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.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1073
In circumstantial-evidence cases, forensic and DNA evidence must actually corroborate the alleged crime: a conviction cannot survive where the most crucial scientific evidence, on its own terms, points away from rather than toward the prosecution's theory.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1074
A conviction based purely on circumstantial evidence requires every link in the chain, timeline, witness credibility, forensic matches, and motive, to be proven beyond reasonable doubt; gaps or suppressed evidence at any link entitle the accused to the benefit of the doubt, even in a serious case like a double murder.
Criminal Miscellaneous Case · 2026:DHC:8505
Courts will not quash a criminal case merely because the accused has a plausible alibi-type defence; unless that defence is conclusive and undisputed, the matter must be tested through the ordinary trial process.
Criminal Miscellaneous Case · 2026:DHC:8547
A private compromise between victim and accused cannot by itself secure quashing of a case involving serious, heinous allegations like attempted murder with a weapon: such matters must proceed to trial regardless of settlement.
First Appeal from Order · 2026:DHC:8563
Railway Claims Tribunals cannot reject a bona fide passenger's death claim based on speculative inferences when there is no direct evidence of an alternative cause of death; the compensation scheme under the Railways Act is to be interpreted generously in favour of victims' families.
Criminal Miscellaneous Case · 2026:DHC:8559
In matrimonial offences, courts can and do quash criminal proceedings once a genuine compromise is verified directly with the complainant, sparing both parties a prolonged and pointless trial.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8541
A co-accused's bail does not automatically extend to another accused where their actual roles in the offence differ materially; delay caused by one's own defence counsel cannot later be used as a ground for bail.
Execution Petition · 2026:DHC:8567
An arbitral award must be adequately stamped before a court can enforce it; courts give only a limited window to cure such defects, after which the award becomes legally unusable until the deficiency is fixed.
Arbitration Petition · 2026:DHC:8555
A genuine settlement reached through mediation renders a pending arbitration-related court petition moot, allowing parties to close out litigation quickly once they resolve their dispute privately.
7878 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 moreLegal 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 ___).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The Haryana Staff Selection Commission advertised nearly 2,000 posts of Physical Training Instructor (PTI) in 2006, with a clearly published selection process involving a written test and viva voce. Before the scheduled written test could be held, the Commission's Chairman unilaterally altered the mode and criteria of selection multiple times: ultimately relying on a one-page document, kept outside the official file, that was only produced after a court directed the Commission to show its selection criteria. Candidates selected under this altered process (including the appellants) were challenged by other aspirants, and the Punjab and Haryana High Court (both the Single Judge and the Division Bench on appeal) quashed the 2010 select list, finding the changes to be the Chairman's unauthorised, arbitrary handiwork rather than a genuine decision of the full multi-member Commission.
The Supreme Court agreed that a multi-member statutory body like the Commission cannot have its selection criteria altered by the Chairman acting alone, especially when the change was designed to lower (not improve) selection standards and was never properly recorded in the Commission's own files. It upheld the High Court's quashing of the 2010 selection but modified the relief: since there was nothing wrong with the original 2006 advertisement and notified criteria, the Commission was directed to complete the selection process from the stage of the written test using that original criteria, allowing all original applicants (including those already selected) to participate afresh, without requiring any fresh advertisement. The Court also protected the already-selected candidates from having to refund any salary already received, recognising their long service under an interim court order, even while confirming they would have to go through the selection again.
The head of a multi-member government selection body cannot unilaterally change recruitment criteria mid-process, doing so to dilute standards makes the selection invalid, though courts can tailor the remedy (like restarting from a fair stage) rather than wiping out years of a flawed process entirely from scratch.
