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 appellant, accused No. 5 in two separate criminal cases pending before a Magistrate in Kerala, had his trial separated from his co-accused because he was unavailable at the time; the co-accused were later tried, with most of them (and in one case, all of them) acquitted. Citing those acquittals, the appellant argued to the High Court that continuing proceedings against him alone was pointless harassment and sought to have the cases quashed, but the High Court refused. He then appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court declined to quash the proceedings, holding that the appellant's arguments about the co-accused's acquittals were exactly the kind of contentions that should be raised before the Magistrate in a proper application under Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (the provision for discharge before trial), not grounds for the higher courts to short-circuit the trial process. The appeals were finally disposed of by directing the appellant to surrender before the Magistrate within four weeks, upon which he would be released on bail against a bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties in each case, and the Magistrate was directed to consider and decide any discharge application he files under Section 239 on its merits.
An accused person cannot get criminal proceedings against them quashed by a higher court simply by pointing to co-accused's acquittals in a separated trial: the correct route is to apply for discharge before the trial court itself, and the Supreme Court will usually send such fact-specific arguments back to be decided there rather than deciding them directly.
