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 moreSenior advocate Shanti Bhushan filed this writ petition seeking the Supreme Court's clarification of the Chief Justice of India's authority, by convention, as the "Master of the Roster": the sole administrative power to decide which bench hears which case. He did not challenge any specific past judgment or order, but asked the Court to rule that, for allocating sensitive or important matters, the term "Chief Justice" should legally be read to mean a "Collegium" of the five senior-most judges, so that no single individual could potentially steer a case to a particular bench to secure a predetermined outcome.
The Supreme Court rejected the core submission that "Chief Justice" should be reinterpreted as a five-judge collegium for roster purposes, holding that the power to frame the roster and allocate cases is a long-settled constitutional and conventional prerogative of the Chief Justice alone, grounded in the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 framed under Article 145 and reinforced by precedent (including the Constitution Bench ruling in Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms v. Union of India). The Court reasoned that vesting this administrative function in multiple hands could cause friction and administrative paralysis, and that existing Rules and the Handbook on Practice and Procedure already provide sufficient guidance and checks on how cases are listed. While acknowledging that institutional practices can always be improved, the Court declined to issue any further directions and disposed of the writ petition.
Long-standing constitutional conventions, like the Chief Justice's administrative authority to allocate cases, are not automatically displaced just because a litigant raises concerns about potential misuse; courts require a stronger constitutional or statutory basis before departing from an established institutional practice, even one touching the judiciary's own internal functioning.
