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.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1094
An older qualification must still satisfy the eligibility rules governing the appointment sought. Here, the certificate's early date did not secure reinstatement, and rejection of eligibility should not be confused with a conclusive finding that the certificate was forged.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1095
A party benefiting from a conditional stay must meet its deposit requirement or face enforcement. The additional ₹15 crore deposit secures the pending dispute; it does not settle the land's final compensation or amount to an immediate payment to the landowners.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1093
An alleged attempt to kill does not become a lesser offence simply because the victim avoided a fatal injury. Restoring this charge means the accusation must be tried; it does not establish that the accused is guilty.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1090
For the assessment in this case, assistance reducing ordinary manufacturing costs was taxable even though the government wanted to encourage industry. The purpose and actual operation of the particular subsidy mattered more than its general development label.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1091
Proof that someone caused a serious injury does not by itself prove the additional ingredients of robbery. A court can substitute a lesser offence supported by the evidence; the sentencing reduction here depended on Appa's particular circumstances.
Special Leave Petition (Civil) · 2026 INSC 1092
Someone challenging an election must ensure that the personal-presentation requirement is met and can be proved. Merely entering the court building does not establish compliance, and a filing defect can end the challenge before the election allegations are examined.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1088
An employee who retires on 30 June may be entitled to the increment that falls due on 1 July after completing a year of service. Authorities that delay paying the amounts due must pay interest after the deadline set by the court.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1089
Recruitment must follow the qualifications stated in the advertisement and the governing Recruitment Rules. A court will not override a merit-based eligibility decision made under those rules merely because the candidate concerned was higher in the written test.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8797
A person who occupied property only because of employment has no independent right to remain once the employment and decree end. Even when a petition fails, courts can make practical arrangements to let a person recover personal belongings.
14543 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 moreJournalists and a cartoonist at the newspaper "Mid Day" published stories and a cartoon in May 2007 alleging that the sons of a former Chief Justice of India (Justice Y.K. Sabharwal) had benefited in their real-estate business from sealing orders their father had passed on the bench shortly before retiring. The Delhi High Court took up the matter as suo motu contempt and found the journalists guilty of contempt, directing them to appear for sentencing.
The Supreme Court held that the publications, on their own terms, were directed at the Supreme Court (specifically a former CJI's conduct as a Supreme Court judge) and not at the Delhi High Court or any court subordinate to it. Under Article 215 of the Constitution and Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, a High Court's contempt power extends only to contempt of itself or of courts subordinate to it: it has no power to punish contempt of a superior court like the Supreme Court, which is reserved to the Supreme Court itself under Article 129. Since the Delhi High Court had no jurisdiction to initiate these proceedings, its order was without jurisdiction and was set aside, and the appeals were allowed.
A High Court cannot punish anyone for contempt of the Supreme Court; each court of record's contempt power is confined to contempt of itself and of courts below it, not courts above it.
