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.

Family LawDelhi High Court

Shikha Singh vs. Saurabh Singh

Civil Miscellaneous (Main) Petition · 2026:DHC:7909Decided 16 Sept 2026New Delhi Bench
CM(M) 2041/2026CNR: DLHC010439832026
Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar

Background

The petitioner-mother challenged a Family Court order that extended the father's visitation time with their minor child from one hour to one-and-a-half hours and required her to remain outside the room during visitation. She argued the child, being of tender age, cried during visits and that she should be allowed to stay in the room.

Decision Breakdown

The Court noted the mother had actually consented to the extended visitation time, undermining her challenge on that point. On the requirement to stay outside the room, the Court relied on Supreme Court precedent holding that children have a right to love and contact with both parents, and that mere initial discomfort or crying during visitation is not, by itself, a reason to deny a father meaningful time with his child, especially given the arrangement still allowed the mother to remain on the same premises, with CCTV supervision, and was only an interim measure subject to future modification.

Lesson Learnt

Courts prioritise a child's long-term right to a relationship with both parents over short-term discomfort during visitation; a parent seeking to restrict the other's access must show more than the child's temporary unease to succeed.

Shikha Singh vs. Saurabh Singh – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware