25 Important Supreme court judgements for UPSC

25 Landmark Supreme Court Judgements for UPSC Aspirants

The Indian Supreme Court, the apex judicial body of the nation, plays a pivotal role in shaping the legal and social landscape of India. Its landmark judgements have not only interpreted the Constitution but also redefined the very fabric of Indian society. For UPSC aspirants, understanding these judgements is crucial, as they provide insights into the evolution of Indian law, the judiciary’s role in upholding fundamental rights, and the interplay between various branches of government.

This article delves into 25 important Supreme Court judgements that are essential for UPSC preparation. These judgements cover a wide range of topics, from fundamental rights and social justice to environmental protection and administrative law.

I. Fundamental Rights and Social Justice

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

Key Issue: The extent of Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution, particularly the fundamental rights.
Judgement: The Court held that Parliament can amend the Constitution, but it cannot alter its basic structure. This judgement established the doctrine of “basic structure” and has been instrumental in safeguarding the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution.
Significance: This landmark judgement defined the limits of parliamentary power and ensured the protection of fundamental rights. It remains a cornerstone of constitutional law in India.

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

Key Issue: The interpretation of “procedure established by law” under Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty).
Judgement: The Court held that “procedure established by law” must be fair, just, and reasonable. It also emphasized the importance of due process and natural justice in all legal proceedings.
Significance: This judgement expanded the scope of Article 21 and established the principle of procedural fairness as an essential element of the right to life.

3. S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994)

Key Issue: The power of the Governor to dismiss a state government under Article 356 (President’s Rule).
Judgement: The Court laid down strict guidelines for the imposition of President’s Rule, emphasizing that it should be used only in exceptional circumstances and not for political reasons.
Significance: This judgement strengthened the federal structure of India by limiting the power of the central government to interfere in the affairs of states.

4. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997)

Key Issue: The absence of specific legislation to prevent sexual harassment at workplaces.
Judgement: The Court laid down guidelines for preventing sexual harassment at workplaces, pending the enactment of a comprehensive law. These guidelines became known as the Vishaka Guidelines.
Significance: This judgement was a significant step towards ensuring the safety and dignity of women in the workplace. It paved the way for the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013.

5. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987)

Key Issue: The right to a healthy environment under Article 21.
Judgement: The Court recognized the right to a healthy environment as an integral part of the right to life. It also laid down the “polluter pays” principle, holding that polluters should be held responsible for the damage caused by their activities.
Significance: This judgement established the principle of environmental justice and paved the way for the development of environmental law in India.

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

Key Issue: The right to privacy as a fundamental right.
Judgement: The Court held that the right to privacy is a fundamental right, implied under Article 21 and other fundamental rights.
Significance: This landmark judgement recognized the right to privacy as a fundamental right, protecting individual autonomy and dignity.

II. Administrative Law and Judicial Review

7. A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950)

Key Issue: The interpretation of “procedure established by law” under Article 21.
Judgement: The Court held that “procedure established by law” meant any procedure laid down by a valid law, regardless of its fairness or reasonableness.
Significance: This judgement narrowed the scope of Article 21 and led to a debate on the protection of individual liberty.

8. State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar (1952)

Key Issue: The scope of judicial review of administrative action.
Judgement: The Court held that judicial review is an essential safeguard against arbitrary administrative action. It also established the principle of “Wednesbury unreasonableness,” which allows courts to intervene in administrative decisions that are unreasonable or irrational.
Significance: This judgement strengthened the role of the judiciary in ensuring good governance and upholding the rule of law.

9. Union of India v. Tulsiram Patel (1985)

Key Issue: The validity of administrative instructions issued by the government.
Judgement: The Court held that administrative instructions, even if not formally notified as law, can be subject to judicial review if they affect the rights of citizens.
Significance: This judgement emphasized the importance of transparency and accountability in administrative decision-making.

10. Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India (2005)

Key Issue: The application of the doctrine of “legitimate expectation” in administrative law.
Judgement: The Court recognized the doctrine of “legitimate expectation,” which allows individuals to challenge administrative decisions that violate their legitimate expectations, even if there is no legal right.
Significance: This judgement expanded the scope of judicial review and provided greater protection for individuals against arbitrary administrative action.

III. Environmental Law and Protection

11. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1996)

Key Issue: The protection of the Taj Mahal from pollution.
Judgement: The Court ordered the closure of polluting industries in the vicinity of the Taj Mahal to protect this iconic monument.
Significance: This judgement demonstrated the Court’s commitment to protecting cultural heritage and the environment.

12. Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India (1996)

Key Issue: The application of the “Precautionary Principle” in environmental law.
Judgement: The Court recognized the “Precautionary Principle,” which requires taking preventive measures to protect the environment even in the absence of conclusive scientific evidence of harm.
Significance: This judgement established the “Precautionary Principle” as a key principle of environmental law in India.

13. T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India (1997)

Key Issue: The protection of forests and wildlife.
Judgement: The Court issued a series of orders to protect forests and wildlife, including the establishment of eco-sensitive zones around protected areas.
Significance: This judgement highlighted the importance of protecting biodiversity and the ecological balance.

14. Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India (1996)

Key Issue: The liability of industries for environmental damage.
Judgement: The Court held that industries are liable for environmental damage caused by their activities, even if they have obtained all necessary permits.
Significance: This judgement strengthened the principle of “polluter pays” and emphasized the importance of environmental responsibility.

IV. Criminal Law and Justice

15. State of Maharashtra v. Madhukar Narayanrao Nene (1999)

Key Issue: The interpretation of “cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment” under Article 21.
Judgement: The Court held that prolonged detention without trial constitutes “cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment” and violates Article 21.
Significance: This judgement emphasized the importance of speedy trial and the protection of individual liberty.

16. Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980)

Key Issue: The constitutionality of the death penalty.
Judgement: The Court upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty but laid down strict guidelines for its imposition, emphasizing that it should be used only in the rarest of rare cases.
Significance: This judgement established the “rarest of rare” doctrine for the imposition of the death penalty.

17. State of Gujarat v. Mithu (1989)

Key Issue: The interpretation of “grave and sudden provocation” in the context of murder.
Judgement: The Court laid down guidelines for determining “grave and sudden provocation,” emphasizing that it should be a sudden and unexpected event that causes a loss of self-control.
Significance: This judgement clarified the legal principles governing the defense of provocation in murder cases.

18. Rupan Deol Bajaj v. K.P.S. Gill (2003)

Key Issue: The liability of police officers for sexual harassment.
Judgement: The Court held that police officers are liable for sexual harassment, even if they are acting in their official capacity.
Significance: This judgement emphasized the importance of accountability and the protection of women from sexual harassment, even within the police force.

V. Other Important Judgements

19. S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1982)

Key Issue: The appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts.
Judgement: The Court held that the appointment of judges should be based on a collegium system, involving consultation with senior judges.
Significance: This judgement established the collegium system for judicial appointments, which has been the subject of much debate and controversy.

20. Union of India v. Rajendra Singh (2018)

Key Issue: The right to water as a fundamental right.
Judgement: The Court recognized the right to water as a fundamental right, implied under Article 21.
Significance: This judgement highlighted the importance of access to clean and safe water for all citizens.

21. Sabarimala Ayyappan Temple Case (2018)

Key Issue: The entry of women of menstruating age into the Sabarimala Temple.
Judgement: The Court held that the ban on the entry of women of menstruating age into the Sabarimala Temple was discriminatory and violated the right to equality.
Significance: This judgement sparked a nationwide debate on gender equality and religious freedom.

22. Aadhaar Case (2018)

Key Issue: The constitutionality of the Aadhaar scheme.
Judgement: The Court upheld the constitutionality of the Aadhaar scheme but struck down certain provisions, including the mandatory linking of Aadhaar with bank accounts and mobile phones.
Significance: This judgement balanced the need for a unique identification system with the protection of privacy and data security.

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

Key Issue: The constitutionality of the practice of triple talaq.
Judgement: The Court held that the practice of triple talaq was unconstitutional and violated the right to equality and dignity.
Significance: This judgement was a major victory for women’s rights and gender equality in India.

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

Key Issue: The constitutionality of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which criminalized homosexuality.
Judgement: The Court held that Section 377 was unconstitutional and violated the right to privacy and dignity.
Significance: This judgement was a landmark victory for LGBTQ+ rights in India and decriminalized homosexuality.

25. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015)

Key Issue: The constitutionality of Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, which criminalized online speech that was deemed offensive or menacing.
Judgement: The Court held that Section 66A was unconstitutional and violated the right to freedom of speech and expression.
Significance: This judgement protected online freedom of speech and expression and emphasized the importance of free and open communication in a democratic society.

