Judgement Summary

Kantaru Rajeevaru v Indian Young Lawyers Association through their General Secretary & Ors

Bench – Ranjan Gogoi Cj., A.M. Khanwilkar J., Indu Malhotra J, (all in favor); D. Y. Chandrchud J., R F Nariman J. (both dissenting)

Issues –

  1. What is essentially religious, essential to religion and integral part of the religion?
  2. Can the matters already sub-judice, i.e. entry of Muslim woman into Durgah/Mosque, entry of Parsi woman married to non-Parsi persons into the holy fire, female genital mutilation in Dawoodi Bohra committee clubbed together and matter be referred to higher bench?

Majority Judgement – All matters to be clubbed together and referred to a higher bench Continue reading

Judgement Summary

Indian Young Lawyers’ Association (in Re Sabrimala) v State of Kerala


Bench- Deepak Mishra CJ, Khanwilkar J., D.Y, Chandrachud J., Nariman J. (Concurring), Indu Malhotra J. (Dissenting)


  1. Whether exclusion of women in the menstrual age (biological factor) violates Art. 14, 15 or 17 or protected by “morality” under Art. 25 and 26.
  2. Whether exclusion of woman is an essential religious practice
  3. Whether Ayyapa Temple is a denomination? if it is a denomination can it violates Art. 14, Art. 15, Art .17 despite getting fund from consolidated fund of the state?
  4. Can religious denomination violate Art. 14, Art. 15 and Art. 17 on the ground of sex?
  5. Whether the temple entry Act and rule violative of Part III of the constitution?

Arguments- Continue reading


Road Ahead for CLAT PG 2021

The year 2020 will remain in infamy for students seeking Masters’ degree in Law from NLUs. Apart from the “CLAT/NLAT controversy” and the ” wrong answers” in the answer key, which already have been discussed in this blog, the change of pattern for the examination was THE important factor which caused maximum stress among the students. The press briefing of the consortium announced that questions will be asked from the excerpts of judgments. But the sample papers showed, the questions might not come from the paragraph. So a reading of the judgement was necessary. But as the final answer key showed, the ratio of judgement did not matter; what mattered was the interpretation of the makers of the question. Let’s hope CLAT PG 2021 becomes less controversial.

In this blog , a new initiative is being started. Summaries of important judgements of the Supreme Court delivered in last two years will be published for the benefit of the students. Having said so, it is clarified upfront that mere reading of summaries will not help much. One needs to go through the judgement thoroughly and use the summary for revision purpose. The sections will be updated regularly for adding new summaries.

Another idea is to put up analytical pieces on contemporary development of law as part of weekly despatches. Hope this will help the stake holders!