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 moreVidhi Rawal married Prateek Tripathi in December 2019. In 2022 she accused her husband, in-laws, and brother-in-law (the appellant here) of dowry harassment, filing both an FIR under Section 498A IPC and a separate application under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 seeking protection, residence, and monetary reliefs. The accused sought to have the domestic violence proceedings quashed under Section 482 of the CrPC, arguing the High Court had the power to do so; the Madhya Pradesh High Court refused, holding that Section 12 proceedings are civil in nature and therefore cannot be quashed under a provision meant for criminal proceedings.
The Supreme Court disagreed with the High Court's reasoning and held that Section 482 CrPC (and its successor, Section 528 of the BNSS) can indeed be invoked to quash proceedings arising from a Section 12 application under the Domestic Violence Act, because the "second limb" of that power, preventing abuse of the process of any court, is not confined to strictly criminal proceedings. However, the Court cautioned that because the Domestic Violence Act is a welfare statute meant to protect women, High Courts must exercise this power sparingly, intervening only in cases of gross illegality or clear abuse of process, not as a routine alternative to trial on the merits. The matter was sent back to the High Court to be reconsidered afresh in light of this clarified legal position.
A High Court does have the power to quash a domestic violence complaint in an extreme case of abuse of process, but that power is meant to be used sparingly: the protective purpose of the Domestic Violence Act means courts must be very cautious before shutting down a woman's case at the threshold rather than letting it be tested on facts.
