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 moreThe complainant (appellant, identified only as "Ms. X" to protect her identity) accused a film producer of raping her on multiple occasions in Mumbai and Hyderabad between July 2015 and January 2016, after the two became acquainted through a mutual friend. She filed her police complaint in January 2017, and a charge-sheet was filed in March 2018 under Sections 376, 342, 493, 506 and 354(C) of the Penal Code. The accused's earlier anticipatory bail had been cancelled for failing to disclose a pending prosecution against him in an unrelated case, but the High Court subsequently granted him regular bail, which the complainant challenged before the Supreme Court.
The Court reiterated settled principles that cancelling bail already granted requires much stronger, "cogent and overwhelming" circumstances than are needed to decide whether to grant bail in the first place. It found that the accused's roughly six months of continued contact with the complainant (including her own visits to him), and the roughly one-year gap before she filed her complaint, were factors the High Court had legitimately weighed. A second FIR the complainant filed shortly after the bail order, alleging she was being harassed, was found not to be a sufficiently cogent "supervening circumstance" to justify cancelling the bail. The Court declined to go deeply into the merits of the rape allegations at this stage to avoid influencing the trial, upheld the High Court's exercise of discretion, and increased the personal bond amount from Rs. 50,000 to Rs. 10 lakh as a condition of continued bail.
Courts apply a stricter test to cancel bail once granted than to decide whether to grant it in the first place: a complainant seeking cancellation must point to a genuinely cogent new development, not just a vague or convenient-seeming fresh complaint, to get bail revoked.
