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 was convicted by the trial court and had his conviction upheld by the Madras High Court for allegedly pouring kerosene on his wife and setting her on fire in September 2008, causing her death about three weeks later. The wife gave three different accounts before she died: twice immediately after the incident (to a doctor and to police) she said she caught fire accidentally while cooking, but six days later, in a statement recorded by a Judicial Magistrate treated as her dying declaration, she blamed her husband. The conviction rested substantially on this dying declaration and on testimony from the wife's parents.
The Supreme Court found the prosecution's case riddled with inconsistencies: the wife's own explanation for her earlier accidental-fire statements (that she lied because her husband was present) was undermined by a doctor's evidence that the husband was in fact present with her at the hospital when her later statement was recorded too, and by evidence that the husband had himself tried to douse the fire and take her for treatment despite his own 40% physical disability. Medical evidence showed no kerosene smell on her body and no external injuries besides burns, and the physical evidence of a kerosene can allegedly recovered from the scene was undermined because the seizure witnesses turned hostile and denied any kerosene smell at the site. The Court also noted a prior family feud (a criminal case the appellant's brother had filed against the wife's father) that raised a possibility of the dying declaration being tutored. Applying the principle that a doubtful or inconsistent dying declaration needs corroboration before it can sustain a conviction, the Court held the prosecution's case fell short, gave the appellant the benefit of doubt, acquitted him, and ordered his immediate release from jail.
A dying declaration, though powerful evidence, cannot alone sustain a conviction when it contradicts the deceased's own earlier consistent statements and lacks independent corroboration. Courts must scrutinise the surrounding facts, not treat a dying declaration as automatically conclusive.
