Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

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.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal 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 ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

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.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

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.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

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.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

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.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

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.

Criminal LawDelhi High Court

Veer Pal vs. State

Criminal Appeal · CNR No. DLHC010508752005Decided 18 Sept 2026New Delhi Bench
CRL.A. 229/2005CNR: DLHC010508752005
Justice Vimal Kumar Yadav

Background

The appellant was convicted of attempt to murder (Section 307 IPC) and sentenced to 5 years' rigorous imprisonment after he assaulted a labourer, who was sleeping in a market verandah after a hard day's work, with a "rapi" (a cobbler's leather-cutting tool) when the man asked him to quiet down a disturbance. The victim suffered a serious wound running from his cheek to his chest but survived after surgery.

Decision Breakdown

The Court extensively reviewed Supreme Court precedent on distinguishing "intention" from mere "knowledge" for an attempt-to-murder conviction, holding that such intention must be inferred from the nature of the weapon, how it was used, the body part targeted, and the surrounding circumstances, not simply from the fact that an injury occurred. It found that although a dangerous weapon was used on a vital area, the single blow was delivered vertically (not by stabbing), the wound (though serious) was not "grievous" under the strict legal definition, and there was no prior enmity or premeditation: the entire episode arose spontaneously from a trivial dispute. The Court therefore reduced the conviction from attempt to murder (Section 307) to voluntarily causing hurt with a sharp weapon (Section 324), and reduced the sentence from 5 to 3 years.

Lesson Learnt

Not every violent assault with a weapon amounts to "attempt to murder" in law: courts look closely at whether there was a genuine intention to kill, and a single spontaneous blow arising from a sudden quarrel, without more, may only support a lesser charge of causing hurt.

Veer Pal vs. State – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware