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 Punjab Public Service Commission advertised posts including one for Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) reserved for "Scheduled Caste Sports" candidates. After new rules mandating 33% reservation for women came into force, the State withdrew the original advertisement and issued a fresh one in which the sole DSP post in that category was reserved for "SC Sports (Women)". Prabhjot Kaur, the only woman who qualified in that category, expected to be appointed DSP, but a male candidate (K. Munivenkatappa, referred to as the private respondent) who topped the same category among men challenged the women's-only reservation, relying on a roster system notified after the application deadline, and the Punjab and Haryana High Court's Division Bench sent the matter back for fresh consideration.
The Supreme Court held that the terms of the operative advertisement (issued 11.12.2020) governed the recruitment, and a roster system notified afterward (in January 2021) could not retroactively change reservation criteria after applications had closed and the process was underway. Relying on the principle that "rules of the game" cannot be changed once a recruitment process starts, as reaffirmed by a Constitution Bench in Tej Prakash Pathak v. High Court of Rajasthan (2025). The Court held that the DSP post remained validly reserved for "SC Sports (Women)" and Prabhjot Kaur, being the only qualified woman in that category, was entitled to the appointment. The Division Bench's order remanding the matter was set aside and the Single Judge's order in the appellant's favour was restored.
Once a government recruitment advertisement fixes the eligibility and reservation criteria and the process of applying begins, those terms cannot be changed midway to the disadvantage of candidates who applied under the original terms: a principle citizens can rely on if a public recruitment process is altered after they've already applied.
