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 Supreme Court had earlier, on 16 December 2015, used its special constitutional powers (Article 142) to appoint retired Justice Virendra Singh as the Lokayukta of Uttar Pradesh after the State failed for years to fill the post despite repeated court directions. The petitioner, a practising advocate, filed this writ petition alleging that the State had misled the Court into making that appointment, pointing to a letter from the Allahabad High Court's Chief Justice (written the same day) objecting to Justice Virendra Singh's name. Connected contempt petitions had also been filed over the State's prolonged failure to appoint a Lokayukta at all.
The Court examined correspondence between the UP Chief Justice, the Chief Minister, and the Leader of the Opposition about which names had actually been agreed upon for the Lokayukta post, and found the factual picture "hazy, unclear and uncertain": it was not clear the three constitutional functionaries had truly agreed on Justice Virendra Singh's name. Because the Chief Justice of the High Court had in fact raised reservations about that name (a letter the Supreme Court did not have before it when it made its 16 December order), and relying on precedent giving primacy to the Chief Justice's opinion in such consultative appointments, the Court recalled its earlier order. In its place, the Court itself appointed Justice Sanjay Misra (a retired judge of the Allahabad High Court) as the new Lokayukta, noting his name appeared on the lists discussed by both the Chief Justice and the Chief Minister. The writ petition and both contempt petitions were disposed of with directions that consequential appointment orders be issued without delay and compliance reported to the Registry within a week.
Even a Supreme Court order made under its widest constitutional powers can be revisited and corrected if it later turns out the Court was not given the full facts; and courts filling constitutional vacancies (like an ombudsman's post) will give weight to the views of the relevant Chief Justice in the consultation process, not just the executive's preference.
