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.

Labour & Industrial LawDelhi High Court

Sri Bhagwan vs. Delhi Transport Corporation

Writ Petition (Civil) · 2026:DHC:8034Decided 16 Sept 2026New Delhi Bench
W.P.(C) 6962/2008CNR: DLHC011363892008
Justice Amit Mahajan

Background

Sri Bhagwan, a DTC conductor since 1979, was removed from service after being found, in 1991, to have collected ₹2 fare from a passenger but issued a ticket worth only ₹1, with his cash also found ₹10 short. He admitted the charge in his enquiry reply and asked for no further enquiry. The Industrial Tribunal upheld his removal, and he challenged this before the High Court, arguing the punishment was grossly disproportionate for gaining just ₹1, and that he had been unwell that day and made an honest mistake.

Decision Breakdown

The Court found the Tribunal had rightly relied on the workman's own clear admission in his enquiry reply, and that he never produced any medical evidence to back his claim of having been unwell. It rejected the argument that a small monetary amount automatically makes dismissal disproportionate, citing Supreme Court rulings that in cases of dishonesty or fraud (as opposed to mere carelessness), even a petty misappropriated sum can justify dismissal, because it is the breach of trust, not the rupee amount, that matters. Given the workman's admission and prior disciplinary history, the removal was upheld and the petition dismissed.

Lesson Learnt

In cases involving dishonesty (as opposed to genuine mistake), the small size of the amount involved is not, by itself, a reason to treat dismissal as too harsh: courts focus on the breach of trust rather than the rupee value.

Sri Bhagwan vs. Delhi Transport Corporation – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware