In the last ten years, two landmark judgments in India are:

1. Aadhaar Judgment (2018): In the Puttaswamy judgment (2018), the Supreme Court of India ruled that the Right to Privacy is a fundamental right guaranteed under the Indian Constitution. The court also held that the Aadhaar scheme, a biometric identification program, is constitutional but only if it meets certain conditions, including the requirement of consent and the data must be used for the purpose it was collected.
2. Sabarimala Verdict (2018): In the Indian Young Lawyers Association vs. State of Kerala judgment (2018), the Supreme Court of India lifted the ban on women’s entry into the Sabarimala Temple in Kerala, allowing women of all ages to worship at the temple. The court ruled that this restriction was unconstitutional and violative of Article 14 (equality) and Article 25 (freedom of conscience) of the Indian Constitution.

Now, about the NOTA Judgment in 2013:

NOTA Judgement (2013): In 2013, the Supreme Court of India ruled in the case of People’s Union for Civil Liberties vs. Union of India that a voter has the right to exercise a “None of the Above” (NOTA) option in an election. This option allows voters to choose NOTA if they are dissatisfied with all the candidates contesting an election. The court held that this option is essential for democratic governance and would help to ensure that voters are not forced to vote for a candidate they do not want.

The NOTA option was introduced by the Election Commission of India through an amendment to Rule 49(0) of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, in January 2013. The option is available to all electors, except those who are voting by postal ballot or proxy.