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.
The appellant, a former employee of the corporate debtor (a hotel company) who retired in 2013, claimed about Rs.1.87 crore in unpaid salary arrears dating back to 1998, pointing to several written acknowledgments of this liability by the company, the latest being a 2014 letter from its then Managing Director admitting about Rs.1.06 crore was due. He filed an application under Section 9 of the IBC as an operational creditor; the NCLT admitted it, accepting that the 2014 acknowledgment kept the claim within limitation and rejecting the company's reliance on a "payment voucher" and a later-filed civil suit as a red herring. The NCLAT, however, reversed this, holding the 18-year delay in raising the claim was unexplained and that a genuine dispute existed, so the Section 9 application was not maintainable.
The Supreme Court held that a written acknowledgment of liability (here, the Managing Director's 2014 letter spelling out the exact arrears) resets the limitation clock under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, so the claim for at least three years' salary prior to that acknowledgment was well within time and payable; the Court found the Employees' Provident Fund letter relied on by the NCLAT was irrelevant "red-herring" evidence unconnected to the arrears claim, and concluded there was a clear acknowledgment of liability and hence no genuine "dispute" barring admission. It therefore set aside the NCLAT's judgment, restored the NCLT's order admitting the Section 9 application, and allowed the main appeal; in the same judgment, it separately rejected permission to file three other connected civil appeals (Diary Nos.34841, 34836 and 34839 of 2018), which were distinct matters not otherwise addressed on merits.
A clear, written acknowledgment of a debt, even one made years after it first fell due, can revive the limitation period and make an insolvency claim maintainable, so companies cannot escape genuine, acknowledged dues to employees or creditors merely by pointing to the original debt's age or raising unrelated technical objections.
