Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

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.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal 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 ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

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.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

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.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

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.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

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.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

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.

Criminal LawSupreme Court of India

Mohd. Firoz vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Criminal AppealDecided 19 Apr 2022
Criminal Appeal No. 612 of 2019

Background

A 4-year-old girl was lured away from her family's courtyard by the appellant, who had come to the house asking for shelter for the night. She was found unconscious and badly injured the next morning and died days later; medical evidence confirmed she had been raped, and the cause of death was smothering. The appellant was convicted by the trial court and sentenced to death; a co-accused was convicted of a lesser role but was acquitted by the High Court. The High Court confirmed the death sentence for the appellant, who then appealed to the Supreme Court (originally filed by his mother, later continued by him after her death).

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction based on strong circumstantial evidence: the child was last seen with the appellant shortly before she was found injured, DNA from hair at the scene matched the appellant, and he had fled to his native state before being arrested. However, applying the Constitution Bench's "rarest of rare" test for the death penalty, the Court held this case, while horrific, did not meet that exacting standard, noting other similar cases where death sentences had been commuted. It commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment for murder, and separately imposed 20 years' rigorous imprisonment (rather than imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life) for the aggravated sexual offence, balancing retribution with the possibility of reform.

Lesson Learnt

Even in the most horrific crimes against children, the death penalty can only be imposed after specifically finding the case falls in the "rarest of rare" category; courts must weigh mitigating factors and the possibility of reform before choosing between death and long-term imprisonment.

Mohd. Firoz vs State of Madhya Pradesh – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware