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.
Transfer Petition (Criminal) · 2026 INSC 1060
Where a marriage has irretrievably broken down and the parties reach a genuine, voluntary settlement, including on alimony, the Supreme Court can use its Article 142 powers to grant a mutual-consent divorce and close out all related litigation in one stroke, without requiring the usual statutory waiting period.
Writ Petition (Civil) · 2026 INSC 1061
In long-running, complex litigation involving apportioned government liabilities across states, the Supreme Court can use a mechanism like a retired-judge committee plus periodic compliance affidavits to bring genuine finality, including firm timelines, transparency obligations, and interest for delayed payment, rather than leaving matters open-ended.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1062
In an "as is where is" liquidation auction, a bidder who voluntarily accepts the auction terms cannot later resile from a forfeiture clause by citing regulatory caps or after-the-fact excuses for non-payment: courts will enforce the auction notice's own conditions.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8338-DB
Once someone is released from custody because the police failed to properly communicate the grounds of arrest, the police cannot simply re-arrest them by adding new charges: a specific, court-supervised procedure with senior-officer accountability must be followed, or the re-arrest itself becomes illegal.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8308
In economic-offence cases, bail can still be granted where the method used to quantify the alleged financial evasion is not adequately justified, and where the apprehension of re-offending is speculative rather than evidence-based.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8323
A parole claim must be backed by a genuine, verifiable application to the competent jail authority: courts will scrutinise irregularities like an incomplete address, an unexplained thumb mark, or reliance on a mere friend's affidavit rather than close family.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8337
Courts can grant short, strictly time-bound interim bail purely on humanitarian/compassionate grounds (such as caring for a seriously ill family member), even while a case remains pending trial and an earlier bail plea has failed.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8312
Courts will not repeatedly re-examine a bail plea already rejected on merits unless the applicant can point to a genuine change in circumstances since the earlier order.
First Appeal from Order · 2026:DHC:8334
Under the no-fault compensation scheme for railway accidents, a valid ticket-holder injured while attempting to board a train, even carelessly, is generally entitled to compensation unless the railway can show a deliberate, conscious exposure to danger, not mere negligence.
6171 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.
In 2002, a quarrel broke out at a wine shop after a customer, Dharmalingam, demanded liquor on credit and smashed the shop's showcase. During the altercation, the appellant Periyasamy (A-1) allegedly stabbed several people with a knife handed to him by co-accused R. Manoharan (A-2), resulting in the deaths of two persons and injuries to others. Both accused were convicted by the Trial Court (for murder, abetment of murder, and attempt to murder) and the Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) upheld their convictions, leading to this appeal before the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court undertook a detailed re-examination of the three prosecution eyewitnesses' testimony and found serious problems: the two injured witnesses were closely related to the deceased or otherwise "interested" in the outcome, no independent witnesses were examined despite the crime occurring in a crowded, well-lit public area with about 50 people present, there were unexplained delays in recording witness statements and filing the FIR, and there were contradictions and interpolations in the record. The Court also flagged major investigative lapses, including the investigating officer's inability to explain how a suspect was traced, the use of an unexamined private vehicle for investigation, and doctors who issued wound certificates never being examined at trial. Applying the well-established distinction between "interested" and merely "related" witnesses, and citing precedent on the poor standards of police investigation in India, the Court held that the cumulative effect of these lapses meant the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. It set aside the convictions of both accused and ordered their release.
A criminal conviction cannot rest on witnesses who have a personal stake in the outcome when independent witnesses were readily available but never called, nor can it survive unexplained delays and gaps in the police investigation. Courts must scrutinise such evidence carefully rather than accept it at face value, since the burden remains on the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
