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.
Transfer Petition (Criminal) · 2026 INSC 1060
Where a marriage has irretrievably broken down and the parties reach a genuine, voluntary settlement, including on alimony, the Supreme Court can use its Article 142 powers to grant a mutual-consent divorce and close out all related litigation in one stroke, without requiring the usual statutory waiting period.
Writ Petition (Civil) · 2026 INSC 1061
In long-running, complex litigation involving apportioned government liabilities across states, the Supreme Court can use a mechanism like a retired-judge committee plus periodic compliance affidavits to bring genuine finality, including firm timelines, transparency obligations, and interest for delayed payment, rather than leaving matters open-ended.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1062
In an "as is where is" liquidation auction, a bidder who voluntarily accepts the auction terms cannot later resile from a forfeiture clause by citing regulatory caps or after-the-fact excuses for non-payment: courts will enforce the auction notice's own conditions.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8338-DB
Once someone is released from custody because the police failed to properly communicate the grounds of arrest, the police cannot simply re-arrest them by adding new charges: a specific, court-supervised procedure with senior-officer accountability must be followed, or the re-arrest itself becomes illegal.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8308
In economic-offence cases, bail can still be granted where the method used to quantify the alleged financial evasion is not adequately justified, and where the apprehension of re-offending is speculative rather than evidence-based.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8323
A parole claim must be backed by a genuine, verifiable application to the competent jail authority: courts will scrutinise irregularities like an incomplete address, an unexplained thumb mark, or reliance on a mere friend's affidavit rather than close family.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8337
Courts can grant short, strictly time-bound interim bail purely on humanitarian/compassionate grounds (such as caring for a seriously ill family member), even while a case remains pending trial and an earlier bail plea has failed.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8312
Courts will not repeatedly re-examine a bail plea already rejected on merits unless the applicant can point to a genuine change in circumstances since the earlier order.
First Appeal from Order · 2026:DHC:8334
Under the no-fault compensation scheme for railway accidents, a valid ticket-holder injured while attempting to board a train, even carelessly, is generally entitled to compensation unless the railway can show a deliberate, conscious exposure to danger, not mere negligence.
6171 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 moreLegal 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 ___).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
A plot of land in Kolhapur owned by the respondents was reserved in the city's 1999 development plan for public purposes like parking, a garden, and a sewage treatment plant extension. When the Corporation failed to acquire the land for over a decade, the owners served a statutory notice in 2012 demanding acquisition; the Corporation passed a resolution to acquire it but never actually completed the acquisition, later citing an inability to pay the roughly Rs. 77 crore compensation and pointing out the land was flood-prone (crossed by the Jayanti Nala rivulet) and thus unsuitable for its reserved purpose. The Bombay High Court had directed the Corporation, by writ of mandamus, to go ahead and acquire the land and pay compensation, prompting the Corporation's appeal to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that under Section 127 of the MRTP Act, if a reservation is not acted upon within ten years and the landowner then serves a purchase notice, the reservation is deemed to lapse by operation of law if no genuine acquisition steps (such as a formal declaration) follow within a further year: merely passing a resolution or writing a letter to government authorities does not count as "taking steps," following the Court's own precedents in Girnar Traders and Shrirampur Municipal Council. Since the Corporation never issued the required declaration within that window, the reservation on this land had already lapsed, and once lapsed it cannot be revived by a court order compelling acquisition. The Court also independently held that a Corporation cannot be forced to acquire and pay huge compensation for land that is factually unsuitable/unusable for its reserved purpose (here, being flood-prone), and rejected the landowners' alternative request for Transferable Development Rights (TDR) since they had earlier expressly told the High Court they did not want TDR. The appeal was allowed, the High Court's mandamus was quashed, and the writ petition was dismissed.
A government body's mere paperwork (a resolution, a letter, a budget line) does not count as "taking steps" to acquire land; if the statutory time limits lapse without real action, a land reservation dies by operation of law and cannot be revived by a court, and public authorities cannot be forced to acquire land that is genuinely unfit for the purpose it was reserved for.
