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 moreDuring a police investigation into illegal sale of call-detail records, the respondent's husband, Rizwan Alam Siddique, was found to be destroying evidence on his phone and laptop and was arrested; a Magistrate granted the police his custody until 23 March 2018. His wife filed a habeas corpus petition in the Bombay High Court without challenging the Magistrate's remand order itself. The High Court found the police had not properly complied with arrest procedure, ordered his immediate release, and additionally made sharp critical remarks against the investigating police officers, directing disciplinary and even criminal proceedings against them, without giving the officers a chance to explain themselves.
The Supreme Court held that a writ of habeas corpus cannot be issued for a person held in police custody under a valid, subsisting judicial remand order, since that order had not itself been challenged, the detention was not "illegal" in the sense required for habeas corpus, and the High Court should not have gone into the merits of the arrest at all. Relying on its own precedent deprecating harsh, one-sided remarks against investigating officers without hearing them, the Court expunged the High Court's scathing observations against the police. The appeal was allowed, though since the husband had already been released, the Court clarified that police could still proceed against him lawfully in connection with the case, without expressing any opinion on his guilt.
Habeas corpus is the wrong remedy to challenge custody that stems from a valid court-ordered remand: the proper course is to challenge that remand order itself; and courts should not make severe adverse findings against investigating officers without first giving them a chance to be heard.
