LegalAware
LegalAware.ai
EMPOWERING LEGAL AWARENESS

Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

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.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal 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 ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

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.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

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.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

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.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

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.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

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.

Criminal LawSupreme Court of India

SALIB @ SHALU @ SALIM vs STATE OF U.P. & ORS.

Criminal Appeal · 2023 INSC 687Decided 8 Aug 2023
Criminal Appeal No. 2344 of 2023
B.R. Gavai · J.B. Pardiwala

Background

The appellant's mother-in-law's family (headed by his father-in-law Haji Iqbal @ Bala) was already facing an FIR for serious offences filed by one Husna. A second FIR was later lodged against unnamed persons alleging that Husna and her family were being threatened over the phone to withdraw that earlier complaint, and the appellant's name surfaced only later, in a witness's supplementary statement, as one of the persons present when the threats were allegedly made. The Allahabad High Court refused to quash this second FIR against him, so he approached the Supreme Court.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court found that the appellant was not named in the original FIR at all and appeared for the first time in an improved, later witness statement, and that the story had visibly evolved and changed over successive statements. The Court held that none of the ingredients of the offences invoked (Sections 195A, 386, etc.) were actually made out even taking the allegations at face value, for instance, extortion requires proof that the victim actually parted with property out of fear, which was missing. Applying the well-known guidelines from State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal for quashing FIRs, the Court concluded that this was a case of implicating the appellant merely because he was the hardened accused's son-in-law, and quashed the FIR against him.

Lesson Learnt

Courts will look behind the FIR's face value at how a criminal complaint evolved over time, and being related to an accused person is not by itself a legal basis to be dragged into a criminal case; the ingredients of each offence charged must genuinely be made out on the facts alleged.

Official source (sci.gov.in)View Judgment (PDF)
SALIB @ SHALU @ SALIM vs STATE OF U.P. & ORS. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware