Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

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.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal Case Shots is built to help you quickly identify and understand relevant precedent. For citation in pleadings or filings, always verify against the full judgment PDF and current citation format (e.g., 2026 INSC ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

The holding is what the court legally decided. The lesson learnt translates that into a practical takeaway: what a lawyer should factor into case strategy or client advice as a result of this precedent.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

Both. Each case shows a distilled summary (case type, key holding, and lesson learnt) and links to the full judgment as a PDF for when you need the complete text for research or citation.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

Yes. Use Advanced Filters to narrow results by decision date and by practice area, including Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Service & Administrative Law, Family Law, Civil Property & Inheritance, and Labour & Industrial Law.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

Yes. You can filter judgments by the judge or bench that decided the case, which is useful for tracking how a particular judge has reasoned on similar issues across multiple rulings.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

Legal Case Shots is a searchable database of Supreme Court of India judgments, each broken down into the case type, the court's key holding, and a practical lesson learnt, with the full judgment available as a PDF for citation or deeper reading.

Criminal LawSupreme Court of India

State of Punjab vs Randhir Singh Etc.

Not available · 2024 INSC 489Decided 9 Jul 2024
Not available
Justice Aravind Kumar · Justice Sandeep Mehta

Background

The accused, Randhir Singh, his mother, brother and sister-in-law were tried for the death of Randhir's wife, who died of extensive burn injuries in 1998. The trial court convicted all four accused of murder based on two competing accounts of a "dying declaration" made by the victim before her death, but the High Court of Punjab and Haryana reversed the conviction and acquitted everyone, prompting the State of Punjab to appeal to the Supreme Court.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court scrutinised the two conflicting dying declarations and found serious inconsistencies: key eyewitnesses who claimed to be with the victim never mentioned any dying declaration being recorded, doctors found no evidence of kerosene smell or burns consistent with the prosecution's story, and one declaration (recorded by a police officer allegedly influenced by the victim's brother, himself a policeman) appeared to be a fabricated, post-investigation document. Defence witnesses and a version of the victim's own statement instead suggested she caught fire accidentally while making tea, and her husband had rushed her to hospital rather than caused her death. Finding the High Court's acquittal was a sound appreciation of the evidence, the Supreme Court dismissed the State's appeal and upheld the acquittal.

Lesson Learnt

A conviction cannot rest on a dying declaration alone if it is inconsistent, uncorroborated, or shows signs of being tailored by interested parties. Courts must carefully test such evidence against independent facts before treating it as conclusive proof of guilt.

State of Punjab vs Randhir Singh Etc. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware