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 moreCol. A.D. Nargolkar, an Army officer empanelled for promotion to Brigadier, had his promotion withheld after a Court of Inquiry (COI) was ordered against him on a private complaint alleging he had an improper relationship with and blackmailed a subordinate officer's wife. The officer tendered a settlement/apology letter to the complainant, but the COI still found him guilty, leading to a "Severe Displeasure (Recordable)" punishment and loss of his promotion. He fought this through the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) and courts for years, while the Union of India separately appealed an earlier High Court order favourable to the officer.
The Supreme Court found that the Court of Inquiry violated Army Rule 180, which guarantees an officer "full opportunity" to be present, cross-examine witnesses, and defend his character: the COI had relied on an undisclosed "discreet inquiry" report never put to the officer. It also held that his apology letter was conditional and given to buy peace with the complainant (who later withdrew his complaint and did not testify against him), not an unconditional admission of guilt, and so could not by itself prove the allegations without independent proof. The Court set aside the punishment and the AFT's judgment, allowed the officer's appeal, and directed he be promoted to Brigadier with retrospective effect, arrears of salary, and pension as a Brigadier. The Union of India's own appeal was held to no longer survive and was disposed of accordingly.
Even in military disciplinary proceedings, the basic rules of natural justice and fair process must be followed: a finding of guilt cannot rest on undisclosed evidence or an ambiguous "apology" given to settle a personal dispute; such an apology is not automatically proof of wrongdoing.
