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.
Transfer Petition (Criminal) · 2026 INSC 1060
Where a marriage has irretrievably broken down and the parties reach a genuine, voluntary settlement, including on alimony, the Supreme Court can use its Article 142 powers to grant a mutual-consent divorce and close out all related litigation in one stroke, without requiring the usual statutory waiting period.
Writ Petition (Civil) · 2026 INSC 1061
In long-running, complex litigation involving apportioned government liabilities across states, the Supreme Court can use a mechanism like a retired-judge committee plus periodic compliance affidavits to bring genuine finality, including firm timelines, transparency obligations, and interest for delayed payment, rather than leaving matters open-ended.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1062
In an "as is where is" liquidation auction, a bidder who voluntarily accepts the auction terms cannot later resile from a forfeiture clause by citing regulatory caps or after-the-fact excuses for non-payment: courts will enforce the auction notice's own conditions.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8338-DB
Once someone is released from custody because the police failed to properly communicate the grounds of arrest, the police cannot simply re-arrest them by adding new charges: a specific, court-supervised procedure with senior-officer accountability must be followed, or the re-arrest itself becomes illegal.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8308
In economic-offence cases, bail can still be granted where the method used to quantify the alleged financial evasion is not adequately justified, and where the apprehension of re-offending is speculative rather than evidence-based.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8323
A parole claim must be backed by a genuine, verifiable application to the competent jail authority: courts will scrutinise irregularities like an incomplete address, an unexplained thumb mark, or reliance on a mere friend's affidavit rather than close family.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8337
Courts can grant short, strictly time-bound interim bail purely on humanitarian/compassionate grounds (such as caring for a seriously ill family member), even while a case remains pending trial and an earlier bail plea has failed.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8312
Courts will not repeatedly re-examine a bail plea already rejected on merits unless the applicant can point to a genuine change in circumstances since the earlier order.
First Appeal from Order · 2026:DHC:8334
Under the no-fault compensation scheme for railway accidents, a valid ticket-holder injured while attempting to board a train, even carelessly, is generally entitled to compensation unless the railway can show a deliberate, conscious exposure to danger, not mere negligence.
6171 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.
This judgment jointly disposed of a batch of connected appeals arising from years of litigation over the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission's (TNPSC) 2018 recruitment for 113 Motor Vehicle Inspector-Grade II posts. Multiple rounds of writ petitions before the Madras High Court had repeatedly set aside select lists and ordered re-verification of candidates' mandatory one-year vehicle-workshop experience, with the Division Bench ultimately directing the entire recruitment process be redone after the government decided whether to grant retrospective renewal to unapproved workshops. Various sets of candidates appealed to the Supreme Court: some seeking inclusion after their workshop experience was retrospectively validated, others resisting having to go through the process again after already being provisionally selected, and the TNPSC itself challenging a direction to disclose exam marks even to candidates who did not qualify.
For the first group of appellants (whose names had appeared in an earlier list of 33 candidates but were later excluded), the Court found that a subsequent government re-verification report confirmed each of them now had more than one year of qualifying workshop experience once retrospective workshop approvals were factored in, so it directed their names be included in the process going forward for consideration alongside all similarly-placed candidates, with the TNPSC directed to complete the long-pending exercise (now over six years old) at the earliest. For the second group (candidates already on the 226-candidate list who objected to redoing the process), and for other connected matters, the Court found no error in the High Court's approach requiring the full process to be completed afresh in accordance with the Division Bench's directions. On the TNPSC's own appeal, the Court upheld the direction requiring disclosure of exam marks even to candidates outside the zone of consideration (though not their answer sheets), holding this was justified in the public interest given the recruitment process had been mired in litigation for over five years, and also upheld that a certificate from the Head of an educational Institution certifying Tamil-medium education was sufficient proof for claiming the "Persons Studied in Tamil Medium" quota benefit, without needing separate verification from the Directorate of Technical Education.
In long-running public recruitment disputes, courts will generally require the recruiting authority to bring the process to a fair and final conclusion for all affected candidates rather than repeatedly reopening or truncating it, and transparency measures, such as disclosing test marks even to unsuccessful candidates, can be ordered in the public interest where a selection process has dragged on for years, to give affected candidates closure and confidence in the process's fairness.
