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 moreSixteen persons were charge-sheeted for a brutal attack on a group of villagers traveling home on motorbikes, in which the victim died from multiple cutting-weapon injuries, including a severed hand. Twelve of the accused were convicted and sentenced for rioting and murder by the trial court, and the High Court upheld most of these convictions (acquitting only one accused). The appellants (the convicted accused, some of whom died before the Supreme Court appeal was decided) challenged their convictions before the Supreme Court, arguing that the police investigation was seriously flawed, the eyewitnesses were unreliable and inconsistent, no weapons were recovered or forensically tested, and the First Information Report was registered only after a suspicious delay.
The Supreme Court found serious and unexplained gaps in the investigation: the FIR was delayed by two to three days despite an earlier police diary (GD) entry, the seizure list for the motorbikes allegedly used by witnesses was of doubtful genuineness with no ownership documents ever proved, and the weapons seized were never sent for forensic analysis or shown to the eyewitnesses or the postmortem doctor. The Court also found the eyewitnesses' claimed presence at the crime scene inherently improbable and inadequately corroborated, given that they were close relatives who did not flee despite witnessing a brutal multi-person attack. Concluding that the prosecution's evidence, taken as a whole, did not credibly establish the presence and reliability of the eyewitnesses or the chain of investigation, the Court held the conviction could not stand. The appeals were allowed, all appellants were acquitted, and their bail bonds were cancelled; the Court also urged the State's police department to improve investigative training given how badly the case was handled.
A criminal conviction cannot rest merely on eyewitness testimony if the surrounding investigation (timing of the FIR, chain of evidence like seizure records, and forensic verification of weapons) is riddled with unexplained gaps and inconsistencies; courts will acquit where a sloppy or questionable investigation leaves reasonable doubt, even in a serious case involving loss of life.
