Top 10 Landmark Supreme Court Judgments Every Law Student Must Know (With IRAC Summaries)

---

Introduction

For every law student, mastering landmark judgments is key to cracking exams, internships, and court arguments. Below are 10 important Supreme Court cases in IRAC format (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion)—making it easier to understand, memorize, and revise.

---

1. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)

Issue: Can Parliament amend any part of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights?
Rule: The Basic Structure Doctrine limits Parliament’s power under Article 368.
Application: The Court upheld the power to amend but protected the Constitution’s core structure.
Conclusion: Parliament cannot alter the basic structure of the Constitution.

---

2. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)

Issue: Can the government restrict a citizen’s liberty without a fair process under Article 21?
Rule: Procedure under law must be just, fair, and reasonable.
Application: The arbitrary impounding of a passport without a hearing was struck down.
Conclusion: Article 21 includes a due process standard.

---

3. Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985)

Issue: Can a divorced Muslim woman claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC?
Rule: Section 125 applies to all citizens to prevent destitution.
Application: The Court upheld the woman’s right to maintenance despite personal law.
Conclusion: CrPC overrides personal laws for maintenance.

---

4. Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975)

Issue: Can Parliament amend election laws to favor a specific leader?
Rule: Amendments violating free & fair elections are against the basic structure.
Application: Court invalidated an amendment that tried to shield Indira Gandhi’s election.
Conclusion: Rule of law and free elections are part of the basic structure.

---

5. Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018)

Issue: Is criminalizing consensual same-sex acts under Section 377 IPC constitutional?
Rule: Articles 14, 15 & 21 guarantee equality, dignity, and privacy.
Application: Court decriminalized homosexuality between consenting adults.
Conclusion: Section 377 partially struck down.

---

6. Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017)

Issue: Is the right to privacy a fundamental right in India?
Rule: Privacy is protected under Articles 14, 19, and 21.
Application: A 9-judge bench unanimously declared privacy fundamental.
Conclusion: Privacy is now a constitutional right.

---

7. Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma (2020)

Issue: Can daughters claim equal coparcenary rights in HUF property?
Rule: 2005 amendment to Hindu Succession Act gives equal rights from birth.
Application: Daughters are coparceners even if the father is deceased.
Conclusion: Daughters and sons have equal rights.

---

8. Joseph Shine v. Union of India (2018)

Issue: Is Section 497 IPC (Adultery) violative of equality principles?
Rule: It violates Articles 14, 15, and 21.
Application: The Court found it patriarchal and discriminatory.
Conclusion: Adultery is no longer a criminal offence.

---

9. Shayara Bano v. Union of India (2017)

Issue: Is the practice of Triple Talaq (instant divorce) legally valid?
Rule: Arbitrary religious practices not essential to faith are unconstitutional.
Application: Triple Talaq violates equality and is not protected under religion.
Conclusion: Practice struck down as unconstitutional.

---

10. State of Rajasthan v. Balchand (1977)

Issue: Is bail a rule or an exception in criminal jurisprudence?
Rule: Bail is the rule; jail is the exception.
Application: The Court emphasized personal liberty in bailable cases.
Conclusion: Bail should be granted unless there’s serious risk.

---

Final Note:

Using the IRAC method makes legal cases easy to memorize, especially when preparing for law exams or interviews. You can convert these into flashcards, case briefs, or notes for regular revision.