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 moreFollowing a neighborhood altercation at an apartment building in Kolkata over a broken entrance door and a parked scooter, a chargesheet was filed against several people (including the appellants) under IPC provisions for offences like wrongful restraint, assault, criminal intimidation, and outraging modesty. The Calcutta High Court quashed the proceedings against two of the accused (the wives of two appellants) but declined to quash the case against three other appellants (Sajal Bose, Chandidas Joardar, and Sautrik Joardar) allowing the trial to continue against them. Those three appellants approached the Supreme Court, relying heavily on CCTV footage from the scene that was already part of the police's own chargesheet.
The Supreme Court applied the four-step test from its precedent in Pradeep Kumar Kesarwani (drawing on Rajiv Thapar v. Madan Lal Kapoor) for when a High Court should quash proceedings under Section 482 CrPC: whether the accused's material is reliable and of "sterling quality," whether it rules out the charges, whether it remains unrefuted by the prosecution, and whether continuing the trial would amount to abuse of process. Examining the CCTV footage, which was part of the investigation's own record and thus unimpeachable, the Court found it did not show the three appellants participating in any assault or aggression, substantially undermining the factual basis of the charges against them. Since the footage was uncontested and compelling, the Court held that forcing these appellants to undergo a full trial would serve no purpose and amount to misuse of the criminal process, set aside the High Court's judgment, and quashed the chargesheet against all three appellants.
A criminal case can be quashed at the threshold, before trial, when unimpeachable evidence already in the investigation's own record (such as CCTV footage) clearly contradicts the allegations: an accused person is not required to endure a full trial merely because a chargesheet has been filed, if reliable material makes clear the charges cannot hold up.
