Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

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.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal 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 ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

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.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

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.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

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.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

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.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

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.

Criminal LawSupreme Court of India

Qamar Ghani Usmani vs. The State of Gujarat

Criminal Appeal · 2023 INSC 337Decided 10 Apr 2023
Criminal Appeal Nos. 1045-1046 of 2023
M.R. Shah · C.T. Ravikumar

Background

The appellant was arrested on 29.01.2022, giving investigators 90 days (until 29.04.2022) to file a chargesheet. On 22.04.2022 the trial court granted a 30-day extension without the accused being present, though he was informed the next day. The accused applied for default bail on 10.05.2022, without mentioning the extension, and a second extension was later granted on 22.05.2022 with the accused present; the chargesheet was ultimately filed within the extended period. Both the trial court and the Gujarat High Court refused default bail, leading to this appeal.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court held that, ordinarily, an accused should be given notice or kept present when the court considers extending the investigation period, so that the accused knows an extension is being sought. However, on the specific facts: the accused knew of the first extension the very next day, never challenged either extension, and was present for the second one, with the chargesheet filed within the extended time. The Court held he was not entitled to default bail. The appeals were dismissed, though the accused was left free to seek regular bail on merits.

Lesson Learnt

A technical lapse in following procedure (like not having the accused present for an extension order) will not automatically entitle an accused to default bail if the accused knew about the extension, failed to challenge it promptly, and the chargesheet was ultimately filed within the (extended) statutory period.

Qamar Ghani Usmani vs. The State of Gujarat – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware