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 appellants were convicted by a Special POCSO Court in Chhattisgarh for kidnapping and aggravated penetrative sexual assault of a minor, under Sections 363, 366 and 342 of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, and sentenced to life imprisonment meaning imprisonment for the remainder of their natural lives. The High Court of Chhattisgarh affirmed this conviction and sentence. The appellants challenged both the conviction and, alternatively, sought a reduction of the sentence.
The Supreme Court declined to interfere with the conviction itself, finding no merit in that challenge. However, it noted that Section 6 of the POCSO Act prescribes a minimum sentence of twenty years, extendable up to life imprisonment for the remainder of natural life, and that the Trial Court had imposed the harsher end of that range without considering mitigating factors. Given that the appellants were in their early twenties at the time of the offence and had already served over five years, the Court held the interests of justice would be served by reducing the sentence to the statutory minimum of twenty years, and allowed the appeals in part on that basis.
Even where a POCSO conviction is upheld, courts retain discretion to calibrate the sentence within the statutory range rather than defaulting to the harshest possible punishment: factors like the offender's age at the time of the crime and time already served can justify reducing a sentence to the prescribed statutory minimum.
