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

Viraj Tra Desai vs. State of Gujarat & Ors.

SLP(C)Decided 30 Aug 2022
SLP(C) No. 7951 of 2002
Uday Umesh Lalit · S. Ravindra Bhat · J.B. Pardiwala

Background

This 2002 petition originally sought transfer of investigation into a Gujarat-riots-related matter to the CBI, after the Gujarat High Court declined such transfer. Around the same time, the National Human Rights Commission had also approached the Supreme Court, leading the Court to earlier direct constitution of a Special Investigating Team (SIT) to investigate and prosecute nine major riot-related trials across the state. Over the following two decades, several connected petitions (transfer petitions, writ petitions, and an SLP) accumulated around this core matter and were listed together.

Decision Breakdown

By 2022, counsel informed the Court that eight of the nine major trials entrusted to the SIT had already concluded at the trial stage and were pending only in appeal, while only the trial relating to the Naroda Gaam incident remained pending (at the stage of final arguments). Counsel for the petitioners in the connected matters conceded that their petitions had become infructuous, except for one request: restoration of protection for activist Teesta Setalvad, who was named in the case. The Court held that it need not entertain the petitions further and disposed of them all as having become infructuous, while directing that the Naroda Gaam trial be taken to its logical conclusion and that the SIT remains empowered to take appropriate steps. On the protection issue, the Court gave Ms. Setalvad liberty to make an appropriate application before the concerned authorities, to be dealt with in accordance with law.

Lesson Learnt

Long-pending litigation can become "infructuous" (pointless to continue) once the underlying grievance is overtaken by events: here, most trials the petition was designed to safeguard had already run their course. Courts will still preserve accountability mechanisms (like the SIT) for genuinely pending matters even while closing the broader litigation.

Viraj Tra Desai vs. State of Gujarat & Ors. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware