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 moreThe appellants (the father-in-law, mother-in-law and sister-in-law of a woman who had filed a dowry-harassment and bigamy complaint against her husband and his family) sought to quash the criminal proceedings against themselves. The complainant alleged years of dowry harassment by her husband, and that his family members were present during, or benefited from, incidents involving sale of her gold jewellery and money transfers, and were aware of the husband's alleged second marriage. The Kerala High Court had refused to quash the case against the family members, so they appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that merely naming family members in a matrimonial dispute, without specific allegations of their active involvement in cruelty, is not enough to sustain criminal prosecution, citing its own recent precedent cautioning against "generalised and sweeping accusations" implicating an entire family. It found that the allegations against the father-in-law and mother-in-law were limited to presence during incidents and receiving money, without any specific act of demand, threat, or assault attributed to them, and that the allegations against the sister-in-law were confined to receiving money for a flat purchase. On the bigamy charge, the Court held that mere knowledge of a second marriage, without proof of active participation or facilitation, cannot establish the common intention required under Section 494 IPC. The Court set aside the High Court's order and quashed the proceedings against all three appellants.
Family members of an accused in a matrimonial dispute cannot be prosecuted merely on the basis of their relationship or general presence during events: criminal liability requires specific, particularised allegations of an accused person's own active role in the offence, not vague or collective accusations.
