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 moreA divorced US-citizen couple disputed custody of their 22-year-old son, Aadith, who has Ataxic Cerebral Palsy and an intellectual disability. The father brought Aadith to India in 2023 without informing the mother, who had since been appointed his legal guardian by a court in Idaho, USA. The mother filed a habeas corpus petition in the Madras High Court, which found no illegal detention after a brief in-person conversation with Aadith convinced it he was happy living with his father in Chennai; the mother appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court ordered a comprehensive multidisciplinary medical evaluation of Aadith at NIMHANS, Bengaluru, which concluded he functions cognitively at the level of an 8-to-10-year-old child and cannot make complex, informed decisions about matters like his place of residence, though he can manage basic daily tasks. The Court held that the High Court had erred by relying solely on a short oral interaction with Aadith while disregarding this kind of expert medical evidence, especially given his documented cognitive limitations. Applying the "parens patriae" doctrine (the court's duty to act as guardian for those who cannot decide for themselves), the Court found Aadith's best interests lay in returning to the US to live with his mother and younger brother (who share similar developmental needs and a close bond), and it set aside the High Court's judgment, directing Aadith's return to the US within 15 days.
When a person's mental capacity to consent is in genuine dispute, courts must rely on rigorous, independent medical/psychological assessment rather than their own brief impressions, and where someone cannot make binding decisions for themselves, the court steps in to decide what genuinely serves their welfare, not simply what they say they prefer in the moment.
