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 moreNilesh Baburao Gitte was convicted of matricide (the murder of his own mother, Sunanda (also known as Nanda Gitte)) under Section 302 IPC by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ambajogai, and sentenced to life imprisonment along with a co-accused, Balasaheb Gangadhar Gitte (who was later acquitted by the High Court). The Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) dismissed Nilesh's appeal and confirmed his conviction, which he then challenged before the Supreme Court. The case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence, including alleged recoveries and a claimed motive.
The Supreme Court found serious gaps in the prosecution's case: the medical evidence and post-mortem report did not conclusively establish homicide, the alleged recoveries did not inspire confidence as to their genuineness, and the alleged motive was never actually established. The Court noted that the acquittal of the co-accused Balasaheb, and the rejection of related recovery evidence in his case, reinforced doubts about the prosecution's version. Applying the well-established caution required in cases built on circumstantial evidence (citing the classic warning against courts "straining" facts to fit a theory), the Court held that the tests from Sharad Birdhichand Sarda for convicting on circumstantial evidence were not satisfied, allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction, and acquitted Nilesh Baburao Gitte of all charges, discharging his bail bonds.
A conviction based purely on circumstantial evidence must satisfy a strict chain-of-proof test with no reasonable alternative explanation. Courts must guard against the natural temptation to "connect the dots" into a plausible-sounding theory when the underlying medical, motive, and recovery evidence does not actually hold up.
