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 moreRamji Prasad Jaiswal and two others were tried by a CBI Special Court in Patna in a case (Special Case No. 52/1983) relating to alleged offences of cheating, forgery and corruption under Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120B IPC read with the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, arising from conduct dating back to September-December 1982. In 2006 they were convicted and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment, and the Patna High Court dismissed their appeal in 2011. They challenged their conviction before the Supreme Court, arguing that the trial court had committed a serious procedural lapse in how it examined them under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (the stage where an accused is questioned about the evidence against them).
The Supreme Court found that the questions put to the appellants under Section 313 CrPC were asked in a "most mechanical manner" and did not reflect the specific incriminating evidence actually on record against them, in breach of both Section 313 CrPC and the principle of audi alteram partem (the right to be heard). Since the trial court had nonetheless relied on that evidence to convict them, the Court held this was a serious, though curable, irregularity, but declined to send the case back for a retrial given that roughly 19 years had already passed since the trial concluded, reasoning that a fresh trial at this distance in time would cause more injustice than it would cure. It therefore set aside both the trial court's conviction and the High Court's affirming judgment, gave the appellants the benefit of the doubt, and allowed the appeal, cancelling their bail bonds since they were being released from further proceedings.
A fair trial is not just about the final verdict but about following the required procedural safeguards along the way: an accused must be properly confronted with the specific evidence held against them; when courts fail to do this and too much time has passed for a fair retrial to be practical, the conviction itself can be set aside rather than the case being restarted.
