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.
Indo Unique Flame sub-contracted coal-transport work to N.N. Global Mercantile, who furnished a bank guarantee as security. When a dispute arose under the main contract with a government power company, Indo Unique invoked N.N. Global's bank guarantee as well. N.N. Global sued in a commercial court claiming the invocation was fraudulent since no work had ever actually been done under the sub-contract, and it specifically resisted Indo Unique's request to send the dispute to arbitration, arguing the bank guarantee was a separate, unstamped document unconnected to the arbitration clause. The case eventually reached the Supreme Court on the question of whether an arbitration clause survives even if the underlying contract itself was never stamped (as required under the Stamp Act) and whether fraud allegations about a bank-guarantee invocation can be arbitrated at all.
The Court held that an arbitration agreement is a separate and independent contract from the underlying commercial agreement in which it is embedded (the "doctrine of separability"), so it survives in law even where the main contract is unstamped or insufficiently stamped, only the underlying contract becomes inadmissible in evidence until duty and penalty are paid, not the arbitration clause itself. It also held that the civil aspect of fraud (as opposed to criminal fraud going to the very existence of the arbitration agreement) is arbitrable, so the fraudulent-invocation dispute could go to arbitration; and that the High Court's writ petition route was not maintainable since a statutory appeal was available instead. The Bombay High Court's order was set aside, directions were given for impounding and stamping the underlying work order, and the parties were left to proceed to arbitration, but because this directly conflicted with an earlier judgment (Garware, affirmed by a co-ordinate bench in Vidya Drolia), the Court referred the specific legal question of whether an unstamped instrument's arbitration clause is unenforceable to a five-judge Constitution Bench for authoritative resolution.
An arbitration clause inside a contract is legally treated as a separate agreement, so a failure to pay stamp duty on the main contract does not by itself kill the right to arbitrate; and allegations that a party acted fraudulently in invoking a bank guarantee or similar commercial instrument can themselves be resolved through arbitration rather than only in court.
