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, a tanker driver, struck and killed a 20-year-old girl working on road construction near Manali in 2009. The trial court convicted him under Sections 279 and 304A IPC and sentenced him to a few months' imprisonment and a small fine; the High Court, on the respondent's appeal, kept the conviction but replaced the imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 40,000. The State of Himachal Pradesh appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing this fine was grossly inadequate given the loss of a young life.
The Supreme Court, hearing only the State's challenge to the sentence (the respondent had not challenged his conviction), agreed that a fine of Rs. 40,000 was not proportionate to the offence, especially since the insurance company had already separately paid Rs. 3,60,000 as compensation to the victim's family. The Court held that where an accused cannot pay adequate compensation, courts should additionally draw on the State's Victim Compensation Scheme under Section 357A of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It modified the High Court's order, directing the respondent to pay Rs. 1 lakh (with the earlier imprisonment sentence to revive if he defaults) and the State of Himachal Pradesh to pay a further Rs. 3 lakhs in interim compensation, so the victim's family would receive a total of Rs. 4 lakhs.
In fatal road-accident cases, courts are expected to ensure the victim's family receives meaningful compensation: if the convicted driver cannot pay enough, the State itself may be directed to make up the difference through its statutory Victim Compensation Scheme, rather than leaving the family under-compensated.
