Top 10 Most Important Current Affairs for CLAT 2026

Top 10 Month-wise Current Affairs For CLAT 2026 Exam

The Current Affairs Section in the CLAT 2026 exam Syllabus holds a major portion of the question paper. And with the right preparation, this section is scoring. Below are the month-wise current affairs for the CLAT 2026 Exam.

Supreme Court Criticises Tamil Nadu Governor for Withholding Bills

What happened:

• The R. N. Ravi, the Governor of Tamil Nadu, had been sitting on (i.e. withholding assent to) several bills passed by the State Assembly.

• The State government challenged this in the Supreme Court of India. In February 2025, a Bench questioned the legality of indefinite withholding. The Court observed that the Governor did not communicate any formal ‘withholding’ or reasons to the Assembly at the time.

• In April 2025, the Court delivered a decisive ruling: holding that the Governor’s action was “illegal and erroneous in law.” The verdict declared that the 10 pending bills shall be deemed to have received assent from the date they were re‑presented to the Governor (i.e. after they were re‑passed by the Legislature).

• The Court further clarified constitutional limits: the Governor does not have a “pocket veto” or an indefinite “absolute veto.” Under Article 200 of the Constitution of India, a Governor, upon receiving a bill, must either assent, withhold and return for reconsideration, or reserve for the President’s consideration, but cannot simply sit indefinitely.

Why this matters (substantive significance):

• It reaffirms a crucial principle of federalism and representative democracy: the WILL of the elected legislature cannot be indefinitely frustrated by an unelected constitutional functionary (Governor). This preserves the balance of power between state legislatures and Governors.

• It clarifies and constrains the discretionary power of Governors under Article 200, offering a judicial check against misuse of “withholding assent.”

Why relevant for CLAT / constitutional law study:

• It is a fresh and landmark precedent on legislative procedure, and the Governor’s assent is likely to be part of constitutional‑law questions for CLAT 2026.

• It elucidates the application of Article 200 and the doctrine of legislative will vs. executive discretion, a classic constitutional‑law issue.

• Includes use of the Court’s inherent powers (under Article 142) to enforce legislative will, good material for “remedies and powers of the judiciary.”

Preliminary inquiry is not mandatory before all FIRs

What happened:

• The Court in 2025 (Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Sandeep Mehta) held that a “preliminary inquiry” is not mandatory under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act) before registration of an FIR.

• The Court clarified the role of preliminary inquiry: it is only meant to ascertain whether the information prima facie discloses a cognizable offence. If the initial report (source information report) is “detailed and well‑reasoned,” that itself is enough to register an FIR.

• The high court’s decision to quash the FIR (on the ground that an inquiry was not done) was overturned; the FIR was restored.

Why this matters (substantive significance):

• It streamlines and strengthens the ability of investigative agencies to register FIRs swiftly in corruption cases and prevents undue procedural delays that could hinder justice.

• Reinforces that procedural safeguards must be balanced; the law should not create extra hurdles in genuine cases. The Court rejected the notion that accused have a “vested right” to preliminary inquiry..

Why relevant for CLAT / criminal law & jurisprudence:

• Demonstrates interplay between procedural law (FIR, preliminary inquiry) and substantive law (PC Act offences). Good for criminal law questions on FIR registration, police powers, and constitutional safeguards.

• Makes you aware of evolving Jurisprudence: even established practices like “preliminary inquiry before FIR” can be re‑examined, a useful mindset for constitutional interpretation questions.

Obscenity On OTT Platforms & Social Media (Uday Mahurkar And Ors. Versus Union Of India And Ors.)

What happened:

• On 28 April 2025, the Supreme Court accepted for consideration a PIL filed by Uday Mahurkar and others, raising concerns about “obscene/indecent/pornographic” content being streamed on OTT platforms.

• The Bench (Justices B. R. Gavai and Augustine George Masih) told the Centre that this is a “serious concern,” and issued notice to the Union Government and all these platforms for their reply.

• The Court observed that OTT platforms have a “social responsibility” as carriers/distributors of content, not just passive intermediaries.

• The petition requests the government to craft guidelines, perhaps institute a “National Content Control Authority,” akin to the traditional film‑certification regime (but for OTT & social media).

• The Centre (through the Solicitor General) admitted that while some regulations exist, more are “under contemplation.” The Court’s notice suggests it's likely to follow up.

Why this matters (substantive significance):

• Digital media has exploded; OTT and social‑media platforms now have immense reach. Regulation (or lack thereof) directly affects millions, especially youth. The decision may shape the future of content regulation and digital freedom in India.

• Raises core constitutional issues: balance between freedom of speech & expression (Article 19(1)(a)) vs morality/decency / public order/protection of minors (grounds for reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2)). This balance is central to Indian jurisprudence on obscenity, censorship, and digital rights.

Why relevant for CLAT:

• Directly tied to constitutional freedoms, fundamental rights, and limits a core area for CLAT.

• Gives insight into emerging jurisprudence after earlier landmark free‑speech cases (e.g. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015)) helps in comparative analysis, which CLAT often tests

Operation Abhyaas — first nationwide civil‑defence mock drill since 1971

What happened

• On 7 May 2025, the government of India launched a massive civil‑defence exercise called Operation Abhyaas across 244 civil‑defence districts, the first nationwide mock drill of its kind since 1971.

• The exercise was organised by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), in coordination with the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) and state/local agencies, including police, fire services, civil‑defence volunteers, Home Guards, etc.

• Activities simulated a variety of emergency/wartime scenarios: activation of air‑raid sirens, implementation of blackout drills (turning off lights/power), evacuation drills, rescue operations, first‑aid and medical aid procedures, civil‑defence management, public awareness/training, essentially a full civil‑defence preparedness exercise.

Why it matters (and its significance)

• This marks a revival of large‑scale civil‑defence readiness, something last done nationwide during the 1971 war.

• The drill indicates that the government recognises evolving threats, cross-border tensions, terrorism, the possibility of aerial/ missile strikes, and other emergencies and wants to ensure that civil infrastructure and the public are prepared, not just the military.

• It serves to test coordination between multiple agencies (administration, disaster management, police, civil defence, and medical services) and public responsiveness. Good civil‑defence preparedness can save lives in times of crisis (war, terror, disasters).

Why this is important for CLAT (or law/General Studies aspirants)

• CLAT and other law‑entrance exams often test current affairs, especially developments related to national security, disaster management, constitutional provisions, and government machinery. Operation Abhyaas is a high‑profile national security / civil‑defence event, widely covered in media, and likely to feature in general‑knowledge / current‑affairs sections.

• It touches on issues of federalism and centre‑state coordination (since states/UTs + central agencies are involved), which links to constitutional/polity knowledge.

Amlesh Kumar v. State of Bihar — “Accused can voluntarily opt for Narco Test, but court’s permission is a must”

What happened — court ruling & background

• On 9 June 2025, the Supreme Court of India (SC) delivered a judgment in Amlesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, setting aside a previous order passed by the Patna High Court, which had allowed narco‑analysis tests for accused persons during an ongoing investigation/bail hearing.

• The case arose out of an FIR under various IPC sections (including 498A, kidnapping/disappearance, etc.), against the accused (husband and family). The High Court had accepted a submission by the Investigating Officer to conduct a narco‑analysis of all the accused and witnesses as part of the investigation during the bail hearing.

• The SC held that:

  1. An accused does not have an indefeasible (absolute) right to demand narco‑analysis.

  2. Forced / involuntary narco‑analysis is unconstitutional and cannot be ordered it violates fundamental rights under Article 20(3) (right against self-incrimination) and Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty).

• The Court reiterated its earlier decision in Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010), which had held that involuntary narco‑analysis (and similar techniques) are impermissible under the Constitution.

Why it matters — legal/constitutional importance

• The ruling reaffirms basic constitutional protections, especially the right against self‑incrimination and the right to bodily integrity / personal liberty. This helps guard against coercive investigative techniques, protecting civil liberties even during serious criminal investigations.

• It clarifies the limits and conditions under which scientific/psycho‑scientific investigative techniques (like narco‑analysis, polygraph, brain‑mapping, etc.) may be used, a subject often debated in criminal jurisprudence.

Why important for CLAT

• This is a recent landmark Supreme Court judgment (2025), very likely to be asked as a “recent developments” MCQ / case‑law question. CLAT often gives recent SC judgments for the constitutional law / criminal law part.

• It relates to core constitutional provisions: Articles 20 and 21. Understanding the interplay between investigative power, evidence admissibility, and fundamental rights is central to CLAT’s constitutional law / criminal law syllabus.

Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025 (August 2025)

What happened — key features & background

• In August 2025, Parliament passed the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Bill, 2025; after assent by the President, it became the Act (Act No. 32 of 2025).

• The Act establishes a national legal framework for online gaming, which includes licensing, classification, and regulation of online games (social games, e‑sports, educational games) and aims to “promote online gaming as an industry” while safeguarding against harms.

• Crucially, the Act bans all forms of “online money games”, i.e. real‑money gaming (whether of chance or skill), and prohibits related financial transactions, advertisement, and promotion.

• Enforcement: The Act empowers the government to set up a regulatory authority (e.g. Online Gaming Authority of India under the Ministry of Electronics & IT) to license and regulate games, block illegal platforms, and enforce compliance.

Why this matters: legal, constitutional & policy significance

• This is a landmark statute creating uniform national regulation around online gaming. Earlier, the domain was patchy; state laws differed, and “real‑money games” operated in legal grey zones. Now there is a central law covering all of India.

• The Act raises important constitutional and fundamental rights questions: freedom of trade/business, right to livelihood (for those working in the gaming industry), regulatory overreach, criminalisation of what was considered “skill‑based games,” and the legitimacy under federalism principles (since states previously had powers over gambling).

Why important for CLAT 2026 aspirants

• This Act is recent (2025), nationwide in effect, and a major legislative reform very likely to be asked in the “Current Affairs” / “General Knowledge” / “Polity & Governance” sections.

• It touches constitutional themes of federalism, centre-state relations, regulation vs. liberties (right to business), criminal law (penalties for operators), and consumer rights, all core for CLAT’s constitutional law, administrative law, and general awareness.

• Also relevant for digital jurisprudence, cyber law, fintech law, and regulation of the digital economy are increasingly important in the modern legal landscape.

UN Sustainable Development Goals Index 2025 — India’s progress

What happened / what’s the update

• In 2025, for the first time, India entered the top 100 countries globally in the SDG Index. India secured 99th place among 167 (or 193, depending on the list) countries, with an index score of 67.0.

• This is seen as a substantial improvement over recent years: in 2024, India ranked 109th.

• The progress is attributed to gains in several key areas: clean energy adoption, improved healthcare, poverty reduction, better access to housing (or infrastructure), and overall social-development measures.

Why this matters — development, policy, constitutional relevance

• The SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals) are a global framework adopted by UN member states; domestic progress reflects on how India balances growth, sustainability, inclusive development, key for policy governance, constitutional obligations (Right to Health, Right to Environment, socio-economic rights, justiciable or non-justiciable depending on context).

• Entry into the top 100 signals India's improvement in social indicators, which often interplay with constitutional/economic policies: social welfare, federal/state governance, environmental policy, urban/rural development, public healthcare, clean energy/water, etc.

• For CLAT candidates, knowledge of SDG progress helps in general awareness, especially for the general knowledge/current affairs portion. Also, it could provide context for essay‑type questions on development, environment, social justice, constitutional duties of the state, sustainable governance, etc.

Why important for CLAT 2026 aspirants

• Because CLAT often includes GK/Current Affairs (national/international developments), citing India’s entry into the SDG top 100 is a strong candidate for such questions.

• Also helpful for essay topics: e.g. environmental sustainability, development vs. rights debate, you can reference India’s SDG performance

• In law‑related questions: where legal reasoning intersects with social justice, welfare legislation, fundamental rights, and directive principles, this update provides a recent contextual backdrop.

131st Constitutional Amendment Bill, 2025 — proposed change regarding Chandigarh under Article 240

What is proposed (or being discussed)

• The 131st Constitutional Amendment Bill has been proposed (to be introduced in the winter session of Parliament starting December 2025) to place Chandigarh under Article 240 of the Constitution, effectively making Chandigarh a Union Territory governed by the President/Governor under Article 240, rather than giving any shared state control.

• This proposal has triggered strong objections, ally from groups/political parties in Punjab, which view it as an attempt to “strip Punjab of its rights over Chandigarh.”

• According to some statements, as soon as the Bill appeared in the parliamentary bulletin, the central Home Ministry later clarified that there is “no intention” of altering existing arrangements, saying the mention was to “streamline administrative procedures,” and no final decision has been taken.

Why this matters — constitutional/federal structure implications

• If enacted, the amendment would alter the governance structure of a shared capital (Chandigarh), potentially upsetting arrangements between states (Punjab, Haryana) and the Union government. It impacts issues of state rights, federal balance, division of powers, and administrative law, foundational to constitutional law.

• It raises questions about centre-state relations, federalism, and representation: whether a shared capital can be unilaterally converted into a full-fledged Union Territory under Article 240 without consensus from concerned states.

• It also touches on fundamental rights / political rights/state autonomy/state identity, especially when people view the move as infringing upon a state’s historic claims over a territory.

Why important for CLAT 2026 aspirants

• Constitutional amendments are central to the CLAT syllabus. A proposed 131st Amendment affecting federal structure, centre-state powers, and territory administration is critical to understand.

• It provides fresh material for polity and constitutional law questions (structure of government, centre-state relations, Article 240, status and governance of Union Territories).

• Also fodder for essay or analytical questions: e.g. “Is such an amendment justified?” “Effect on federalism”, “Rights of states vs Union”, “Constitutional morality”, “Political negotiation vs constitutional law”, etc.

• Because the Bill is contemporary (Nov 2025), it reflects live constitutional debate, good for current affairs and legal reasoning preparation.

Government Introduces Four New Labour Laws

What happened: Implementation of Four New Labour Codes (Nov 2025)

• On 21 November 2025, the Government of India formally implemented four major labour codes, namely: Code on Wages, 2019; Industrial Relations Code, 2020; Code on Social Security, 2020; and Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions (OSHWC) Code, 2020.

• These four codes replace and rationalise 29 older central labour laws, many of which dated back to the pre- or early post-Independence era.

• The objective, as stated by the government, is to simplify India’s labour regulatory framework, make compliance easier, and modernise labour laws to suit today’s economic realities (gig work, informal sector, MSMEs, new-age industries).

Key Provisions & What Changes Under the New Codes

• Unified definitions & simplified procedures: Concepts like “wages”, “worker/employee”, “employer”, etc. are standardised across sectors, replacing varied definitions under old laws. Compliance is simplified: single registration, single licence, single return instead of multiple licences, returns, and registers.

• Wages & remuneration regulation (Code on Wages): The law provides for a national floor wage, a statutory minimum wage for all workers, timely payment of wages, and uniformity across sectors.

• Social security expansion (Code on Social Security): Formal social security benefits (like provident fund, health insurance/ESI, pension or social-security schemes) are now extended beyond the organised sector, including informal workers, gig workers, platform workers, MSMEs, contract labour, etc.

• Workplace safety, health, working conditions, and welfare (OSHWC Code): The law consolidates multiple earlier safety- and welfare-related statutes (for factories, mines, construction, contract labour, etc.), aiming for uniform safety standards, health provisions (e.g. free annual health check-ups for older workers), protections for hazardous industry workers, fairness in working hours, overtime pay, etc.

• Industrial relations and flexibility (Industrial Relations Code): It regulates trade unions, strike/lockout procedures, employer-employee relations, but also introduces more flexibility, including fixed-term employment, simplified dispute-resolution, and easier compliance for employers.

• Benefit for fixed-term / contract / informal workers: Fixed-term employees are eligible for gratuity, social security, etc., similar to permanent workers.