Table: Summary of Important Supreme Court Judgements

Judgement	Year	Key Issue	Significance
Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru v. State of Kerala	1973	Extent of Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution	Established the doctrine of “basic structure”
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India	1978	Interpretation of “procedure established by law”	Expanded the scope of Article 21 and established procedural fairness
S.R. Bommai v. Union of India	1994	Power of the Governor to dismiss a state government	Strengthened the federal structure of India
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan	1997	Absence of legislation to prevent sexual harassment	Laid down guidelines for preventing sexual harassment at workplaces
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987)	1987	Right to a healthy environment	Established the principle of environmental justice
K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India	2017	Right to privacy as a fundamental right	Recognized the right to privacy as a fundamental right
A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras	1950	Interpretation of “procedure established by law”	Narrowed the scope of Article 21
State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar	1952	Scope of judicial review of administrative action	Strengthened the role of the judiciary in ensuring good governance
Union of India v. Tulsiram Patel	1985	Validity of administrative instructions	Emphasized transparency and accountability in administrative decision-making
Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India	2005	Application of “legitimate expectation”	Expanded the scope of judicial review
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1996)	1996	Protection of the Taj Mahal from pollution	Demonstrated the Court’s commitment to protecting cultural heritage
Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India	1996	Application of the “Precautionary Principle”	Established the “Precautionary Principle” in environmental law
T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India	1997	Protection of forests and wildlife	Highlighted the importance of protecting biodiversity
Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India	1996	Liability of industries for environmental damage	Strengthened the principle of “polluter pays”
State of Maharashtra v. Madhukar Narayanrao Nene	1999	Interpretation of “cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment”	Emphasized the importance of speedy trial
Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab	1980	Constitutionality of the death penalty	Established the “rarest of rare” doctrine for the death penalty
State of Gujarat v. Mithu	1989	Interpretation of “grave and sudden provocation”	Clarified legal principles governing the defense of provocation
Rupan Deol Bajaj v. K.P.S. Gill	2003	Liability of police officers for sexual harassment	Emphasized accountability and protection of women from harassment
S.P. Gupta v. Union of India	1982	Appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts	Established the collegium system for judicial appointments
Union of India v. Rajendra Singh	2018	Right to water as a fundamental right	Recognized the right to water as a fundamental right
Sabarimala Ayyappan Temple Case	2018	Entry of women of menstruating age into the Sabarimala Temple	Sparked a debate on gender equality and religious freedom
Aadhaar Case	2018	Constitutionality of the Aadhaar scheme	Balanced the need for a unique identification system with privacy protection
Shayara Bano v. Union of India	2017	Constitutionality of triple talaq	Declared triple talaq unconstitutional
Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India	2018	Constitutionality of Section 377	Decriminalized homosexuality
Shreya Singhal v. Union of India	2015	Constitutionality of Section 66A of the IT Act	Protected online freedom of speech and expression

Conclusion

These 25 landmark Supreme Court judgements are not just legal precedents but also reflections of the evolving social, political, and economic landscape of India. They demonstrate the judiciary’s role in safeguarding fundamental rights, upholding the rule of law, and ensuring justice for all. For UPSC aspirants, understanding these judgements is crucial for developing a comprehensive understanding of the Indian legal system, its evolution, and its impact on society.

By studying these judgements, aspirants can gain insights into the following:

The interpretation of the Constitution: How the Supreme Court has interpreted various provisions of the Constitution and shaped its meaning over time.
The evolution of legal principles: How the Court has developed and refined legal principles in different areas of law, such as fundamental rights, administrative law, environmental law, and criminal law.
The role of the judiciary in society: How the judiciary has acted as a guardian of the Constitution, a protector of individual rights, and a check on the power of the government.
The interplay between different branches of government: How the judiciary interacts with the legislature and the executive in shaping public policy and ensuring good governance.

By studying these landmark judgements, UPSC aspirants can develop a deeper understanding of the Indian legal system and its role in shaping the nation’s destiny. This knowledge will be invaluable in answering questions related to law, governance, and social justice in the UPSC exam.

Here are some frequently asked questions on the 25 important Supreme Court judgements for UPSC, along with concise answers:

1. What is the significance of the Kesavananda Bharati case?

The Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) established the doctrine of “basic structure” of the Constitution. This means Parliament can amend the Constitution, but cannot alter its fundamental features, safeguarding fundamental rights.

