Skip to main content

10 LANDMARK JUDGEMENTS OF SUPREME COURT - By Knowledge Nation Law Centre

Follow on Instagram for latest Updates 

To follow 👇👇


10 Landmark judgements of Supreme Court for law entrance exams. 

1) Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala (1973):

Explanation: Established the doctrine of Basic Structure of the Constitution, limiting the Parliament's power to amend certain parts of the Constitution.

2) Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India (1978):

Explanation: Expanded the scope of personal liberty under Article 21, stating that it includes the right to travel abroad.

3) Shah Bano Case (1985):

Explanation: Highlighted the issue of Muslim women's rights, affirming the obligation of Muslim husbands to provide maintenance to divorced wives.

4)Vishakha vs. State of Rajasthan (1997):

Explanation: Laid down guidelines to address sexual harassment at the workplace and recognized the importance of women's right to a safe working environment.

5) M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India (1986):

Explanation: Resulted in the closure of hazardous industries in Delhi, addressing environmental concerns and setting a precedent for public interest litigation in environmental matters.

6) Aruna Shanbaug vs. Union of India (2011):

Explanation: Decriminalized passive euthanasia and provided guidelines for executing living wills, protecting the rights of individuals in end-of-life situations.

7) Navtej Singh Johar vs. Union of India (2018):

Explanation: Struck down parts of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, decriminalizing consensual homosexual acts between adults, emphasizing the right to privacy and individual autonomy.

8) S.R. Bommai vs. Union of India (1994):

Explanation: Clarified the limitations on the use of Article 356 (President's Rule) and emphasized the importance of federalism in the Indian political structure.

9) Indra Sawhney vs. Union of India (1992):

Explanation: Laid down the concept of the creamy layer and upheld the reservation of seats in educational institutions and jobs for socially and educationally backward classes.

10) Mohd. Ahmed Khan vs. Shah Bano Begum (1985):

Explanation: Addressed the issue of maintenance for divorced Muslim women, emphasizing the applicability of the Code of Criminal Procedure over personal laws in such cases.

Call - 9999882757 / 9999882858 

Follow on Instagram for Updates on Law Entrances - CLICK HERE 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How Knowledge Nation Law Centre created soo many results in Past years | Success story of KNLC

Success story of   Knowledge Nation Law Centre  -  Best CLAT coaching In Delhi Started in the year 2011 , KNLC has trained more than 11000 law aspirants in past years. & Has maintained the legacy of producing maximum no of selections by single educational institution from last 5 years   Because of results of  KNLC  , it has been awarded several awards in past years. How results are made  1) 75 worksheets program (LAST 15 years questions that too topic wise & type wise arranged ) of each topic. 2) Expert Faculty of each and every subject , a team of 28 Faculties. 3) Comprehensive Study material designed by law team. 4) Workbooks of every topic give extra competitive advantage over other candidates. 5) Mandatory Revision Classes after the course completion.  6) Updated test series - Chapter wise tests , Module wise test & Full detailed Syllabus tests in accordance with the latest pattern. 7) Doubt solving Helpline & ...
3 comments
Read more

Landmark Supreme Court Judgements for LAW Entrances

Topic - Supreme Court Landmark Judgements  Quick Read / Learn for Law Entrances  Here are some landmark Supreme Court judgments in India, in detail, point wise _Fundamental Rights_ 1. _A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950)_: Defined the scope of Article 21 (Right to Life and Liberty) 2. _State of West Bengal v. Subodh Gopal Bose (1951)_: Established the principle of "procedure established by law" under Article 21 3. _Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)_: Held that the basic structure of the Constitution is unamendable _Equality and Social Justice_ 1. _State of Punjab v. Jalal Singh (1966)_: Struck down the Punjab Act, which allowed for preventive detention 2. _Golak Nath v. State of Punjab (1967)_: Held that Parliament cannot amend Fundamental Rights 3. _Indira Sawhney v. Union of India (1992)_: Upheld the Mandal Commission's recommendations for reservation _Separation of Powers_ 1. _Ram Jawaya Kapur v. State of Punjab (1955)_: Established the principle of jud...
Post a Comment
Read more

CLAT 2025 : Delhi High Court Finds Two Answers 'Demonstrably Wrong', Directs To Revise Results Of Petitioner

The Delhi High Court has ruled that courts shouldn't take a completely hands-off approach when it comes to correcting errors in answer keys, especially when those errors are clearly wrong. Justice Jyoti Singh emphasized that courts have the power to review and challenge answer keys, even if expert opinions are involved. In a recent case, a candidate challenged the final answer key for the CLAT-UG 2025 exam, specifically questioning five answers. The court found errors in two of those questions and decided that ignoring those mistakes would be unfair to the candidate and potentially affect other candidates' results. As a result, the court ordered that the candidate's result be revised to award marks for one of the incorrectly answered questions. Additionally, the court excluded another question from the exam, as recommended by an expert committee. The Consortium of NLUs had argued that their expert committee had thoroughly reviewed all objections before finalizing the answer...
Post a Comment
Read more