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 moreDuring a dispute over ploughing of a piece of land that was subject to a pending civil suit, gunshots were fired in 1997, killing one woman and injuring two others. The trial court convicted two of the accused, including the respondent Kalusinh, under Section 302 IPC and other provisions, sentencing them to life imprisonment, while acquitting the other co-accused. On appeal, the Gujarat High Court upheld the conviction of the first accused but acquitted Kalusinh, holding that his identification as the shooter was doubtful since the incident occurred at night and there was confusion between the names "Kalusinh" and "Harpalsinh." The State of Gujarat appealed to the Supreme Court against this acquittal.
The Supreme Court noted contradictions in the prosecution's own evidence, the original complaint named two shooters while the complainant's courtroom testimony attributed all three shots to Kalusinh alone, and that the post-mortem report could not confirm which weapon caused the fatal wounds. It also noted that recovery of the weapons from the accused was not convincingly proved. Given these evidentiary gaps and the genuine doubt about Kalusinh's identity in the dark conditions of the incident, the Court held that the High Court's view acquitting him was a "plausible view" that was not perverse or patently erroneous, and that an order of acquittal should not be interfered with merely because another view was possible. The State's appeal was accordingly dismissed, confirming the High Court's acquittal of Kalusinh.
When an accused has already been acquitted and the appellate evidence shows genuine contradictions and identification doubts, courts will not overturn the acquittal simply because a different conclusion was also possible: the benefit of reasonable doubt in criminal cases extends to upholding a plausible acquittal.
