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

Sanchit Alagh & Anr. vs Union of India & Ors.

Not availableDecided 28 Mar 2022
Not available
Uday Umesh Lalit · S. Ravindra Bhat · Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha

Background

The petitioners faced multiple FIRs registered in different police stations across Delhi, Chandigarh, Pune and Thane, all allegedly involving identical allegations. They approached the Supreme Court under Article 32 seeking a single, consolidated investigation by the CBI into all the FIRs, and also sought anticipatory bail for both petitioners in relation to these FIRs. The Court had earlier, in 2019, issued notice and granted interim anticipatory bail while the petition was pending. The Union of India and the CBI filed affidavits stating that the investigations in the individual matters were being conducted in accordance with law.

Decision Breakdown

Having examined the facts and the affidavits on record, the Court found no case made out for transferring the investigation of the multiple FIRs to the CBI, and saw no reason to entertain the petition further. The petitioners' counsel informed the Court that regular bail had already been granted in some of the matters pursuant to the earlier interim order. The Court disposed of the writ petition with the observation that the petitioners could avail the benefit of any such bail orders already granted, and that for any FIRs where bail had not yet been obtained, they would need to apply through the ordinary legal process, with each application to be decided on its own merits.

Lesson Learnt

The Supreme Court will not ordinarily transfer investigation of multiple, separately registered FIRs to a central agency like the CBI merely because the allegations across them appear similar; an accused facing several FIRs must generally pursue bail and other remedies before the appropriate courts in each case rather than seeking a blanket consolidated remedy from the Supreme Court.

Sanchit Alagh & Anr. vs Union of India & Ors. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware