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

Santosh & Anr. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Criminal AppealDecided 22 Feb 2022
Criminal Appeal No. 1506 of 2019
Uday Umesh Lalit · S. Ravindra Bhat · Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha

Background

Following a quarrel at a colony in Gorakhpur district in March 1998, a group of accused allegedly assaulted several people and fatally shot one Vivek Kumar Pandey after chasing him into a house; two other men, Asgar and Ramesh Yadav, were also injured. The trial court acquitted all six accused, but the Allahabad High Court, in a State appeal, reversed the acquittal of two of them, Santosh and Bhola, convicting them under Sections 302 and 324 read with 34 IPC and sentencing them to life imprisonment. Santosh and Bhola then appealed to the Supreme Court against their conviction.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court found that the prosecution's case rested mainly on the eyewitness testimony of the two injured witnesses (PW-2 and PW-3), whose injuries were documented by doctors soon after the incident and were consistent with the medical evidence, making their presence at the scene credible. It held that even though the High Court was hearing an appeal against acquittal (which calls for caution before interference), the reversal was justified on these facts since the eyewitness accounts were cogent and consistent. The Court found no reason to take a different view and dismissed the appeal, upholding the conviction and sentence.

Lesson Learnt

An appellate court can properly overturn a trial court's acquittal and convict where injured eyewitnesses give consistent testimony that is corroborated by contemporaneous medical evidence: physical injury records examined near the time of the incident carry strong evidentiary weight in establishing a witness's presence and credibility.

Santosh & Anr. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware