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 moreShilpa, married in 2006, died after being set on fire in 2012; her dying declaration named only her sister-in-law Chanchal @ Babita as the person who poured kerosene on her, and the police charge-sheeted only Chanchal for murder, finding no case against the other in-laws for dowry harassment or dowry death. The trial court nevertheless summoned several in-laws (the appellants) under Section 319 CrPC to stand trial for murder as well, and the Allahabad High Court upheld that summoning order in revision. The in-laws appealed to the Supreme Court against being made additional accused.
The Supreme Court held that neither the victim's dying declaration nor the complainant's statements attributed any specific act to the appellants, and the evidence contained only vague, general allegations without naming them or describing their role, falling well short of the "much stronger evidence than mere probability of complicity" that a Constitution Bench (Hardeep Singh) requires before invoking Section 319 CrPC. Since the investigating officer had already found no offence made out against them even under the dowry-harassment provisions, the Court found no justification for summoning the appellants for murder or dowry offences. It set aside the High Court's order and allowed the appeals, while clarifying it expressed no opinion on the merits and directing the trial to proceed against the originally charge-sheeted accused.
A person cannot be summoned as an additional accused mid-trial merely on vague suspicion or general allegations: the law requires strong, specific evidence of that person's role before they can be dragged into a criminal trial they were not originally charged in.
