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 moreOn Diwali night in 2010, the respondent, a police constable posted as a guard, got angry about the quality of mess food and about his colleagues bursting firecrackers. He opened fire with his service AK-47 rifle, hitting fellow constable Sanjeet Kumar with four bullet wounds in both thighs, and fired a second time before being overpowered and disarmed. The trial court convicted him under Section 307 IPC (attempt to murder) and the Arms Act, sentencing him to seven years' imprisonment, but the Himachal Pradesh High Court acquitted him of attempt to murder, convicting him instead only of the lesser offence under Section 326 IPC (causing grievous hurt) and sentencing him to time already served.
The Supreme Court held that the High Court wrongly focused only on the fact that the injuries, though grievous, were not life-threatening: Section 307 IPC requires only proof of intention or knowledge that death could result, not that the actual injury be fatal or even grievous. Given that the respondent, a trained member of a disciplined force, fired an AK-47 (a lethal weapon) multiple times at close range at colleagues in anger, the Court found clear intention/knowledge that his act could cause death, satisfying Section 307. It restored the trial court's conviction under Section 307 IPC and the Arms Act, but (considering the case was 15 years old, the incident arose from a sudden fit of rage, and the accused belonged to a disciplined force) reduced his sentence to the roughly one year five months he had already served, rather than the original seven years.
For a charge of attempt to murder, what matters is whether the accused acted with intent or knowledge that death could result, not how serious the victim's actual injuries turned out to be; a person cannot escape a Section 307 conviction merely because, by chance, the victim survived with less severe wounds than the weapon and manner of attack could have caused.
