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.
The respondent appeared in the Civil Services Examination, 2014 (his fifth and final attempt) and cleared the preliminary exam, main exam, and interview. His medical report, uploaded on 17 June 2015, showed a Body Mass Index of 32 (against the permitted 30), so he was declared "temporarily unfit." His name did not figure in the main merit list but later appeared at Sl. No. 16 in the reserve list published on 19 January 2016; after allotments were made on 9 March 2016, he applied on 10 March 2016 for a re-medical examination, which the authorities refused as being beyond the six-month window prescribed by the recruitment rules.
The Central Administrative Tribunal had dismissed his case for missing the six-month deadline (counted from the 17 June 2015 upload), but the High Court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh read the word "ordinarily" in Rule 7(a)(vii) of Appendix-III of the CSE Rules as allowing discretionary relaxation and ordered a re-medical examination. The Supreme Court held that the High Court's reading was legally unsustainable: "ordinarily" must be read together with "maximum," so six months is a firm outer limit save for genuinely exceptional situations (e.g., a pregnant candidate unable to complete examination in time), and the respondent's facts did not qualify. However, since the Court itself had earlier directed a re-medical examination during the appeal, and the respondent was found "medically fit for all services" in a May 2022 report, the Court invoked its special power under Article 142 of the Constitution to do complete justice: it set aside the High Court's judgment on the legal point but still directed the Union to consider the respondent for appointment per his original 2016 reserve-list ranking, with notional seniority and benefits but without back pay for the period not worked.
Statutory deadlines described as running "ordinarily" up to a "maximum" period are treated as firm limits, not open-ended discretion, but the Supreme Court can still use its Article 142 power to grant relief on the specific facts even after ruling against a party's legal argument.
