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

Shiv Kumar Sharma vs The State of Rajasthan

Criminal AppealDecided 28 Jul 2022
Criminal Appeal No. 1050 of 2022
B.R. Gavai · Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha

Background

The appellant, a government engineer, was convicted by a Special Judge under the Prevention of Corruption Act and for falsification of accounts (Section 477A IPC) over alleged irregularities in construction accounts for two village primary schools in Rajasthan, where entries in the measurement book were allegedly altered after a complaint was made. The Rajasthan High Court upheld the conviction and one-year sentence. The appellant approached the Supreme Court, arguing the evidence did not show he personally gained anything or acted with fraudulent intent.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court found that both the trial court and the High Court had ignored crucial admissions by the prosecution's own witnesses: the Inquiry Officer confirmed the measurements were correct and found no irregularity in one school's accounts, and the Investigating Officer admitted payments for materials were made directly by the Gram Panchayat, not through the appellant, and that no criminal intent was found in the investigation. Since a conviction under the corruption law requires proof the accused obtained a valuable thing or pecuniary advantage, and a conviction for falsifying accounts requires proof of wilful intent to defraud, and neither was established, the Court held the concurrent findings of the lower courts were "perverse" and could be overturned even though appellate interference with factual findings is normally limited. The conviction and sentence were set aside and the appellant was acquitted of all charges.

Lesson Learnt

Even when two courts below have agreed on a conviction, the Supreme Court can step in and reverse it if the lower courts ignored key, undisputed admissions in the evidence: a criminal conviction cannot stand on suspicion or irregularity alone, it requires proof of the specific mental element (like intent to defraud) the law demands.

Shiv Kumar Sharma vs The State of Rajasthan – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware