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 LawSupreme Court of India

Vinod Katara vs State of U.P.

Not available · 2024 INSC 171Decided 5 Mar 2024
Not available

Background

The petitioner was convicted in 1986, along with three co-accused, for murder committed in 1982 and sentenced to life imprisonment; his conviction was upheld through the appellate process and he had already spent decades either in custody or on suspended sentence. Decades later, he filed a writ petition claiming that he was a juvenile at the time of the offence and was therefore entitled to the protections of the juvenile justice law, seeking to have his case sent back for a proper age-determination inquiry.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court had the matter inquired into by the trial court, which examined school records (admission register and transfer certificate from his primary school) alongside a medical ossification test. The school records placed his date of birth in 1960, making him an adult at the time of the offence, while other family documents he relied on were found to be doctored/inconsistent. The Court reaffirmed the settled priority under Section 94(2) of the Juvenile Justice Act: a school-issued date of birth certificate ranks above an ossification/medical test, which is only to be used as a last resort. Finding no merit in the juvenility claim, the Court dismissed the writ petition.

Lesson Learnt

Under Indian juvenile justice law, documentary proof of age (school records, birth certificates) takes priority over medical/ossification tests, which are only a fallback when no such records exist: a claim of juvenility made decades after conviction will be tested rigorously against the best available documentary evidence, not accepted on say-so.

Vinod Katara vs State of U.P. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware