Landmark Judgements & Important Cases for AIBE 19 Preparation 2024

For the AIBE 2024 exam, familiarising yourself with these landmark judgments is essential for excelling AIBE Exam 2024. These cases have played a pivotal role in shaping India's legal framework and remain highly relevant in the practice of law today. Read further to significantly enhance your chances of success in the AIBE 2024 and prepare you for real-world legal practice.

Landmark Judgements for AIBE Exam 2024 with Analysis

AIBE 19 Exam 2024 is scheduled to be held on December 1, 2024. AIBE Exam 2024 will be held in pen-and-paper mode. Here is a list of top landmark judgments that are essential for AIBE (All India Bar Examination) preparation. These cases cover a broad range of topics, including constitutional law, criminal law, contract law, family law, and more, helping you build a strong foundation of legal knowledge for the exam:

Latest Update: AIBE 19 Admit Card 2024 OUT @allindiabarexamination.com, Check steps to download

• Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)

The Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala case remains one of the cornerstone judgments of Indian constitutional law. It helped establish the balance of power between the legislature and the judiciary, ensuring that even Parliament cannot override the Constitution’s foundational principles. The Basic Structure Doctrine continues to serve as a key safeguard to protect the Constitution’s core values, ensuring that India's democracy, secularism, and justice system remain intact.

Also Read: All India Bar Exam 2024: How to fill AIBE 19 OMR Sheet?

• Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)

The Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India case is a milestone in the evolution of Indian constitutional law. It broadened the scope of personal liberty under Article 21 and introduced the concept of due process, ensuring that the state's actions affecting individual rights must be reasonable, just, and transparent. The case has shaped the judicial approach toward fundamental rights and continues to be cited in numerous judgments that deal with personal liberty, judicial review, and procedural fairness.

Also Read: Judicial Service Exams 2024: State-wise exam pattern, Syllabus, Eligibility Criteria, Prelims, Mains

• Marbury v. Madison (1803) (US Case with Indian Influence)

The Marbury v. Madison case laid down the crucial principle of judicial review, establishing the judiciary as the final arbiter on the constitutionality of laws and executive actions. This principle is directly applicable to India, where the Supreme Court of India enjoys similar powers to review and invalidate laws or actions that violate the Constitution. Judicial review in both the U.S. and India ensures that the rule of law prevails and that no branch of government exceeds its constitutional authority. Thus, the doctrine of judicial review established in Marbury v. Madison remains a cornerstone of Indian constitutional law, influencing the interpretation of the Constitution and the protection of fundamental rights.

• Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967)

The Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967) case was a critical moment in the history of Indian constitutional law. It limited Parliament's power to amend the Fundamental Rights, ruling that constitutional amendments could not alter them. This case laid the groundwork for later developments, such as the Kesavananda Bharati case, which established the basic structure doctrine and clarified the scope of Parliament's power to amend the Constitution. While Golaknath restricted the amending power, the 24th Amendment and subsequent rulings gradually restored and clarified the relationship between constitutional amendments and the protection of Fundamental Rights in India.

Also Read: AIBE 19 Books: Top 10 Topic-wise AIBE Preparation Books

• Shah Bano Case (Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum) (1985)

The Shah Bano case was a landmark judgment in the history of Indian law, marking a significant victory for women’s rights, especially in the context of maintenance after divorce. While the ruling was met with political controversy, it underscored the need for secular laws to ensure equality and justice for women, irrespective of their religious background. The case sparked important debates on the relationship between personal laws and secular laws, and while the Muslim Women's Act (1986) reversed the Court’s judgment, the case remains an important precedent in gender justice and the application of secular law in India.

• Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan (1997)

The Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan (1997) judgment stands as a crucial turning point in the fight against sexual harassment in India. It ensured that sexual harassment at the workplace was no longer a hidden issue and that employers had a duty to provide a safe and respectful environment for their employees. The Supreme Court’s judgment in this case laid the foundation for further legal reforms and empowered women to assert their rights in the workplace, helping to pave the way for the 2013 Sexual Harassment Act. The Vishakha Guidelines remain a significant milestone in India’s legal history concerning gender equality and workplace safety.

Also Read: एआईबीई (XIX) 2024 (Latest Updates): परीक्षा तिथि (जल्द ही), पंजीकरण, अधिसूचना, पात्रता, पैटर्न

• Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975)

The Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975) case was a landmark decision that shaped the electoral law in India, reinforced the judicial review powers of the Supreme Court, and became a critical chapter in the history of Indian democracy. The case highlighted the delicate balance between the powers of the executive, judicial independence, and the rule of law, and it continues to influence the discourse on constitutional amendments, election laws, and the fundamental rights of Indian citizens.

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

The Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India case (2018) is a landmark moment in Indian constitutional law and a significant victory for the LGBTQ+ community. By decriminalising homosexuality, the Supreme Court took a crucial step towards equality, freedom, and human dignity for all citizens, irrespective of their sexual orientation. This judgment not only emphasized the importance of the right to privacy but also reaffirmed the need for judicial protection of minority rights. The judgment has had far-reaching implications, both legally and socially, helping to break down the social stigma surrounding same-sex relationships and encouraging a more inclusive society. It remains a critical milestone in the ongoing fight for LGBTQ+ rights in India and serves as a beacon of hope for greater social justice and human rights protections in the country.

Also Read: Last 15 years AIBE Question Papers With Answers free PDF Download

• Sabarimala Case (Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala, 2018)

The Sabarimala Case (Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala, 2018) was a landmark judgment in the struggle for gender equality in India, particularly with regard to women’s rights to worship in places of religious significance. The judgment underscored the importance of constitutional morality, placing fundamental rights over regressive religious customs. It was a critical moment in the fight against discrimination and patriarchy within religious spaces, ensuring that constitutional principles such as equality, freedom, and dignity prevailed over discriminatory practices based on gender.

• State of Rajasthan v. Union of India (1977)

The State of Rajasthan v. Union of India case (1977) was a key decision in Indian constitutional law, particularly in the context of financial federalism. The Supreme Court’s judgment reinforced the Union Government’s authority to regulate and allocate financial resources to the states, especially for projects with national significance. While it highlighted the importance of state autonomy, the case affirmed that in the domain of financial assistance, the Union retains significant discretion and authority. This case remains a landmark in understanding the complex relationship between the Union and States in the context of fiscal policies and the distribution of resources.

Also Read: AIBE 19 Study Plan: Week-by-Week and Month-by-Month Guide

• R. V. District Registrar (2009)

The R. v. District Registrar case (2009) is a crucial decision in the context of privacy law and data protection in India. The Delhi High Court’s judgment reinforced the importance of privacy as a fundamental right and called for stronger safeguards to protect personal data from government overreach. This case helped shape the discourse on data protection and privacy rights, which gained even more prominence with the 2017 Puttaswamy judgment and the ongoing efforts to legislate on data privacy in India. The case remains a cornerstone in understanding the balance between state authority and individual privacy rights in India.

• R. v. Union of India (2013)

The R. v. Union of India (2013) case is a significant judgment that addresses the balance between judicial oversight and the executive’s authority in matters of public interest. The Supreme Court upheld the role of Public Interest Litigation in protecting fundamental rights and ensuring government accountability but emphasized the need for judicial restraint in matters of policy decisions. The case reinforced the separation of powers and clarified the scope of judicial review, ensuring that while the judiciary can protect rights, it must do so within the confines of its constitutional jurisdiction. This judgment remains crucial for understanding the limits and scope of judicial intervention in India.

Also Read: AIBE 2024 Last Minute Revision Tips and Best Books for AIBE 19 ExamUpdated Nov 8, 2024

• Rathinam v. Union of India (1994)

The P. Rathinam v. Union of India case (1994) was a pivotal judgment that marked a major shift in the Indian legal landscape regarding attempted suicide. The Supreme Court's ruling reflected a compassionate and progressive approach towards individuals in mental distress, emphasizing the need for mental health support over criminalisation. Although Section 309 was not fully struck down at the time, the case laid the groundwork for subsequent reforms in India's approach to suicide attempts, culminating in the decriminalisation of attempted suicide under the Mental Healthcare Act of 2017. This case is often cited for its expansion of the right to life, human dignity, and mental health awareness in India.

• Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997)

The L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India case (1997) is a landmark ruling that significantly impacted the judicial landscape in India. It upheld the constitutionality of the Administrative Tribunals Act, but crucially, it declared that the judicial review power of High Courts could not be limited by the Act.

The Supreme Court’s decision preserved the basic structure of the Constitution, reinforced the doctrine of judicial review, and emphasized the importance of judicial oversight in ensuring the fairness of administrative decisions. This case solidified the role of the judiciary in maintaining the rule of law and ensuring accountability in government decisions, particularly those made by administrative tribunals.

Also Read: Important Topics for AIBE 19 (XIX) Syllabus 2024 - Weightage, Landmark Judgements and More

• State of Karnataka v. Union of India (1977)

The State of Karnataka v. Union of India (1977) case is a landmark judgment that reaffirmed the federal structure of the Indian Constitution while recognising the Union's powers in certain areas. The Supreme Court's ruling in this case clarified the scope of discretionary power exercised by the Union over State matters, emphasising the need for a harmonious construction of constitutional provisions to maintain the balance of powers. The judgment was significant in strengthening the federal principles in India and ensuring that the autonomy of States is preserved within the framework of the Constitution. It also played a key role in defining the relationship between the Union and the States, ensuring that neither side encroaches upon the constitutional rights of the other.

• D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997)

The D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal case (1997) is a landmark judgment that significantly contributed to the protection of human rights and the prevention of custodial torture in India. The Court's detailed guidelines aimed at preventing custodial violence and safeguarding the rights of detainees became a benchmark for subsequent legal developments in the area of police reforms and human rights.

The judgment not only provided immediate relief to those affected by police brutality but also laid down a framework for future reforms in law enforcement practices, ensuring that the right to life and dignity is respected in all circumstances, including detention. The case remains a key reference in the ongoing dialogue around police accountability, human rights, and the protection of individual freedoms in India.

Also Read: Lowest Weightage Topics for AIBE Syllabus: No. of Questions, Best Books & MoreUpdated Nov 8, 2024

• NALSA v. Union of India (2014)

The NALSA v. Union of India (2014) case is a historic judgment that played a key role in advancing the rights of transgender individuals in India. By recognising transgender persons as a third gender, affirming their right to self-identify, and guaranteeing them legal protections against discrimination, the Supreme Court set a precedent for gender inclusivity and social justice.

The ruling not only guaranteed equality for transgender persons but also laid down a framework for policy reforms and affirmative action to address the historical marginalization of the transgender community in India. This case continues to serve as a vital legal milestone in the human rights movement in India, ensuring that transgender people have access to the same fundamental rights as other citizens.

• Keshav Singh v. Speaker (1965)

The Keshav Singh v. Speaker (1965) case is a crucial judgment in the area of legislative privileges, judicial review, and separation of powers. It affirmed the broad powers of the legislature to protect its privileges and ensure order within its chambers, while also recognizing the importance of constitutional protections for individuals.

The case helped define the limits of judicial intervention in legislative matters, reaffirming the autonomy of the legislature while ensuring that such powers are not exercised arbitrarily or in violation of the fundamental rights of individuals.

Also Read: Bare Acts for AIBE (XIX) 19 Exam 2024: Important Bare Acts, Study Tips

• Delhi Domestic Working Women’s Forum v. Union of India (1995)

The Delhi Domestic Working Women’s Forum v. Union of India (1995) case is a landmark judgment that made substantial strides in recognizing the legal rights of domestic workers in India, particularly women. By highlighting issues such as exploitation, working hours, minimum wages, and the right to social security, the Court brought much-needed attention to the plight of domestic workers, a largely invisible and marginalised group.

This judgment encouraged the State to take concrete steps toward improving the working conditions of domestic workers, and it remains a vital case in the ongoing struggle for gender equality and labor rights in India

• R.K. Garg v. Union of India (1981)

The R.K. Garg v. Union of India (1981) case is a significant ruling that dealt with the constitutional validity of certain provisions in the Income Tax Act, particularly those concerning the imposition of penalties for tax violations. The Court upheld the legality of these provisions, affirming the discretionary powers of the tax authorities but also emphasized the importance of procedural fairness and natural justice. It clarified the limits of judicial review in the exercise of discretionary powers and reaffirmed the legitimate role of the state in ensuring tax compliance. This case remains important in understanding the balance between state power and individual rights in the context of taxation law.

Also Read: Family Law for AIBE (19) 2024: Syllabus, Important Topics, Previous years' Questions, Books, Tips

• Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985)

Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985) is a landmark case in India that expanded the scope of fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution to include the right to livelihood. It established that individuals who depend on public spaces for their survival, such as pavement dwellers and street vendors, cannot be evicted without ensuring alternative arrangements. The case is a milestone in the development of human rights and social justice in India, particularly for the urban poor.

• Kunal Sood v. Union of India (2011)

Kunal Sood v. Union of India (2011) is an important case in Indian constitutional law, which focused on the rights of death row prisoners and the constitutional validity of the death penalty. While the Court upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty, it acknowledged the serious mental and psychological harm caused by prolonged delays in the execution of capital punishment. The case remains significant in the debate about human rights and capital punishment in India and has contributed to discussions about whether reforms are necessary to prevent the violation of the fundamental rights of individuals on death row.

•  T.K. Rangarajan v. Government of Tamil Nadu (2003)

The T.K. Rangarajan v. Government of Tamil Nadu (2003) case highlights the balance that needs to be struck between economic policies (such as privatization) and the fundamental rights of workers. While the Supreme Court upheld the government's right to privatize its undertakings and retrench employees as part of its policy, it also reaffirmed the importance of protecting workers' rights under Indian labour laws, ensuring that retrenchment is carried out in a fair and legal manner. This judgment remains relevant in discussions surrounding the rights of employees in the face of economic restructuring and privatisation efforts.

• Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995)

The Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India case remains a landmark judgment in India’s judicial history for its focus on personal law reform, particularly in the area of bigamy, conversion for marriage, and women’s rights. The Supreme Court's call for legislative intervention highlighted the need to address the inconsistencies between different personal laws and the necessity of a uniform legal framework that treats all citizens equally regardless of religion. This case continues to be relevant in the ongoing debates about religious freedoms, women’s empowerment, and law reform in India.

•  M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1986)

The M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1986) case was a landmark decision in the history of environmental law in India. It significantly advanced the cause of environmental justice and laid the foundation for environmental protection laws in the country. The judgment recognised the right to a clean and healthy environment as an essential part of the right to life under the Constitution. The case also highlighted the need for stricter industrial regulations and the protection of cultural heritage from environmental degradation. It was a major turning point in India's environmental jurisprudence and continues to influence legal approaches to environmental issues today.

• Union of India v. Tulsiram Patel (1985)

The case of Union of India v. Tulsiram Patel (1985) is a landmark judgment by the Supreme Court of India that dealt primarily with the issue of termination of government employees, particularly focusing on the power of the government to dismiss, remove, or reduce the rank of a civil servant under certain circumstances, and the procedural safeguards available to such employees. The case is significant in understanding the constitutional interpretation of the protection provided under Article 311 of the Indian Constitution.

• Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980)

The case of Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980) is a landmark judgment by the Supreme Court of India that dealt with the constitutionality of the death penalty in India, particularly focusing on its application in cases of murder. This case is critical in the evolution of India's death penalty jurisprudence, as it upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty but set guidelines for its imposition, ensuring that it would be used only in the "rarest of rare" cases.

