CLAT Legal Aptitude: Key Recent Judgments

Important Legal Cases and Their Relevance
For CLAT Aspirants | CLAT | Career Launcher South Ex

---

Introduction

Legal aptitude isn’t just about memorizing principles—it’s about understanding how they are applied in real-life judgments.

For CLAT aspirants aiming for top NLUs, staying updated with recent landmark Supreme Court and High Court judgments is a major advantage.

Why?
CLAT’s legal reasoning section has evolved. It now emphasizes the application of legal principles to real-world scenarios, often tied to current affairs and constitutional developments.

In this article, Career Launcher South Ex highlights key judgments from the past 12–18 months, breaking them down with clarity and showing how they matter for your prep.

---

Why Recent Judgments Matter in CLAT Legal Aptitude

CLAT does not test prior legal knowledge. But it does assess your ability to:

• Understand legal passages

• Identify core legal issues

• Apply principles to fact situations

• Avoid moral/emotional bias in reasoning

• Use legal logic, not assumptions

Judgments involving constitutional rights, personal liberty, due process, and government powers are fertile ground for CLAT-style legal reasoning questions.

---

Key Landmark Judgments

1. Same-Sex Marriage Verdict (Oct 2023)

Case: Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty v. Union of India
Issue: Can same-sex couples marry under the Constitution?
Judgment: Supreme Court declined to legalize same-sex marriage but reinforced the dignity and equality of LGBTQIA+ individuals.
CLAT Relevance: Article 14, Article 21, separation of powers

---

2. Abortion Rights for Unmarried Women (Sep 2022)

Case: X v. Principal Secretary Health & Family Welfare
Issue: Can unmarried women terminate pregnancies up to 24 weeks under MTP Act?
Judgment: Yes. Denial would violate Articles 14 and 21.
CLAT Relevance: Right to bodily autonomy, legal interpretation of "woman"

---

3. Demolition Without Notice (2023)

Case: Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Issue: Can the state demolish an accused person’s property without notice?
Judgment: No. Due process and natural justice must be followed.
CLAT Relevance: Rule of Law, procedural fairness

---

4. Hijab Ban in Schools (2022–23)

Case: Fathima Thasneem v. State of Karnataka
Issue: Can hijab be banned under a school’s dress code policy?
Judgment: High Court upheld the ban; matter now with larger bench.
CLAT Relevance: Articles 25, 19 – religious freedom vs reasonable restriction

---

5. Right to Be Forgotten (2023)

Case: XYZ v. Union of India
Issue: Can someone request removal of old online content after acquittal?
Judgment: Recognized under the Right to Privacy (Article 21), subject to limits.
CLAT Relevance: Digital rights, privacy vs right to information

---

6. Death Penalty Sentencing Guidelines (2023)

Case: Manoj v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Issue: Should courts consider rehabilitation before awarding death?
Judgment: Laid down a structured 3-step sentencing framework.
CLAT Relevance: Mitigating factors, criminal justice reform

---

7. Delhi LG vs CM Powers (May 2023)

Case: Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India
Issue: Who controls Delhi’s bureaucracy — LG or elected CM?
Judgment: Elected government has legislative control, except over land, police, public order.
CLAT Relevance: Federalism, constitutional interpretation

---

How CLAT May Frame These Judgments as Questions

Example 1

Principle: Everyone is entitled to equal protection of the law.
Facts: A shop is demolished overnight by the municipality without a notice.
Answer: Violation of due process.
Connected Case: Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind v. UP

---

Example 2

Principle: Right to life includes dignity and bodily autonomy.
Facts: An unmarried woman is denied an abortion at 22 weeks.
Answer: Violation of Article 21.
Connected Case: X v. Principal Secretary Health

---

Example 3

Principle: Religious freedom is subject to reasonable restrictions.
Facts: A school bans hijabs.
Answer: Validity depends on whether it’s an essential religious practice and the reasonableness of the restriction.
Connected Case: Fathima Thasneem v. State of Karnataka

---

How to Prepare Judgments for CLAT

• Use short, reliable summaries

• Focus on issues, reasoning, outcome

• Link to constitutional articles

• Create flashcards for 15–20 key cases

• Practice applying them in CLAT-style MCQs

---

Topics to Prioritize

• Articles 14, 19, 21, 25

• Due process and natural justice

• Fundamental rights vs state powers

• Criminal law procedures

• Digital privacy and data rights

• Separation of powers and federalism

---

What to Avoid

• Memorizing case dates or citations

• Deep legal jargon or technicalities

• Reading full judgments unless necessary

• Relying on unchecked video summaries

• Overloading with too many cases

---

How Career Launcher South Ex Supports You

• Live sessions on legal reasoning and current judgments

• Judgment-based CLAT mock questions

• Monthly digests curated by law experts

• Flashcards and quick revision notes

• Group discussions and practice exercises

• Regular updates on CLAT pattern changes

---

Final Thoughts

Your legal aptitude section can be a score booster — but only if you learn to think legally, not just memorize.
These judgments help you train your mind to reason like a future law student.

At Career Launcher South Ex, we’re here to make that journey easier.
Keep practicing, stay updated, and think critically — that’s how you win CLAT.