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 case arose from a dispute over a pathway between the deceased, Devi Singh, and one Salag Ram. The prosecution alleged that on 30.08.1991, 18 persons including the respondents forcibly entered the complainant's house armed with farsi (a sharp-edged weapon) and lathis, assaulting both the complainant and the deceased, who later died. A trial court convicted four of the accused under Sections 302, 324 and 323 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced them to life imprisonment, but the Madhya Pradesh High Court acquitted them on appeal. The State then appealed to the Supreme Court against the acquittal.
The Supreme Court upheld the acquittal, agreeing with the High Court's detailed re-appreciation of the evidence. It found that the First Information Report (FIR) was lodged only after considerable delay and following consultation among villagers, and that an earlier, genuine first report by the deceased himself (before he died) had been suppressed by the prosecution, meaning the document treated as the FIR was not really the earliest information and could at best be used as a witness statement. The eyewitnesses also gave mutually contradictory accounts of where the assault actually took place, and the number and nature of the deceased's injuries (only four, mostly minor) were inconsistent with an attack by 18 armed assailants. The Court held this combination of suppression, delay, and inconsistency meant the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and separately noted (without it affecting the outcome) that the trial court had wrongly framed "issues" as if it were a civil suit rather than properly framing criminal charges. The appeal was dismissed.
In criminal trials, unexplained delay in lodging an FIR and any suppression of an earlier, more contemporaneous account of events can seriously undermine the prosecution's credibility; appellate courts will not disturb an acquittal reached through a careful, consistent re-evaluation of genuinely conflicting eyewitness testimony.
