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 moreIn 2017 the Kerala Government had set up the "Hema Committee," headed by a retired High Court judge, to study the working conditions and hardships faced by women in the Malayalam film industry; the committee submitted its report in 2019, but it remained largely unacted upon and undisclosed for years. The petitioner, Sajimon Parayil, went to the Kerala High Court seeking to keep the report confidential to protect the privacy of those who had testified, but the High Court's Division Bench instead began monitoring implementation of the report's recommendations and approved a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to look into the allegations, prompting these petitions challenging some of the High Court's directions.
The Supreme Court declined to interfere with the High Court's core directions, holding that once a police officer has reason to suspect a cognizable offence has occurred, he is legally bound to proceed and register cases as required by law, and the Court cannot direct police to be restrained from doing so. It found the High Court had been actively and properly monitoring the SIT's actions. At the same time, the Court left the door open for individuals who had testified before the Hema Committee and who felt they were being unfairly compelled or harassed by the SIT to approach the High Court directly for redress, and asked the High Court to specifically examine whether FIRs were being registered on genuine supporting material or without any basis. The petitions were disposed of on these terms rather than being allowed or dismissed outright.
Courts will not shield potential offences from police investigation merely to protect confidentiality of an inquiry report; but individuals who believe an investigation triggered by such disclosures is being misused to harass rather than genuinely investigate can seek specific protection from the High Court supervising that investigation.
