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

Shankar v. State of Rajasthan

Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 315Decided 2 Apr 2026
Crl.A. No.-001735-001735 - 2026
Justice Sanjay Karol · Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh · Justice Augustine George Masih

Background

Shankar was convicted of pouring kerosene on his wife, Sugna Bai, and setting her on fire about 20 days after their marriage, following a dispute after she went to her parents' house. She died from her burn injuries after giving a dying declaration to a Magistrate identifying her husband as the assailant. The Trial Court sentenced him to life imprisonment under Section 302 IPC (plus a separate sentence under Section 342), and the Rajasthan High Court's Division Bench confirmed the conviction on appeal. Shankar then appealed to the Supreme Court, challenging the reliability of the dying declaration and the concurrent findings against him.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court held that interference with concurrent findings of conviction by two lower courts is permissible only in limited circumstances (manifest legal errors, misappreciation of evidence, or overlooked crucial evidence) none of which were found here. The Court examined the dying declaration recorded by a Magistrate and found it credible, consistent, and corroborated by medical evidence from two doctors confirming the cause of death as septicaemia due to burns. It rejected arguments questioning the declarant's mental fitness and the qualification of one of the medical witnesses. The appeal was dismissed and the conviction upheld. The Court added an extended postscript on the persistence of domestic violence against women in India despite decades of legal and welfare reforms.

Lesson Learnt

A dying declaration, if found credible, consistent, and free of tutoring, can by itself sustain a conviction, and appellate courts will rarely disturb concurrent findings of guilt by the Trial Court and High Court unless there is a clear legal or evidentiary error.

Shankar v. State of Rajasthan – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware