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 moreThe appellant was convicted by the trial court and the Punjab and Haryana High Court for murdering his first wife, who was found dead with ligature marks on her neck. The prosecution's case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence, including a Zero FIR lodged by the deceased's brother naming the appellant, and the testimony of the deceased's sister who lived nearby and was described as having seen the incident. However, both these key witnesses turned hostile at trial: the brother testified he had signed a blank paper and that his sister actually died of illness, and the sister likewise stated there was no dispute between the couple and that the death was due to illness.
The Supreme Court found that with both principal prosecution witnesses turning hostile and disowning their earlier statements, the chain of circumstantial evidence collapsed. It also faulted the lower courts for ignoring the appellant's statement under Section 313 CrPC that his wife had died a natural death from chronic tuberculosis, noting the prosecution failed to get the post-mortem doctor re-examined or produce independent medical evidence to rebut this explanation. Since the evidence permitted two equally plausible conclusions, the Court held the benefit of doubt had to go to the appellant, set aside the High Court's judgment, and ordered his immediate release after over ten years in custody.
A criminal conviction cannot stand on circumstantial evidence where the key witnesses turn hostile and an innocent explanation offered by the accused is never seriously investigated or rebutted by the prosecution. Courts must give the accused the benefit of doubt when the evidence reasonably supports two competing conclusions.
