiming monthly expenses of Rs. 1,50,000/- and stating the husband earned around Rs. 32-35 lakhs a year. The Family Court, noting the husband had not produced his ITRs or salary slips despite being asked to, estimated his income at roughly Rs. 2 lakhs a month (based on bank credits from his employer) and granted interim maintenance of Rs. 75,000/- per month (Rs. 37,500/- each) to the wife and son, after allowing him a Rs. 50,000/- deduction for supporting his own parents. The husband challenged this order before the High Court.
The husband argued his salary slips and ITR actually showed a lower income (around Rs. 1.68-1.76 lakhs net monthly, Rs. 17.81 lakhs annually) and that the Family Court's Rs. 2 lakh estimate, plus directing him to pay roughly 50% of his income, was excessive, and that the wife's earnings from private tuitions had been ignored. Justice Jalan held that a High Court's revisional jurisdiction over such orders is narrow: it does not permit re-appreciating evidence or reassessing facts unless the order suffers from a jurisdictional error or gross irregularity, citing Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander and reiterating the Supreme Court's view in Bhuwan Mohan Singh v. Meena that Section 125 CrPC exists to prevent destitution of a wife and children and secure their dignified sustenance. Since the husband had not placed his salary slips/ITRs before the Family Court at the relevant time, and neither his housing-loan liability nor the wife's tuition income was backed by any documents on record, the Family Court's estimate was a reasonable assessment on the material then available, and Rs. 75,000/- per month for a wife and minor child was not excessive or disproportionate. The petition was accordingly dismissed, without prejudice to either side's right to prove their actual income/liabilities later before the Family Court itself.
Interim maintenance orders are provisional and based only on what each side actually places on record at that stage: a spouse who withholds salary slips, ITRs, or proof of other liabilities cannot later expect the High Court to second-guess the Family Court's reasonable estimate, since revisional courts intervene only for clear jurisdictional errors, not to reweigh evidence.
