In this guide
A CLAT legal passage can run to a few hundred words of dense prose. It might explain a statute, summarise a Supreme Court judgment or set out a policy debate. Many aspirants read it like a newspaper article, top to bottom at one speed, and then reread half of it for every question. That is where the minutes go.
Reading a legal passage well means knowing in advance what you are looking for. This guide shows you what to mark, how case-based passages differ from principle-based ones, and how to pace a set. Then you can test it on a full passage.
Three kinds of passage
| Type | What it looks like | What to extract |
|---|---|---|
| Principle-based | States a rule, often from a statute, with conditions and exceptions | Each element, each exception, and any definitions |
| Case-based | Summarises a judgment: facts, question, decision, reasoning | The holding, the test the court laid down, and its limits |
| Policy or new law | Explains what a law does and why, sometimes with criticism | Who it applies to, what it requires, and the author's view |
Most papers mix the three. A case-based passage often contains a principle too: the test the court laid down is the rule you will apply to new facts.
What to mark as you read
Use a small, fixed set of marks so you do not have to think about them:
- Definitions. Box them. "A consumer means…", "Possession includes…". Questions often hinge on one word of a definition.
- Conditions. Underline "only if", "provided that", "where", "when". Each is an element you will test.
- Exceptions. Circle "unless", "except", "does not include", "however". Exceptions decide more answers than rules do.
- The holding. In a case-based passage, star the sentence where the court decides. It is usually after "The Court held" or "The Court ruled".
- The author's voice. In policy passages, note words like "unfortunately", "rightly" or "the better view". They answer "the author would agree" questions.
Case-based passages
A judgment has a shape. Once you see it, you can read at speed:
- Facts. Who went to court and why. Skim.
- Issue. The legal question. Often one sentence.
- Holding. The answer to that question.
- Reasoning and test. Why, and what test future cases must pass.
- Limits. What the court did not decide, or said was not absolute.
Questions then do one of three things. They ask what the court held. They give new facts and ask how the test applies. Or they ask what can or cannot be inferred. The third type catches people who over-read: if the passage says a right is "not absolute", an option saying the right can never be limited is wrong.
Timing
A workable budget is about 3–4 minutes to read and mark a passage and 45–60 seconds for each question. A set of five questions then takes 7–9 minutes. If a question needs you to reread more than two sentences, you have not marked enough on the first read.
Practice passage: the right to privacy
Passage
For more than half a century, it was unclear whether the Indian Constitution protects a right to privacy. In M.P. Sharma (1954) and Kharak Singh (1962), benches of the Supreme Court had said that the Constitution recognises no such right. Later, smaller benches assumed that it did. The conflict came to a head in challenges to a national identity programme, and the question was referred to a bench of nine judges.
In August 2017, in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v Union of India, the nine judges held unanimously that privacy is a fundamental right. It is protected as an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21, and as part of the freedoms guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution. To the extent that M.P. Sharma and Kharak Singh held otherwise, they were overruled.
The Court did not treat privacy as absolute. Like other fundamental rights, it may be restricted. But the plurality opinion laid down three requirements that any restriction must satisfy. First, legality: the restriction must be authorised by a law, not merely by an executive instruction. Second, a legitimate aim: the State must be pursuing a proper purpose, such as national security, preventing crime or distributing welfare benefits fairly. Third, proportionality: the means adopted must be rationally connected to the aim, and must not intrude more than is needed to achieve it.
The judgment described privacy broadly. It includes the privacy of the body, of personal information and of personal choices. The Court also noted that informational privacy has become pressing as governments and companies collect vast amounts of data about citizens.
Critics had argued that recognising privacy as a fundamental right would paralyse governance. The Court's answer lay in the three-part test. The State can still act, but it must act through law, for a proper purpose, and in a measured way.
Q1. Which statement best captures the holding in the passage?
(a) Privacy is a fundamental right that can never be restricted.
(b) Privacy was always accepted as a fundamental right by the Supreme Court.
