CLAT legal current affairs, June 2026: Supreme Court judgments
4 judgments the Supreme Court delivered in the first half of June 2026, each summarised from the Court’s own judgment and linked to it, with a note on the principle a CLAT passage could turn on.
Recognising a headline is not the same as answering a passage-based question on it. The free Diagnostic Test includes a full Current Affairs and GK section.
Take the free Diagnostic Test →Supreme Court judgments, June 2026
“Daughters” includes a married daughter. Kulsum Nisha v. State of U.P., 2026 INSC 617, decided 2 June 2026. A rule defined the “family” of a deceased dealer in a way that left out married daughters, and the appellant was refused an allotment on that ground. The Court asked whether the exclusion could stand constitutionally. Reading the clause by its purpose, it held that “daughters” includes a married daughter who produces a dependency certificate and no-objection certificates from the other adult family members and meets the other conditions. So read, the clause is valid. The orders against her were quashed and an allotment order was directed within four weeks. Read the judgment on sci.gov.in (PDF).
What CLAT could ask: Purposive interpretation; reading a provision so as to save it; equality between married and unmarried daughters.
Dealing with a minor’s property: permission, with safeguards. Shephali Chakraborty v. State of West Bengal, 2026 INSC 621, decided 3 June 2026. A guardian sought permission to go ahead with a development agreement over property in which a minor had an interest. The Court allowed the appeal and granted permission, on conditions: the money received must stay in a nationalised bank until the minor becomes a major, and the agreement cannot be changed without the approval of the court concerned. Read the judgment on sci.gov.in (PDF).
What CLAT could ask: A guardian’s powers over a minor’s property; the court as protector of the minor’s interest.
Royalty is payable at the rate in force when the mineral is moved. Director of Mines and Geology v. BMM Ispat Ltd., 2026 INSC 627, decided 4 June 2026. A company had not removed its ore before the royalty rate was amended and moved it afterwards. The Court held that it could not escape the enhanced royalty: it could have moved the ore before the amendment and chose not to. The appeal was allowed and the judgment under challenge set aside. Read the judgment on sci.gov.in (PDF).
What CLAT could ask: When a liability to pay is fixed; a party cannot benefit from its own choice of timing.
A rejected nomination and the election petition route. Meenakshi Natarajan v. Election Commission of India, 2026 INSC 643, decided 12 June 2026. A writ petition under Article 32 concerned the rejection of a candidate’s nomination. In disposing of it, the Court recorded that its observations on the rejection were only for appreciating the facts, and that nothing in its order would affect an election petition, should one be filed before the High Court concerned, which would be decided on its own merits. Read the judgment on sci.gov.in (PDF).
What CLAT could ask: Article 329(b) and the election petition as the remedy for election disputes; the limits of writ jurisdiction during an election.
How to use this digest
CLAT does not ask you to recall a case name. It gives you a passage and asks you to apply the principle in it. For each judgment above, write the principle in one sentence, then change one fact and ask whether the result changes.
For daily legal current affairs from September 2026 onward, each written from the source document, see Legal Updates.
Frequently Asked Questions
Where do these June 2026 judgments come from?
Each one was read from the judgment published on the Supreme Court of India’s website, sci.gov.in, and the entry links to that PDF. If a summary here and the judgment differ, the judgment is right.
Does CLAT ask for case names and dates?
Rarely. CLAT’s legal and current affairs passages test whether you can read a passage built on a recent development and apply its principle. Knowing what a court decided and why is what helps.
Why does this digest cover only Supreme Court judgments?
Because every entry has to be checked against a primary document, and the Court’s own judgments are that. News that could not be traced to an official source has been left out.
Check whether your GK reading is actually sticking
Recognising a headline is not the same as answering a passage-based question on it. The free Diagnostic Test includes a full Current Affairs and GK section.
Take the free Diagnostic Test →Or create a free account for a full mock, a past paper for each exam, 12 open Legal GK headings and the daily games.