COLOUR THEME
Eight sessions of Law cut-offs for every category, what they suggest for the next session, and a mark-by-mark plan that shows where the easy scores are in Paper 1 and Paper 2.
Cut-offs are declared by the National Testing Agency (NTA) after each session. Read the Disclaimer below, and confirm every figure on the official site before you rely on it. Official UGC NET site
Please read this before you use any figure, range or target on this page.
In short. This page compiles cut-off marks that NTA has already published for UGC NET Law (058) and adds editorial analysis. It is offered for convenience and general education only. NTA alone decides cut-offs, so verify every figure against the official notice before you rely on it, and treat every projection as an informed estimate, never as a promise.
The tables and charts gather figures from NTA's public cut-off notices so that candidates can see trends in one place. They are not an official publication and do not replace one.
Where a figure is shown, it is a transcription of what was published for that session, out of 300 marks. The official notice for the relevant session is always the authoritative version.
Check any number you plan to act on against the NTA cut-off notice and the Information Bulletin for your session.
Despite reasonable care, a compilation can contain transcription errors, can lag behind a corrigendum, a revised result or a court-ordered change, and can differ in category definitions from the official notice. Where independent published sources disagreed and we could not settle the point, we left the cell blank rather than guess. Eligibility, exam pattern, marking scheme and qualification rules are set by NTA and UGC and may change from one cycle to the next.
The expected range is a statistical summary of recent sessions plus our reading of the pattern. NTA does not announce a cut-off in advance, and the actual figure can fall outside any range we show.
Cut-offs depend on how hard the paper was, how many candidates sat it, how they scored in each category and how NTA applies its qualification rules for that session. Past results describe what happened. They do not determine what will happen. A "safe target" is a planning buffer, and no score is safe in a competitive ranking.
The unit-wise marks and the three routes to a target score are an educator's planning frame, not a prediction of how any paper will be set or how you will perform.
Question distribution across units varies by session and is not published in advance. Which topics are "easy" depends on your background and preparation. Use the plans to organise your effort, then adjust them against your own mock-test results.
This page is provided "as is". We give no warranty that it is accurate, complete, current or fit for any purpose, and nothing here is professional, career or legal advice.
To the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, NET Law 058 and its editors and contributors are not liable for any loss, missed opportunity or decision arising from your use of, or reliance on, this page, including any difference between what is shown here and what NTA publishes. Nothing in this disclaimer excludes liability that cannot lawfully be excluded, or waives a right that cannot lawfully be waived.
NET Law 058 is an independent study resource. It is not affiliated with, authorised by or endorsed by the UGC, the NTA or any government body.
Names such as UGC NET and NTA are used only to identify the examination. Linked sites are provided for convenience; we do not control and are not responsible for their content.
If you find a figure that differs from the official notice, please tell us and we will check it and correct the page.
The data is reviewed whenever NTA publishes a new session. The date of the last review is shown at the foot of this page. Write to netlawverse@gmail.com.
Law (058), every session from December 2022 to June 2026, out of 300 marks.
Pick a category. The same choice drives the table, the chart and the calculator further down the page. The shaded column on the chart is the expected range for the next session.
JRF means the marks at which a candidate qualifies for the Junior Research Fellowship, which also carries Assistant Professor and PhD eligibility. The Assistant Professor line also carries PhD eligibility. The PhD-only line is for doctoral admission. A dash means the figure was not available, was not separately published for that session, or published sources disagreed. Marks for the earlier sessions (Dec 2022 to Dec 2023) are shown for the JRF and Assistant Professor lines only.
Hover or tap a session to read the values.
What five sessions of Law cut-offs say about the next one.
Calculated from the five most recent sessions that carry all three lines (June 2024 to June 2026): the average, plus and minus one standard deviation, rounded to an even mark. The safe target adds six marks, or three questions, on top of the range.
The line is steadier than aspirants fear. Over the last five sessions the Unreserved JRF line moved between 200 and 218, a spread of nine questions. The Assistant Professor line stayed between 178 and 194, and the PhD-only line between 158 and 174. Nobody can say which of those numbers the next session will print, but the whole band is narrow enough to plan against.
December sessions have printed higher than June sessions. December 2024 and December 2025 produced Unreserved lines of 218 and 218 (JRF), 194 and 188 (Assistant Professor), and 174 and 166 (PhD). June 2025 and June 2026 averaged 202, 178 and 159. That is a gap of roughly 16, 13 and 11 marks. Two sessions on each side is a small sample, and June 2024 was a re-examination that sits in between, so I treat this as a tilt rather than a rule. For a December cycle I would plan for the upper half of the range.
