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.

Mining LawSupreme Court of India

Waqf Board, Rajasthan vs. Jindal Saw Limited & Ors.

Civil AppealDecided 29 Apr 2022
Civil Appeal No. 2788 of 2022
Hemant Gupta · V. Ramasubramanian

Background

Jindal Saw Limited held a mining lease over land in Village Pur, Bhilwara, Rajasthan for extracting gold, silver and other minerals. The Waqf Board claimed that a structure called "Tiranga Ki Qalandari Masjid" existed within the leased land and objected to mining activity near it, leading to a dispute and even an FIR. The Rajasthan High Court had earlier set up an Expert Committee (including an Archaeological Survey of India official) which found the dilapidated structure on the lease land was not a mosque or of any historical value, and the High Court ruled in favour of Jindal Saw, letting mining continue. The Waqf Board appealed to the Supreme Court, along with the State of Rajasthan's related appeal.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court examined the Waqf Board's own documents and found that the mosque it claimed existed was actually located in a different survey number (931) from the land actually leased to Jindal Saw (survey number 6731), with no evidence the two numbers referred to the same land. There was also an unexplained discrepancy in the mosque's recorded size between the Board's own register and its later survey report. The Court held there was no proof that the structure had ever actually been dedicated to or used for religious worship (essential elements to legally qualify as a "waqf" under the Waqf Act), and a mere dilapidated wall or platform cannot automatically be treated as a place of worship without such proof. Since the expert report was only relied on for the limited point of historical/archaeological value (not to decide the legal question of waqf status), and the actual legal record did not support the Board's claim, the Court dismissed the appeals and upheld the High Court's decision allowing mining to continue.

Lesson Learnt

A claim that land is religious or waqf property must be backed by clear, consistent documentary proof of dedication or actual religious use tied to the correct survey number: vague claims, hearsay, or mismatched land records will not be enough to stop a lawfully granted lease or activity.

Waqf Board, Rajasthan vs. Jindal Saw Limited & Ors. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware