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 moreNeetu Harsh applied as a General Category candidate for the post of Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate in the Rajasthan Judicial Service Examination, 2016, without applying under or submitting a disability certificate for the category reserved for differently-abled persons at the time of application. After not being selected, she later claimed entitlement to a reserved vacancy for disabled candidates, and the Rajasthan High Court directed the recruiting authorities to consider her candidature under that reserved category; this was challenged before the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's direction, holding that a candidate who opts for the General Category at the time of application cannot later change that choice and claim a reserved-category benefit, especially where the required disability certificate was not produced with the application. It also noted inherent contradictions in her claim (the original disability certificate described a locomotor disability, while she later claimed visual impairment), observing that such a disputed medical/eligibility question could not simply be resolved by a court mandamus, and that disturbing an already-made appointment under the general process would be unjustified at that stage.
Candidates seeking a reservation benefit (such as for disability) must claim that category and submit supporting proof at the time of application itself: a reserved-category claim cannot ordinarily be asserted for the first time after the selection process is already underway or completed.
