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.
Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. (PVVNL), a UP electricity distribution company, supplied power to Raman Ispat Pvt. Ltd. under an agreement that made unpaid dues "a charge" on the company's assets. When Raman Ispat defaulted, PVVNL attached its properties through the local District Magistrate and Tehsildar. Raman Ispat later went into insolvency and then liquidation under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The liquidator asked the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) to release the attached property so it could be sold and the proceeds distributed under the IBC's own priority scheme; the NCLT and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) agreed, and PVVNL appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing the Electricity Act's special recovery powers should override the IBC.
The Supreme Court held that Section 238 of the IBC, which gives the IBC overriding effect over other laws, prevails over the non-obstante (overriding) clauses in Sections 173 and 174 of the Electricity Act, 2003, because the IBC is the later, comprehensive law specifically governing insolvency and liquidation. The Court distinguished its earlier ruling in State Tax Officer v. Rainbow Papers, holding that judgment did not consider the IBC's "waterfall mechanism" under Section 53, which places dues owed to the Government below those owed to secured and even unsecured creditors, and that Rainbow Papers should be confined to its own facts. The Court further held that PVVNL, despite having government ownership, is a distinct corporate entity supplying electricity in a now-liberalized sector, so its dues are not "government dues" entitled to top priority; it ranks instead as an operational/secured creditor per the ordinary IBC scheme. The appeal was dismissed, but the liquidator was directed to formally decide PVVNL's claim within ten weeks.
Once a company enters liquidation under the IBC, the Code's own priority list for paying off creditors generally overrides other laws' special recovery powers (like an electricity board's right to attach property for unpaid bills): a statutory corporation supplying a utility service is treated as an ordinary creditor in that queue, not as "the government" jumping to the front.
