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 moreIn the lead case, SC/ST/OBC candidates who had availed age or physical-measurement relaxations to apply for Railway Protection Force ancillary posts scored higher than the unreserved-category cutoff and sought appointment against unreserved vacancies; the High Court ordered their appointment. In the connected case, a general-category candidate for a CISF post challenged the selection of a Scheduled Tribe candidate who had used a relaxed height standard but scored above the general cutoff, and the High Court rejected his challenge.
The Supreme Court held that Standing Order No. 85, which governed the RPF recruitment, expressly barred candidates who had availed any relaxation (including in age or physical measurements) from migrating to unreserved posts, overriding the general migration rule in the earlier Standing Order No. 78; it therefore set aside the High Court's order in that case. In the CISF case, by contrast, the Court found the relevant office memorandum barred migration only for relaxations like age, experience, or extended zones of consideration (not for relaxed physical standards such as height, which vary naturally by gender and background) and so upheld the High Court's dismissal of that challenge.
Whether a reserved candidate who benefited from a relaxation can still be counted in the unreserved merit list depends entirely on the specific recruitment rules governing that post; a rule with an explicit bar on migration after any relaxation controls the outcome even if the candidate scored above the general cutoff.
