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.
Transfer Petition (Criminal) · 2026 INSC 1060
Where a marriage has irretrievably broken down and the parties reach a genuine, voluntary settlement, including on alimony, the Supreme Court can use its Article 142 powers to grant a mutual-consent divorce and close out all related litigation in one stroke, without requiring the usual statutory waiting period.
Writ Petition (Civil) · 2026 INSC 1061
In long-running, complex litigation involving apportioned government liabilities across states, the Supreme Court can use a mechanism like a retired-judge committee plus periodic compliance affidavits to bring genuine finality, including firm timelines, transparency obligations, and interest for delayed payment, rather than leaving matters open-ended.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1062
In an "as is where is" liquidation auction, a bidder who voluntarily accepts the auction terms cannot later resile from a forfeiture clause by citing regulatory caps or after-the-fact excuses for non-payment: courts will enforce the auction notice's own conditions.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8338-DB
Once someone is released from custody because the police failed to properly communicate the grounds of arrest, the police cannot simply re-arrest them by adding new charges: a specific, court-supervised procedure with senior-officer accountability must be followed, or the re-arrest itself becomes illegal.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8308
In economic-offence cases, bail can still be granted where the method used to quantify the alleged financial evasion is not adequately justified, and where the apprehension of re-offending is speculative rather than evidence-based.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8323
A parole claim must be backed by a genuine, verifiable application to the competent jail authority: courts will scrutinise irregularities like an incomplete address, an unexplained thumb mark, or reliance on a mere friend's affidavit rather than close family.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8337
Courts can grant short, strictly time-bound interim bail purely on humanitarian/compassionate grounds (such as caring for a seriously ill family member), even while a case remains pending trial and an earlier bail plea has failed.
Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8312
Courts will not repeatedly re-examine a bail plea already rejected on merits unless the applicant can point to a genuine change in circumstances since the earlier order.
First Appeal from Order · 2026:DHC:8334
Under the no-fault compensation scheme for railway accidents, a valid ticket-holder injured while attempting to board a train, even carelessly, is generally entitled to compensation unless the railway can show a deliberate, conscious exposure to danger, not mere negligence.
6171 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 moreLegal 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 ___).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Following the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh, a dispute arose over allocating employees of the erstwhile combined State Power Utilities between the successor Andhra Pradesh and Telangana power companies. The Supreme Court had earlier accepted a "One Man Committee" report (by Justice D.M. Dharmadhikari) and, by judgment dated 7 December 2020, directed both states' power utilities to implement and absorb all employees on the Committee's final list. 84 petitioners, employees who had already been relieved by the Andhra Pradesh Power Utilities on the strength of this list, alleged that the Telangana Power Utilities (TS Genco, TS Transco, TSSPDCL and TSNPDCL) then issued office orders in December 2020 that arbitrarily left them out of absorption, in defiance of the Court's ruling, leaving them without a job or salary.
The Supreme Court held that once the One Man Committee's Final Report and List had been accepted and made binding by its own earlier order, any deviation from it by the Telangana Power Utilities amounted to willful disobedience. It rejected the Telangana Power Utilities' attempt to re-raise "reciprocity" and "financial neutrality" objections that had already been considered and dismissed in the Court's December 2020 order, holding there must be finality to litigation. The Court found the Telangana Power Utilities guilty of civil contempt for deliberately disobeying its judgment dated 7 December 2020. However, before deciding the actual punishment, it gave the contemnors one final opportunity: two weeks to absorb all 84 petitioners as per the approved list and to pay them salary and service benefits from the date they were relieved by the Andhra Pradesh Power Utilities, with the question of sentence to be taken up on 31 October 2022 depending on compliance.
A government body or public utility that has lost a legal battle before the Supreme Court cannot evade compliance by repeatedly re-raising the same objections through fresh administrative orders, doing so exposes it (and its officers) to a finding of contempt of court, and the Court can hold a party guilty of contempt while still giving a final, time-bound chance to comply before imposing punishment.
