CLAT 2026 Predictions: Will the Question Paper See a Major Overhaul After Past Issues?

Supreme Court Observation in CLAT 2025

Possible Implications

1. "We must express our deep anguish regarding the callous and casual manner in which the Respondent No.1 has been framing questions..." (Page 2)

The Consortium will be under immense pressure to prove it is no longer "callous and casual." The entire question-setting process will be more rigorous, careful, and defensible.

2. "...we fail to understand as to why a candidate who has marked answer option (c) should not be awarded the marks..." (Regarding a question with two logical answers) (Page 8)

Questions and answer choices might be meticulously designed to have only one unambiguous, logically correct answer. Ambiguous or multi-interpretable questions are likely to be avoided.

3. "...even without having any prior knowledge of law, upon appreciation of the material provided and by applying logic and reason, a candidate can arrive at the answer..." (Page 12)

The Legal Reasoning section is very likely to be based on the provided passage. Any question that requires prior knowledge of legal statutes or concepts might be considered flawed and excluded.

4. "...for answering the said question, the candidates will have to undergo a detailed mathematics analysis, which is not expected in an objective test." (Page 17)

The Quantitative Techniques section is expected to be limited to simple, quick calculations based on data from graphs and tables. Complex, multi-step mathematical analysis will most likely be removed.

5. "In our view, therefore, if the Respondent No.1 thought it fit to delete Question No. 85, it ought to have deleted Question No. 88 as well." (Page 15)

Logical Reasoning is likely to move away from convoluted puzzles. The focus is expected to be on critical reasoning and logical deduction, which are less prone to errors and better test aptitude.

6. "We find that in order to put all the candidates on equal footing, Question No. 116 be deleted from all the Sets as well." (Page 19)

The Consortium will look to ensure absolute parity and fairness across all question paper sets (A, B, C, D). Any error found in one set might lead to corrective action for all sets.

7. "We direct the Respondent No.1 to amend the answer key, revise the marksheet and re-publish/notify the final list of candidates forthwith..." (Page 19)

The post-exam process (answer key release, objection window, result declaration) is expected to be more transparent, efficient, and accountable to avoid judicial intervention.

Subject

Key Prediction

Reason (Based on Supreme Court Judgment)

Legal Reasoning

• Passages will be self-contained.

• Answers must be directly derived from the text.

• Zero tolerance for questions requiring prior legal knowledge.

The Court upheld that answers must be found through "logic and reason" applied to the material provided, not external knowledge.

Logical Reasoning

• A significant reduction in complex puzzles (seating arrangement, etc.).

• A major focus on Critical Reasoning (arguments, assumptions, inferences, conclusions).

The Court deleted a puzzle question, showing their low tolerance for convoluted logic. Critical reasoning is a safer, more defensible way to test analytical skills.

English Language

• Continued focus on long comprehension passages.

• Questions will test inference, tone, and vocabulary-in-context.

• Grammar will be tested within passages, not in isolation.

While not directly mentioned, the Court's mandate for clarity and reducing ambiguity applies universally to all sections.

Quantitative Techniques

• The section will be strictly limited to Data Interpretation from graphs, charts, and tables.

• Calculations will be based on basic arithmetic.

• No "detailed mathematical analysis" will be included.

The Court explicitly deleted a question for requiring complex math, setting a clear boundary for this section.

Current Affairs & GK

• Heavy focus on verifiable facts and events from the past year.

• A significant portion will relate to legal, constitutional, and governance issues (new laws, SC judgments, international treaties).

This section is less prone to ambiguity if based on factual events. A legal slant aligns the section with the overall nature of the exam and is easily verifiable, reducing grounds for challenge.