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 moreOn 29 January 1995, the deceased Siddaramreddy was attacked and beaten to death with clubs by eight accused persons who had allegedly formed an unlawful assembly against him. The trial court convicted accused no. 1 under Section 302 IPC and accused nos. 2-5 and 7 under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC. On appeal, the High Court acquitted accused nos. 4 and 5 for want of any specific overt act against them, and reduced the conviction of the remaining accused (nos. 1, 2, 3, and 7) from Section 302 to Section 304 Part-II IPC, citing the nature of the weapons (sticks) and the injuries. The State appealed to the Supreme Court against both the acquittals and the reduced sentences.
The Supreme Court held that the High Court's acquittal of accused nos. 4 and 5 was reasonable, since the sole eyewitness had named them in her complaint but attributed no specific overt act to them. On the question of reducing the conviction from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, the Court found the High Court's reasoning sound, only accused no. 1 had prior enmity with the deceased, and the others appeared to have joined merely to assist him, using sticks rather than more lethal weapons. Given the considerable passage of time since the 1995 incident and the High Court's detailed factual findings, the Supreme Court declined to interfere and dismissed the State's appeal in its entirety.
A conviction for murder under Section 149 (unlawful assembly) requires courts to look closely at each individual's specific role and the nature of weapons used: mere presence or naming in a complaint, without a specific overt act, will not sustain a murder conviction, and the choice of weapon can determine whether an offence is treated as murder or a lesser form of culpable homicide.
