Important Judgments and Case Laws for CLAT Legal Reasoning
- himanshilawprep
- 4 hours ago
- 6 min read
When preparing for the CLAT exam, many students feel confused about the Legal Reasoning section. One common question is: Do we need to remember judgments and case names? The answer is - not exactly, but knowing some important judgments helps you understand how legal principles are applied in real life. This improves your logic and gives you an edge.
In this blog, we’ll go through some landmark judgments and case laws that every CLAT aspirant should be familiar with. Don’t worry - we’ll explain them in easy language that you can understand even if you are just starting out. Think of this like learning from real-life stories that shaped the law in India.
Let’s begin!
1. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)
Topic: Constitution - Amendment & Basic Structure
This case is considered one of the most important in Indian legal history. The Supreme Court said that while Parliament can make changes (amendments) to the Constitution, it cannot change the basic structure of it.
What is “basic structure”? It means important parts like democracy, rule of law, separation of powers, and fundamental rights - these cannot be removed.
Why it matters for CLAT: This case helps you understand how law and power are balanced. You may get passages where a law affects fundamental rights, and this case helps you know how courts deal with such issues. Also, staying updated on all details about the CLAT exam, including landmark cases like this one, gives you an advantage in Legal Reasoning questions.
2. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)
Topic: Right to Life and Liberty – Article 21
Maneka Gandhi’s passport was taken away by the government without a proper reason. She went to court. The Supreme Court said that any law that takes away someone’s liberty must be fair, just, and reasonable.
This changed the way Article 21 is understood. It became a wider and more protective right for people.
Why it matters for CLAT: Article 21 is very common in legal passages. This case helps you apply the principle of fairness and justice when reading questions about individual rights.
3. Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932)
Topic: Law of Torts - Negligence
This is a British case, but very important in CLAT. A woman found a dead snail in her ginger beer bottle and fell sick. She sued the manufacturer.
The court said that a person must take reasonable care to avoid acts that could harm others. This is called the duty of care.
Why it matters for CLAT: Negligence-based legal reasoning questions are common. This case is a classic example of how harm can happen even without a direct contract.
4. Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985)
Topic: Maintenance after Divorce
In this case, a Muslim woman named Shah Bano was divorced by her husband and left without support. She asked the court for maintenance under Section 125 of CrPC, which applies to all Indians, not just one religion.
The Supreme Court said that she had the right to maintenance. This caused a lot of debate and even led to a new law later.
Why it matters for CLAT: This case shows the conflict between personal laws and secular laws, a common theme in CLAT legal reasoning.
5. K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017)
Topic: Right to Privacy
This is a very recent and famous case. The court said that the Right to Privacy is a fundamental right under Article 21.
It became important because of issues like Aadhaar, mobile tracking, and data privacy.
Why it matters for CLAT: CLAT loves current and relevant issues. This judgment helps you answer questions where privacy and individual rights are involved.
6. Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992)
Topic: Reservation Policy
This case is also called the Mandal Commission Case. The court approved 27% reservation for OBCs but added a condition that total reservations should not cross 50%.
The court also said that reservation cannot be based on economic status alone.
Why it matters for CLAT: You might face questions on equality, fairness, or government policy. This case helps you understand the balance between merit and social justice.
Check out the Best Judiciary Coaching in Jodhpur if you want to crack the judiciary exam and become a judge.
7. State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan (1951)
Topic: Educational Rights and Equality
This was one of the first cases on reservation. The court said that giving admissions only based on caste violated Article 29(2), which protects the right to education for all.
This led to the First Constitutional Amendment, which allowed reservations under Article 15(4).
Why it matters for CLAT: This case helps you see how laws change after court judgments. A great example of law and politics working together.
8. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997)
Topic: Sexual Harassment at Workplace
There was no proper law for workplace harassment until this case. The Supreme Court created rules called the Vishaka Guidelines, which later became the POSH Act (2013).
The case was based on the tragic story of Bhanwari Devi, a social worker in Rajasthan.
Why it matters for CLAT: This case shows how courts protect people even when laws are missing. Legal reasoning often includes such examples of judicial action.
9. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015)
Topic: Freedom of Speech and Internet
This case struck down Section 66A of the IT Act, which allowed police to arrest people for "offensive" online posts. The court said it violated freedom of speech (Article 19).
The law was too vague, and people were getting arrested for things like Facebook comments.
Why it matters for CLAT: Online rights and speech are current topics. This judgment is a good example of how courts protect freedom in modern ways.
10. Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala (2018)
Topic: Religious Practices vs. Gender Equality
This is also called the Sabarimala Case. The court said that banning women from entering the temple was against their right to equality and freedom of religion.
The judgment said that faith cannot be used to deny women their rights.
Why it matters for CLAT: It’s a perfect example of conflict between religious freedom and gender rights - a common topic in legal reasoning questions.
How to Use These Judgments in CLAT Preparation
Knowing the case names is not enough. You need to understand the legal principle behind them and learn to apply that principle in various situations.
Here’s how you can make the best use of these:
1. Make One-Line Summaries
Keep small notes like:
Kesavananda Bharati: Constitution’s basic structure can’t be changed
Maneka Gandhi: Law must be fair, not just legal
Donoghue: Duty of care in negligence
This will save you time in revision.
2. Think Like the Judge
When you read a legal reasoning passage, ask yourself:
What would the court do?
Apply logic based on real judgments you have studied.
3. Use Flashcards or Charts
Make a revision chart of 10–15 key cases with their topics and principles. Keep it near your study table. One look daily = better memory.
4. Practice Legal Reasoning Questions Using These Principles
When you practice mock tests, try to identify which principle is being tested. Is it privacy? Equality? Free speech? This connection will improve your answers.
Also, do explore Law as a Career in India
Quick Revision Table for CLAT Students
Case Name | Topic/Principle |
Kesavananda Bharati | Parliament can't change basic structure |
Maneka Gandhi | Law must be fair and just (Article 21) |
Donoghue v. Stevenson | Duty of care in negligence |
Shah Bano Case | Maintenance under CrPC |
K.S. Puttaswamy (Privacy) | Right to privacy is fundamental |
Indra Sawhney | Reservation limit and social justice |
Champakam Dorairajan | Start of reservation debate |
Vishaka Guidelines | Workplace harassment rules |
Shreya Singhal | Online freedom of speech |
Sabarimala Judgment | Gender equality in religion |
Why These Judgments Make a Difference
You don’t need to memorize 100 cases for CLAT. Just understand 10–15 major ones really well, and you’ll be ahead of most students. These judgments give you a sense of how law works in real life, which helps you apply logic quickly in the exam.
Legal reasoning is not about mugging up facts. It’s about thinking clearly and answering with purpose. These judgments will sharpen your thinking and give you that clarity.
Final Words: Keep It Simple and Smart
If you’re reading this, you’ve already taken the smart step. Instead of worrying about too much theory, you’re now learning how the courts think. That’s exactly what the CLAT exam wants from you.
Take small steps. Revise one case a day. Relate each principle to a real-life situation. And most importantly - don’t stress. Legal reasoning rewards calm and logical thinking.
Just like you learn from cricket matches or movie stories, you can learn from these case laws too. They are just legal stories that changed India.
Комментарии