2. How did the Maneka Gandhi case impact Article 21?

The Maneka Gandhi case (1978) broadened the interpretation of “procedure established by law” under Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty). It mandated that procedures must be fair, just, and reasonable, emphasizing due process and natural justice.

3. What are the Vishaka Guidelines?

The Vishaka case (1997) addressed the lack of legislation against sexual harassment at workplaces. It laid down guidelines for preventing such harassment, later formalized by the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013.

4. How did the M.C. Mehta case (1987) impact environmental law?

The M.C. Mehta case recognized the right to a healthy environment as part of the right to life under Article 21. It also introduced the “polluter pays” principle, holding polluters responsible for environmental damage.

5. What is the “rarest of rare” doctrine?

The Bachan Singh case (1980) upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty but established the “rarest of rare” doctrine. This means the death penalty should be imposed only in exceptional cases where the crime is exceptionally heinous.

6. How did the Sabarimala Ayyappan Temple case impact gender equality?

The Sabarimala case (2018) ruled that the ban on women of menstruating age entering the temple was discriminatory and violated the right to equality. This sparked a national debate on gender equality and religious freedom.

7. What is the significance of the Aadhaar case?

The Aadhaar case (2018) upheld the constitutionality of the Aadhaar scheme but struck down certain provisions, emphasizing the need to balance a unique identification system with privacy and data security.

8. How did the Navtej Singh Johar case impact LGBTQ+ rights?

The Navtej Singh Johar case (2018) decriminalized homosexuality by striking down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which criminalized consensual sexual acts between adults of the same sex.

9. What is the impact of the Shreya Singhal case on online freedom of speech?

The Shreya Singhal case (2015) struck down Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, which criminalized online speech deemed offensive or menacing. This protected online freedom of speech and expression.

10. How do these judgements help UPSC aspirants?

Understanding these judgements provides insights into the evolution of Indian law, the judiciary’s role in upholding fundamental rights, and the interplay between different branches of government. This knowledge is crucial for answering questions related to law, governance, and social justice in the UPSC exam.

Here are some MCQs based on the 25 important Supreme Court judgements for UPSC, with four options each:

1. Which case established the doctrine of “basic structure” of the Indian Constitution?

a) Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India
b) Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru v. State of Kerala
c) S.R. Bommai v. Union of India
d) Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan

Answer: b) Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru v. State of Kerala

2. The “polluter pays” principle was established in which landmark case?

a) M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987)
b) Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India
c) T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India
d) Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India

Answer: a) M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987)

3. Which case expanded the scope of Article 21 by including the right to a healthy environment?

a) Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India
b) A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras
c) M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987)
d) K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India

Answer: c) M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987)

4. The Vishaka Guidelines were formulated to address which issue?

a) Environmental pollution
b) Freedom of speech
c) Sexual harassment at workplaces
d) Right to privacy

Answer: c) Sexual harassment at workplaces

5. Which case recognized the right to privacy as a fundamental right in India?

a) Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India
b) A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras
c) S.P. Gupta v. Union of India
d) K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India

Answer: d) K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India

6. The “rarest of rare” doctrine, related to the death penalty, was established in which case?

a) Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab
b) State of Gujarat v. Mithu
c) Rupan Deol Bajaj v. K.P.S. Gill
d) State of Maharashtra v. Madhukar Narayanrao Nene

Answer: a) Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab

7. Which case dealt with the constitutionality of the Aadhaar scheme?

a) Sabarimala Ayyappan Temple Case
b) Shayara Bano v. Union of India
c) Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India
d) Aadhaar Case

Answer: d) Aadhaar Case

8. The decriminalization of homosexuality in India was achieved through which case?

a) Shayara Bano v. Union of India
b) Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India
c) Shreya Singhal v. Union of India
d) Sabarimala Ayyappan Temple Case

Answer: b) Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India

9. Which case dealt with the constitutionality of triple talaq?

a) Shayara Bano v. Union of India
b) Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India
c) Shreya Singhal v. Union of India
d) Sabarimala Ayyappan Temple Case

Answer: a) Shayara Bano v. Union of India

10. Which case struck down Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, protecting online freedom of speech?

a) Shreya Singhal v. Union of India
b) Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India
c) Shayara Bano v. Union of India
d) Aadhaar Case

Answer: a) Shreya Singhal v. Union of India