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.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1073
In circumstantial-evidence cases, forensic and DNA evidence must actually corroborate the alleged crime: a conviction cannot survive where the most crucial scientific evidence, on its own terms, points away from rather than toward the prosecution's theory.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1074
A conviction based purely on circumstantial evidence requires every link in the chain, timeline, witness credibility, forensic matches, and motive, to be proven beyond reasonable doubt; gaps or suppressed evidence at any link entitle the accused to the benefit of the doubt, even in a serious case like a double murder.
Criminal Miscellaneous Case · 2026:DHC:8505
Courts will not quash a criminal case merely because the accused has a plausible alibi-type defence; unless that defence is conclusive and undisputed, the matter must be tested through the ordinary trial process.
Criminal Miscellaneous Case · 2026:DHC:8547
A private compromise between victim and accused cannot by itself secure quashing of a case involving serious, heinous allegations like attempted murder with a weapon: such matters must proceed to trial regardless of settlement.
First Appeal from Order · 2026:DHC:8563
Railway Claims Tribunals cannot reject a bona fide passenger's death claim based on speculative inferences when there is no direct evidence of an alternative cause of death; the compensation scheme under the Railways Act is to be interpreted generously in favour of victims' families.
Criminal Miscellaneous Case · 2026:DHC:8559
In matrimonial offences, courts can and do quash criminal proceedings once a genuine compromise is verified directly with the complainant, sparing both parties a prolonged and pointless trial.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8541
A co-accused's bail does not automatically extend to another accused where their actual roles in the offence differ materially; delay caused by one's own defence counsel cannot later be used as a ground for bail.
Execution Petition · 2026:DHC:8567
An arbitral award must be adequately stamped before a court can enforce it; courts give only a limited window to cure such defects, after which the award becomes legally unusable until the deficiency is fixed.
Arbitration Petition · 2026:DHC:8555
A genuine settlement reached through mediation renders a pending arbitration-related court petition moot, allowing parties to close out litigation quickly once they resolve their dispute privately.
7878 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.
Land in villages Dhana, Kasan, Bas Huria, Bas Khusla and Bas Lambi was acquired in 2005-06 for Phase-VI (Transport Hub) of the Industrial Model Township, Manesar, Gurgaon. Over the years, different Reference Courts had awarded inconsistent compensation for essentially the same acquisition, ranging from about Rs. 46 lakhs to Rs. 68 lakhs per acre for different villages without clear justification for the differences. The Punjab & Haryana High Court, relying on a sale deed used in a related case for a neighbouring acquisition, fixed a uniform rate of Rs. 43.61 lakhs per acre for all the villages. The landholders appealed, seeking a higher rate.
The Supreme Court rejected the landholders' argument based on a post-acquisition sale deed (which it found rightly excluded because it bundled industrial structures with land) and their claim for a 12% cumulative annual increase. However, it found two factors distinguishing this acquisition from the related case the High Court had relied on: the land here was closer to an under-construction expressway, and this acquisition occurred about a year later than the comparable one, which should logically carry some value appreciation that the High Court had not accounted for. Balancing this against the fact that the base valuation it was building on was itself already on the higher side, the Court granted the landholders a flat 8% increase over the High Court's rate, enhancing compensation to Rs. 47,10,500 per acre plus statutory benefits.
Even where a court's base valuation method is broadly sound, specific distinguishing factors, such as proximity to new infrastructure or a time gap between notifications, can still justify a calibrated enhancement in land acquisition compensation, rather than either accepting or rejecting a claim wholesale.
