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 appellant, a police officer accused in the 2004 "fake encounter" killing of Ishrat Jahan, was arrested on 4 April 2013. He claimed he was entitled to mandatory "default bail" under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. because, in his submission, the CBI had not filed a valid, complete police report (chargesheet) within the mandatory 90-day investigation period, and because there was a gap in his judicial remand orders between 5 and 8 July 2013. The Gujarat High Court had rejected his default bail plea, holding the chargesheet was validly filed within time and that cognizance had been taken by the Magistrate.
The Supreme Court held that the chargesheet, filed on 3 July 2013 (the 90th day), contained all the particulars required under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., and that the Magistrate had taken cognizance of the offence on that same date: an order the appellant never challenged. It held that the requirement to annex supporting documents and witness statements under Section 173(5) is directory, not mandatory, relying on prior Supreme Court precedent (CBI v. R.S. Pai), so any delay in filing those accompanying documents did not invalidate the chargesheet itself or revive the right to default bail. Finding no merit in any of the appellant's contentions, the Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the High Court's refusal of default bail.
The 90/60-day "default bail" clock under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. is tied to the timely filing of the core police report with the statutorily required particulars (and the Magistrate taking cognizance on it): a delay in filing supporting documents or witness statements alongside that report does not, by itself, revive an accused's right to default bail.
