Highlights

Every curated judgment is given a significance score from signals in its own summary. The more a judgment explains and settles a point of law, the higher it ranks. A clear ruling on any section of any statute counts.

• Explains the law: the ratio interprets or clarifies a provision (its scope, meaning, or whether it is mandatory or directory), lays down a test or principles, and is reasoned in some detail.
• Provisions discussed: the more sections, rules and articles it engages with, the higher it scores. The ones found are listed on each card.
• Settles the law: it overrules or clarifies earlier decisions, resolves conflicting views, or issues guidelines.
• Constitutional questions: a challenge to validity or a finding of violation of fundamental rights adds to the score. It is one factor among several.
• Court and bench: the Supreme Court weighs most, then the Delhi High Court, then ATFP. Larger benches add more, and a Constitution Bench adds the most.
• Precedents and practical weight: cases that engage with many precedents, deal with widely litigated statutes (for example PMLA, FEMA, GST, customs, CrPC/BNSS, Arbitration), or are won by a citizen against the State score somewhat higher.
• Routine orders rank lower: condonation of delay, remands and fact-specific dispositions lose points unless the ratio also explains the law.

Scores map to Landmark, Significant and Notable; lower-scoring judgments are not shown here but remain in the Raw Feed. The ranking is automated and keyword-based, so it is a screening aid and not a legal opinion. The tags on each card show why it ranked where it did.