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.
An FIR was registered against a sitting Member of Parliament (Chairman of the Airport Advisory Committee of Deoghar Airport) and others after their chartered flight took off from Deoghar Airport, alleging they had forcibly entered the Air Traffic Control room and pressured officials into granting take-off clearance close to sunset. The FIR invoked provisions of the Indian Penal Code (trespass and related offences) as well as the Aircraft Act, 1934. The Jharkhand High Court had quashed the FIR, holding it was filed with mala fide intent and that continuing the proceedings would abuse the process of law; the State of Jharkhand appealed to the Supreme Court to revive the prosecution.
The Supreme Court examined the FIR's own factual allegations and found no averment that anyone had unlawfully entered the ATC premises with intent to commit an offence or to intimidate, insult, or annoy anyone in possession, a necessary ingredient for criminal trespass or house-trespass under the IPC, and noted the incongruity that even the Airport Director had been named as an accused. The Court held that the IPC offences under Sections 336, 447 and 448 were not made out on the facts as alleged. Separately, the Court held that the Aircraft Act, 1934 and its rules form a complete code governing aviation safety and security, and that Section 12B of that Act requires a complaint by (or with the sanction of) an authorised aviation officer as a precondition to a court taking cognizance, meaning the local police could investigate but could not itself prosecute under that Act; instead it could only forward its collected material to the authorised officer to decide on filing a complaint. The appeals were dismissed, with liberty given to the State to forward the investigation material to the appropriate aviation authority within four weeks.
Where a special statute (like the Aircraft Act) prescribes its own procedure and requires a complaint from a designated authority before prosecution, ordinary criminal offences under the IPC cannot be used as a substitute route unless the specific factual ingredients of those IPC offences are actually made out: vague or unsupported allegations dressed up as trespass or intimidation will not survive judicial scrutiny.