Importance for CLAT 2026 Aspirants / Legal & Constitutional Significance

• Landmark legislative reform: Since CLAT often tests current affairs along with law, awareness of this major overhaul of labour law is essential. It’s among the most significant legislative changes in independent India, hence highly likely to appear in GK/Current Affairs or even in constitutional/polity-related questions.

• Intersection with fundamental rights & constitutional values: The codes raise (or may raise) questions about workers’ rights, the right to livelihood, social security, equality (non-discrimination based on gender), the state’s duty to protect labour, and regulatory limits. These are core constitutional law issues.

• Labour law / administrative law relevance: For aspirants planning to study or practice labour law, industrial relations, and social welfare law, these codes redefine the legal landscape. Understanding them will be crucial for future case law, statutory interpretation, or policy-based reasoning questions.

• Policy-law interplay & socio-economic rights: The expansion of social security, coverage of gig / informal sector, inclusion of women, etc., reflects a shift towards inclusive social justice, an area of interest for essays, legal reasoning questions, or socio-legal debates in CLAT.

Law Ministry Halts Advocates Act Amendment Bill

What happened: Amendment Bill + Withdrawal

• In February 2025, the Law Ministry published a draft Advocates (Amendment) Bill, 2025 (on 13 February), inviting public consultation until 28 February.

• The Bill proposed several major changes to the Advocates Act, 1961, including changes to the regulation of the legal profession, discipline of lawyers, definition of “legal practitioner,” authority over foreign law firms/lawyers, etc.

• Among the most controversial:

  • Allowing the Central Government to nominate up to three members to the Bar Council of India (BCI), which currently functions as an elected body under the 1961 Act.

  • Granting the Centre power to issue binding directions to the BCI (via a proposed new Section 49B).

  • Prohibiting strikes, boycotts, or abstention from work by lawyers as a form of protest: the Bill sought to add a new Section 35A under which any association of advocates or individual advocate calling for boycott/abstention or causing obstruction to court functioning would count as “misconduct.”

  • Introducing new grounds for misconduct, including potential client-initiated misconduct complaints, penalties, fines, suspension, or de-enrolment for advocates.

• The draft Bill triggered strong opposition from the legal fraternity, bar associations across the country, the BCI, senior lawyers, and many practising advocates.

• Protests were widespread, including strikes/boycotts of court work, letters from various Bar Councils, and public statements emphasising that the Bill threatened the autonomy of the Bar and independence of lawyers.

• As a result, on 22–23 February 2025, the Law Ministry formally withdrew the draft Bill. The official statement said that due to the large number of concerns and suggestions received, the consultation process has ended, and a revised draft, after stakeholder consultations, will be issued afresh.

What were the key issues?

• Undermining the independence of the Bar / legal profession by enabling the Centre to appoint members to the BCI, giving the government power to issue binding directions to the BCI.

• Prohibition on strikes/ boycotts/ protests by advocates — making even collective action or court abstention a “misconduct.”

• Vague/broad definitions of misconduct and liabilities — including client-initiated complaints for merely “loss of case”; vague use of terms like “misconduct.”

• Violation of constitutional values: rule of law, independence of profession, separation of powers, access to justice

Why This Matters for CLAT

• The issue deals directly with independence of the legal profession, separation of powers, executive influence, right to practice law, and due process/ natural justice, all central themes in constitutional law and administrative law sections of CLAT.

• The events (publication of draft, opposition, protests, withdrawal) reflect real-world dynamics between state, legal profession, and civil society, useful for essay topics, scenario-based questions (e.g. “Should government regulate entry of foreign law firms?”; “Are lawyers’ protests legitimate?”).

• Raises questions about whether the legal profession remains accessible, independent, and capable of representing marginalised clients without fear, critical for social justice themes, a common focus in CLAT.

• The fact that the Law Ministry has “withdrawn for now, but may re-introduce after consultations” means this issue is “live.” Future drafts/amendments may come, or this might end up in public interest litigation, something law aspirants ought to watch.