• Aruna Shanbaug case 

The Aruna Shanbaug case was a landmark ruling that laid the groundwork for the legal recognition of passive euthanasia in India, while also addressing the constitutional right to live with dignity. It provided clarity on how the law should approach situations where an individual is in a vegetative state with no hope of recovery, marking a significant step toward recognizing personal autonomy and human dignity in end-of-life decisions. The case continues to shape India's ongoing discussion about euthanasia, right-to-die laws, and the balance between ethics, law, and medical practices.

• K.K. Verma v. Union of India (1996)

The K.K. Verma v. Union of India (1996) case marked a significant turning point in the development of the right to information in India, laying the groundwork for future legislation on transparency and accountability. The Supreme Court, while upholding the government's ability to withhold certain types of sensitive information, also acknowledged the importance of public access to government documents and information. The case remains relevant in understanding the balance between individual rights and state interests, and its influence is seen in the subsequent enactment of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

• Minerva Mills v. Union of India

Minerva Mills v. Union of India is a landmark decision that clarified the relationship between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles. It firmly upheld the basic structure doctrine, establishing that amendments to the Constitution cannot disturb its foundational principles, particularly Fundamental Rights. The case has had a lasting impact on Indian constitutional law, reinforcing the limits of Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution.

• Salomon v. A. Salomon & Co. Ltd (1897)

The Salomon v. Salomon & Co. Ltd. case is foundational in company law because it established that a company is a separate legal entity, distinct from its shareholders and directors, and that shareholders are not personally liable for the company’s debts beyond their investment. This case forms the bedrock of modern corporate law, allowing the concept of limited liability to thrive and shaping the structure of business enterprises worldwide. While it has been subject to some limitations and exceptions, the case remains a key reference point in understanding the nature of companies and corporate responsibility.

• Vodafone International Holdings BV v. Union of India (2012)

The Vodafone International Holdings BV v. Union of India case is a landmark decision in Indian tax law, particularly concerning the taxation of cross-border transactions involving foreign companies and indirect transfers of Indian assets. While Vodafone won the case based on the interpretation of existing law, the Indian government responded with retrospective legislation, marking an important development in India’s taxation framework and raising issues of tax fairness, certainty, and investment climate.

• Tata Consultancy Services v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2005)

The Tata Consultancy Services v. State of Andhra Pradesh case is a significant milestone in Indian tax jurisprudence, particularly with respect to the classification and taxation of software. The Supreme Court’s ruling made it clear that software is a service, not a good, and therefore, should not be taxed under sales tax provisions. This judgment helped shape the legal landscape for IT services and software transactions in India and had a lasting impact on how such transactions are taxed, especially in the context of intangible goods and services.

Why Are These Judgments Important for AIBE Preparation?

Candidates must read below to understand why these judgments are important for AIBE Preparation:

• Foundation of Constitutional Law: Many of the above cases involve fundamental rights, judicial review, and basic structure doctrine. Understanding these will give you a strong foundation in constitutional law, which is a key topic in the AIBE.
• Applicability in Legal Reasoning: Several landmark cases are frequently used in Legal Reasoning questions, where the application of legal principles and precedents is tested. Familiarity with these judgments will help you solve hypothetical legal scenarios in the exam.
• Important Legal Concepts: These judgments explain critical legal concepts such as maintenance, marriage validity, PIL, privacy, and gender equality, all of which can form the basis of multiple-choice questions in the AIBE.
• Practical Insights into Indian Law: Knowing these judgments will also give you insights into how courts interpret laws and apply them in real-world situations, helping you develop a practical understanding of legal principles.

For the AIBE 2024 exam, knowledge of these landmark judgments is crucial to performing well, particularly in the Legal Reasoning section. Many of these cases shape India’s legal landscape and continue to be relevant in legal practice.

Ensure you read the full judgments, understand their legal principles, and practice applying them to case scenarios to maximise your chances of success in the exam.

Read More:

• AIBE Previous Year Question Papers (GUJARATI) with Answers : Download For Free
• AIBE Mock Test 2024: Download Free PDFs, Hindi & Gujarati Sample Paper with Answer