(c) Privacy is protected only by statute, not by the Constitution.
(d) Privacy is a fundamental right, and any restriction must pass the tests of legality, legitimate aim and proportionality.
Answer: (d).
- (a) Wrong. The passage says privacy is not absolute.
- (b) Wrong. Two earlier benches had denied it.
- (c) Wrong. The Court located privacy in Article 21 and Part III.
- (d) Right. It states both the holding and the test.
Q2. A state government issues an executive order, without any law passed by the legislature, requiring every resident to upload their full medical history to a public website.
(a) Valid, because public health is a legitimate aim.
(b) Invalid under the passage, because the restriction is not authorised by law.
(c) Valid, because executive orders bind residents.
(d) Invalid, because privacy is absolute.
Answer: (b).
- (a) Wrong. A legitimate aim alone is not enough; all three requirements must be met.
- (b) Right. Legality fails first, and one failed requirement is enough.
- (c) Wrong. The passage says an executive instruction does not satisfy legality.
- (d) Wrong. Right result, wrong reason.
Q3. A statute allows the police, with a magistrate's warrant, to examine phone records of a person accused of a serious offence, limited to records relevant to that offence.
(a) It is likely to satisfy the passage's test.
(b) It violates privacy, because phone records are personal information.
(c) It is invalid, because only Parliament can restrict fundamental rights.
(d) It is invalid, because it was not considered in Puttaswamy.
Answer: (a).
- (a) Right. There is a law, a legitimate aim (preventing crime) and a narrowly tailored means.
- (b) Wrong. Informational privacy is protected, but can be restricted if the test is met.
- (c) Wrong. The passage says nothing about which legislature may make the law.
- (d) Wrong. The test applies to new measures; that is its purpose.
Q4. Which fact, if true, most weakens the claim that a data-collection law is proportionate?
(a) The law was passed by a large majority.
(b) The State's aim is to prevent welfare fraud.
(c) A less intrusive method would achieve the same aim equally well.
(d) Many citizens already share data with private companies.
Answer: (c).
- (a) Wrong. The size of the majority is irrelevant to proportionality.
- (b) Wrong. This supports the legitimate aim, not the proportionality of means.
- (c) Right. The passage says the means must not intrude more than needed.
- (d) Wrong. Private sharing does not show the State's means are measured.
Q5. Which of the following can be inferred from the passage?
(a) Every data-collection programme in India is now unconstitutional.
(b) The critics' concerns were accepted by the Court.
(c) Privacy protects only personal information, not the body.
(d) The earlier rulings in M.P. Sharma and Kharak Singh no longer bind courts on whether privacy is a fundamental right.
Answer: (d).
- (a) Wrong. The passage says the State can still act if it meets the test.
- (b) Wrong. The Court answered the critics through the test instead.
- (c) Wrong. The passage lists bodily privacy expressly.
- (d) Right. They were overruled to that extent.
Knowing the judgment beforehand would have saved you a minute here, which is why legal current affairs is part of preparation. For the element-by-element method on principle-based passages, see applying principles to facts.
Common mistakes
- Reading the facts of a decided case closely and the holding loosely. Reverse this.
- Missing a qualifier. "Not absolute", "to the extent that" and "ordinarily" change what can be inferred.
- Bringing in outside knowledge. If you know more about a case than the passage says, answer from the passage.
- Going back to reread for every question. Mark on the first read instead.
Practise this week
- Take five legal passages and mark only definitions, conditions, exceptions and holdings.
- For each case-based passage, write the holding and the test in one line each.
- Time the read separately from the questions. Target 4 minutes.
- Note one qualifier per passage that changed an answer.
- Read one Supreme Court judgment summary a day from a reliable news source.
A note on dates and numbers. Exam patterns, vacancies and schedules change from year to year. Always confirm the current details in the latest notification on the Consortium of National Law Universities website .
Get the next CLAT guide by email
New guides every week. No spam, unsubscribe any time.