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 respondent was arrested in 2020 on charges under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Official Secrets Act along with criminal conspiracy under the IPC. When the police failed to file a chargesheet within 60 days of his arrest, he sought default bail on the ground that the investigation period for his alleged offence had expired. The trial courts repeatedly rejected his bail applications, but the Delhi High Court eventually granted him default bail, holding that the 60-day (not 90-day) investigation window applied because Section 3 of the Act, while allowing punishment up to 14 years, does not prescribe any minimum sentence. The State of Delhi appealed to the Supreme Court against that grant of bail.
The Supreme Court dismissed the State's appeal, holding that the longer 90-day investigation period under Section 167(2) applies only to offences for which the law itself fixes a minimum sentence of "not less than ten years", not merely offences whose maximum punishment happens to reach or exceed ten years. Since neither Section 3 nor Section 5 of the Official Secrets Act prescribes a minimum sentence, the shorter 60-day period applied, and since the chargesheet was not filed within that period, the respondent had already earned the right to default bail. The Court followed its own earlier three-judge bench ruling in Rakesh Kumar Paul v. State of Assam on this exact point.
Whether an undertrial gets default bail after 60 or 90 days depends on whether the specific criminal law sets a minimum sentence of at least ten years for the offence, not on how severe the maximum punishment happens to be: a distinction that can decide whether a long-pending chargesheet delay actually earns someone their release.
