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 respondent, a Territorial Army soldier, was granted two days' casual leave in January 1999, during which he met with a scooter accident and suffered serious head and leg injuries. A Court of Inquiry found no one to blame, and the Brigade Commander's report treated the injury as attributable to military service, but the Medical Board and the Army's appellate authority rejected his claim for disability pension, holding the injury was neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. The Armed Forces Tribunal later overturned that rejection and granted him disability pension, prompting the Government of India to appeal to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that merely being "on duty" (including while on sanctioned leave) is not sufficient by itself to make an injury attributable to military service: there must be a reasonable causal connection between the incident and military service. Since the respondent was injured in a private scooter trip to buy electrical goods for his sister, an activity wholly unconnected to his military duties, the Court held there was no such causal nexus. It set out a detailed list of guiding factors (drawn from its own and Tribunal precedents) for when a disability can be treated as attributable to service, and concluded none were satisfied here. The appeal was allowed, the Tribunal's order was set aside, and the respondent's original claim was dismissed.
Government/military personnel are not automatically entitled to disability pension for every injury suffered while on duty or leave: the injury must have a genuine, reasonable connection to the person's service duties, not arise from a purely personal or private activity.
