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 respondents were raided and found in alleged illegal possession of foreign-made firearms, and were separately chargesheeted under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA), the Arms Act, and other special enactments across three linked cases tried together at Jamnagar. The Designated TADA Court acquitted all the respondents, finding the prosecution's search-and-seizure evidence deficient and holding that the case under TADA itself could not proceed for want of valid sanction/approval. The State of Gujarat appealed the acquittal to the Supreme Court under the special appeal provision of TADA.
The Supreme Court examined whether the respondents could still be convicted under the Arms Act and other ordinary laws even though the TADA charge itself failed for lack of a valid prior sanction. Relying on its own precedent (including Ashrafkhan v. State of Gujarat), the Court held that confessional statements recorded under TADA's special procedure cannot be used as admissible evidence to convict an accused under other, non-TADA statutes once the TADA charge itself is invalidated for non-compliance with mandatory sanction requirements. Since the prosecution's case under the Arms Act and other laws rested essentially on these TADA-recorded confessions, and the search-and-seizure evidence was independently found to be deficient, the Court agreed with the trial court that no legally admissible evidence supported conviction. The State's appeals were accordingly dismissed and the acquittal upheld.
Confessions obtained under a special law's relaxed evidentiary procedure (like TADA) cannot be used to secure a conviction under ordinary criminal law once the special law's own jurisdictional pre-conditions (such as a valid sanction) are not met: procedural safeguards cannot be bypassed by falling back on a different statute.
