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 moreKeramat Ali was killed in 1997 when a group of accused attacked him at a tea stall with firearms, daggers and swords after an earlier altercation. The Trial Court convicted some accused, including Samsul Haque (accused No. 9, on the basis of instigation) and two others, Abdul Rashid and Imdadul Islam (accused Nos. 2 and 3), while acquitting others. The State appealed the acquittals to the High Court, which reversed the trial court and convicted the previously-acquitted accused; those convicted accused then appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals and acquitted all three appellants. It found that the High Court had improperly reversed findings of acquittal without meeting the higher threshold required to overturn an acquittal, relying heavily on related/interested eyewitnesses whose testimony needed to be treated with caution. Key physical evidence was missing or contradictory: no bullets or bullet marks were found despite claims of firing, the weapons were not properly linked, and witness accounts about each accused's specific role were inconsistent with the original FIR. The Court held the prosecution had not proven its case beyond reasonable doubt against these accused and that the trial court's original view (a plausible one) should not have been displaced.
When a higher court reverses an acquittal, it must meet a strict legal standard: mere disagreement with the trial court's view is not enough; inconsistencies between witness statements, the FIR, and physical evidence can be fatal to a prosecution's case, even in a serious crime.
