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

The State of West Bengal v. Kader Khan

Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 718Decided 17 Jul 2026
Crl.A. No.-001164-001166 - 2023
Justice Sanjay Karol · Justice Vipul M. Pancholi

Background

In a 2012 gang-rape case in Kolkata, five accused were named; three were arrested quickly and tried, while the respondent Kader Khan and one other absconded for years and were arrested only in 2016. The victim testified extensively in the first trial against the three arrested accused but passed away in 2015, before Kader Khan's separate (split) trial could begin. When his trial commenced, the prosecution sought to use the victim's earlier deposition against him under Section 299 CrPC (evidence recorded in the absence of an absconding accused); the Calcutta High Court disallowed this, holding that a formal court direction was needed at the time of the earlier deposition for it to be used later against the absconder.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court, reviewing Section 299 CrPC and precedent including Nirmal Singh and CBI v. Abu Salem Ansari, held that the statute requires only that two facts existed at the time of the deposition, that the accused was absconding and there was no immediate prospect of his arrest, not any formal contemporaneous order recording compliance. Since proclamation proceedings against Kader Khan predated the victim's deposition, and he was arrested only years later after her death, both conditions were satisfied, making her earlier testimony admissible against him. The High Court's order was set aside and the State's appeal allowed.

Lesson Learnt

An accused cannot escape the consequences of evidence recorded during his own deliberate absconding simply because no separate formal order was passed at that time. The law does not reward evading trial in hopes that witnesses become unavailable.

The State of West Bengal v. Kader Khan – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware