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 moreIn January 2004, police arrested Puran Mal and found five forged Rs.100 notes on him. He named Mehboob Ali and Firoz as the people who had given them to him. Those two then told police that they had got the fake notes from Anju Ali in Delhi and identified him there. The chain continued through Majhar and then Liyakat Ali, from whom police recovered forged notes and equipment for making them. The trial court and the Rajasthan High Court convicted the appellants under Sections 489B and 489C read with Section 120B of the IPC.
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals and upheld the convictions. The appellants argued that their confessions made in police custody were inadmissible because no forged notes were recovered from them. The Court held that Section 27 of the Evidence Act allows the part of such a statement that leads to a fact the police did not already know. Here, the statements led police to Anju Ali and to his involvement in forged notes, which was not known to them before. That discovery lifted the bar on custodial confessions, and the Court found the overall chain of facts showed the accused acted together in a conspiracy.
A statement made to the police while in custody usually cannot be used against the accused. But if that statement leads police to a new fact, such as a hidden person or place they did not know about, the part of the statement that produced that fact can be used as evidence.
