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 moreIn an assault on 10 January 2002, a father and son were killed and others injured by an armed group; the trial court convicted three of the accused under charges including murder and rioting, relying on the evidence of injured eyewitnesses who were family members of the deceased. The High Court acquitted the three respondents, reversing the trial court's conviction, apparently on the basis of perceived inconsistencies between the medical evidence and the eyewitness accounts. The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed the acquittal to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that minor variations between medical evidence and eyewitness ("ocular") testimony do not by themselves discredit an injured eyewitness, and that such evidence can only be disregarded if the medical evidence completely rules out the incident happening the way the witnesses described, which was not the case here. The Court also reaffirmed the settled principle that where an unlawful assembly shares a common object, every member present can be held liable for an offence committed in furtherance of that object, without the prosecution needing to prove exactly which member struck which blow. Finding that the High Court's acquittal rested on an erroneous appreciation of credible evidence, the Supreme Court set aside the acquittal, restored the conviction, and directed the respondents to surrender within four weeks to serve the remainder of their sentence. The appeal was allowed.
An appellate court cannot overturn a conviction based on injured eyewitness testimony merely because of minor, non-fundamental differences with the medical evidence: the testimony of a credible injured witness carries strong weight and will not be discarded unless the medical evidence makes the witness's version impossible.
