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 moreThe appellant had been seeking formal approval as a Science teacher at a school since 1986. The State had sanctioned the Science subject to be taught at the school but had not separately sanctioned a post for a Science teacher, and the authorities relied on this technical gap to deny him approval. A 2003 communication from the District Inspector of Schools had nonetheless considered him for a selection grade.
The Supreme Court observed that it made little sense for the Department to sanction a subject for teaching while refusing to sanction the teaching post needed to actually teach it, since the entire purpose of approving a subject is for it to be taught by a qualified teacher. Given the 2003 proposal considering him for the selection grade, the Court held that the technical objection about the missing post sanction faded into insignificance in the peculiar facts of this case, and directed that the appellant be deemed a duly and regularly appointed Science teacher for all purposes, with all consequential benefits paid within three months. The Court expressly clarified that this ruling, being based on the case's unusual facts, should not be treated as a precedent.
Authorities cannot use a missing administrative formality (like a separate post sanction) to deny a long-pending, otherwise-deserved appointment when their own actions, like sanctioning the subject itself, are inconsistent with denying it; however, this kind of outcome was explicitly limited to this case's facts and not meant to be relied on as a general rule.
