Judgment research · Bombay High Court & Supreme Court focus

Structured research. Faster briefs. Arguments that hold up.

BHCCO is built around how Indian advocates actually work—metadata you can filter, judgment text you can read end-to-end, and workspace tools when you need more than a one-off lookup.

Courts BHC · SCI Coverage you can filter
Research Filters Parties, dates, keywords
Workspace Diary · Saves For signed-in users
Verified Sources Official portals linked
Support India Human help via contact

Portal updates

News from our team.

  • In a significant ruling in Hindware v. Grohe, the Delhi High Court drew a distinction between the use of generic marks and coined, source-identifying marks like “Hindware” as keywords, while simultaneously narrowing the scope of intermediary safe harbour for platforms such as Google. The ruling builds on precedents such as Google v. DRS Logistics and Google LLC v. MakeMyTrip (India) Pvt. Ltd, where the courts have resisted treating keyword bidding as per se trademark infringement, particularly where the marks involved […]

  • What happens when copyright enforcement tools become instruments of commercial control rather than legal protection? In a significant ruling in Anamika Sood v. Google LLC & Saregama India Ltd., the Saket District Court declared independent artist Anamika Sood the rightful owner of her song “Ferrareee”, rejecting Saregama’s infringement claims over an expired copyright. But while the judgment resolves the ownership dispute, it leaves unresolved a larger structural concern: the growing misuse of automated copyright strike systems as tools of market […]

  • Namaskar, It is easy—and intuitive too—to suppose that Indian copyright law was nothing but British law imposed upon India. Plausible though the assumption may appear, the reality was more meandering and infinitely more intriguing. The deeper one delves, the clearer it becomes how confounding the history of Indian copyright is and how much of its buried past still awaits excavation. In this post, I untangle one of its many threads. A few months ago, while rummaging through the archives at […]

Professional discovery—without the clutter

From first-pass scanning to deep reading, BHCCO keeps judgment work organized so you spend time on substance, not tab management.

Smart database search

Parties, courts, years, and keywords—tuned for logged-in research workflows across the corpus.

Readable judgments

Open full text with typography suited to long orders and head notes where available.

Citations & references

Move between citation tools and judgment views instead of losing context in search results.

Bookmarks & workspace

Save matters and use the dashboard, diary, and subscriber tools as your practice scales.

Latest additions

See newly indexed decisions on the home page and browse the full latest list when signed in.

Teams & students

One consistent interface for chambers, litigation teams, and law school research desks.

Built with practitioners in mind

Workflow and navigation reflect feedback from advocates and researchers—prioritizing clarity over novelty.

Civil Criminal Commercial Writs

Four steps

How it works

1

Join

Register for database search, saved judgments, and workspace tools.

2

Search

Filter by court, year, parties, or keywords—then open the judgment.

3

Read

Use the reader layout for head notes and full orders.

4

Organize

Save work, maintain your diary, and collaborate from the dashboard.

Start from structured case data

Open an account for full search, saves, and workspace—or reach out if you need help choosing a plan.