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 appellant's husband, an advocate, was murdered outside his office in November 2015; five persons were arrested and a murder trial proceeded before a Sessions Court in Indore. Cellular network nodal officers had given evidence about call detail records showing the location of the accused only in coded form, and a "decoding register" was needed to translate those codes into actual locations. The prosecution's applications under Section 311 CrPC to summon witnesses and produce the decoding register were repeatedly rejected by the trial court, which held the document was not part of the investigation, and the Madhya Pradesh High Court upheld that rejection, prompting the widow's appeal to the Supreme Court.
The Court first rejected the accused's objection that Section 301 CrPC barred the widow (as a private party) from pursuing the matter, since the actual application for summoning was made by the State/prosecution and she was not attempting to replace the Public Prosecutor. On the substantive question, the Court held that Section 311 CrPC confers wide power on a trial court to summon or recall witnesses at "any stage" of a trial whenever such evidence is "essential to the just decision of the case," and that this power is not barred merely because prosecution evidence has been formally closed. Since a key prosecution witness (the Airtel nodal officer) had already testified that call locations were recorded only in code, requiring a separate decoding register/chart to interpret them, the Court found this evidence essential and that its introduction would not prejudice the accused's fair-trial rights, as it merely clarified evidence already on record rather than introducing something new. The Court held the timing objection factually incorrect (the application predated the closure of evidence by several months) and set aside both the trial court's and High Court's orders, allowing the applications for production of the decoding register and directed the trial to conclude by 31 October 2022; it separately extended interim bail granted to one co-accused on medical grounds.
A trial court's power under Section 311 CrPC to summon crucial evidence, such as records needed to make sense of technical data already on file, extends even to the late stages of a trial and even after formal closure of evidence, so long as the material is genuinely essential to reaching a just verdict and does not unfairly prejudice the accused; courts should not let procedural technicalities block the discovery of the truth.