Your category changes the number, but not the logic. Averaged over the same five sessions, the OBC (NCL), EWS, SC and ST JRF lines sit about 14, 9, 25 and 30 marks below Unreserved. On the Assistant Professor line the gaps are about 14, 14, 25 and 32. Use the category tabs above to see the exact history, and the calculator below to set your target.
The JRF line is a ranking contest. In the three sessions where candidate counts matched across sources (June 2024, December 2024, June 2025), only 55 to 73 Unreserved candidates cleared the JRF line, against 661 to 1,057 more in the Assistant Professor band and 1,399 to 2,421 more in the PhD-only band. A JRF target is therefore a bet on being near the very top of the paper, and it deserves a larger buffer than the other two lines.
A hard paper does not protect you, and an easy one punishes you. The Unreserved JRF line was 236 in December 2022, the highest in this data set. When a paper is scored generously the line climbs quickly, so the safe habit is to build your score on accuracy in the units you control rather than to hope for a hard paper.
The numbers that would have cleared every one of the last five sessions (Unreserved) are 194 for Assistant Professor, 218 for JRF and 174 for PhD admission. Those are the highest lines in the period. Use them as your upper reference, and treat the range above as your working target.
This is an editorial reading of public data. It is not a prediction by NTA, and no mark is guaranteed to qualify. See the Disclaimer at the top of the page.
The units that pay back fastest in Paper 1 and Paper 2 (Law), with a realistic target for each.
Every question carries 2 marks and there is no negative marking, so the plan is simple: bank the units that repeat and reward revision, protect them with practice, and attempt everything else. I have marked each unit Banker (dependable marks for most candidates), Steady (reliable with focused revision) or Selective (take what you can). The targets below are my judgement of what a well-prepared law graduate can secure, not a statistic from NTA. Paper 1 has five questions per unit and Paper 2 has about ten, though the exact split varies by session.
Every answer sits inside the passage. Two timed passages a day for two weeks builds the speed you need.
Definitions, methods and evaluation types repeat from year to year. A week of revision is enough.
Types, steps, ethics and referencing. Fixed theory, and familiar ground for a law graduate.
Models, barriers and mass media. Short factual options with little ambiguity.
Pollution, climate and the SDGs. It overlaps with Environment Law in Paper 2, so one effort earns twice.
Abbreviations and basic terms. A one-page list revised daily does most of the work.
Regulators, commissions and policies. Memory-led, so check the latest policy changes.
Law students have an edge on arguments and fallacies. Skip a long Venn diagram if you are slow.
Questions are often based on one data set, so mastering one chart type can pay out several marks at once.
The most effort per mark in Paper 1. Take series and simple percentage or ratio items, and leave the rest.
The largest pool of repeating questions: Articles, amendments and landmark cases. Bare text plus about forty key cases.
Concepts, maxims, defences and leading cases, with the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 on top.
Conventions, years and institutions such as the NGT and NHRC. Factual and repetitive.
Statute-driven terms, durations and procedures. One careful read of each Act pays well.
Study the BNS, BNSS and BSA. Many questions now ask for new section numbers, so keep an old-to-new comparison sheet.
Contract, Sale of Goods, Negotiable Instruments and Companies Act. Definitions are exact, so practise eliminating options.
Several personal laws with section numbers and recent judgments. Finish one personal law at a time.
Sources, UN organs, treaties and conventions. Fix names and dates in your head.
A narrow syllabus with predictable comparisons. Ideal for a short, high-return sprint.
Theory-heavy with close options. Learn the jurist-to-theory pairings and do not chase fine distinctions.
Add up the easy marks, then see how many more you need and where to find them.
Secure every Banker and Steady target above and you reach 194 out of 300, which is 97 correct answers. That equals the highest Unreserved Assistant Professor line of the last five sessions. For the PhD line it leaves a wide margin, and for the JRF line you still need to find about 24 more marks (12 questions) to match the highest recent line of 218.
Choose your category and your goal. The calculator uses the expected range worked out above.
218 is the highest Unreserved JRF line of the last five sessions, so it is a useful ceiling to plan against. Each route adds 24 marks (12 correct answers) to the baseline. Pick the one that fits your strengths.
Best if your law revision is strong and you have limited time for quantitative practice.
Best if you reason quickly, enjoy numbers, and want the faster return from the general paper.
The default for most candidates. It spreads the effort so no single weak unit decides the result.
The three routes are illustrations of how 24 extra marks can be distributed. Test any route against your own mock scores, and rebalance after each mock. Mock scores on this site are practice bands, not NTA categories.
Where the numbers come from, and how the range was calculated.
Last reviewed: . NET Law 058 is an independent study aid and is not affiliated with UGC or NTA. Disclaimer and terms