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 morePolice raided the house of one accused in Chennai and recovered over Rs. 7.2 crore in cash, leading to an FIR alleging illegal printing and sale of lottery tickets from Sikkim, Kerala, and Maharashtra, and unlawful profiteering. Two other accused, including the respondent S. Martin, sought to quash the FIR under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, relying on an unregistered agreement of sale suggesting the seized cash was actually an advance payment for a property purchase, not criminal proceeds. The Madras High Court accepted this explanation and quashed the FIR while the investigation was still ongoing, prompting the State of Tamil Nadu to appeal to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court allowed the State's appeals and set aside the High Court's quashing order, restoring the FIR for investigation to continue. It held that the High Court had erred by effectively deciding disputed factual questions, such as the genuineness of the sale agreement, at a stage when investigation was still incomplete; notably, the stamp paper for the alleged agreement was issued by the government only after the agreement's stated date, raising a serious doubt about its authenticity that itself needed investigation, not premature judicial acceptance. The Court emphasized that the presence of a huge unexplained cash recovery, admitted by one accused, was sufficient reason to let the investigation run its full course rather than being cut short. It expressly declined to comment on the ultimate merits of either side's case, leaving all questions open for determination at the appropriate stage.
High Courts should be cautious about quashing a criminal investigation at an early stage based on an accused's untested explanation, especially where the explanation itself (such as a suspiciously backdated document) raises questions that only a completed investigation can properly resolve.
