UG-CLAT entrance exam Question Bank Solutions for Legal Reasoning

LEGAL PRINCIPLE Whoever delivers to another person as genuine any counterfeit currency which he knows to be counterfeit, but which that other person is not aware of at the time when he received it, is guilty of counterfeiting currency.

FACTUAL SITUATION While returning home one day, Roshni realises that the local shopkeeper has given her a fake note of ₹1000. Disappointed, she goes to the same shop and buys cosmetics worth ₹600. She then passes the same fake note to the shopkeeper. The shopkeeper while inspecting the note finds out that it is fake. Is Roshni guilty?

LEGAL PRINCIPLE Whoever dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use any movable property is guilty of criminal misappropriation of property.

FACTUAL SITUATION A finds a Government promissory note belonging to Z, bearing a blank endorsement. A knowing that the note belongs to Z, pledges it with a banker as a security for a loan, intending to restore it to Z at a future time. Has A committed criminal misappropriation?

LEGAL PRINCIPLES

1. The crime of kidnapping involves taking someone away from the custody of their lawful guardian.

2. The crime of abduction involves inducing or forcing somebody to go away from someplace against their will.

FACTUAL SITUATION

A steals B's slave. Is it a crime?

DECISION

I. Kidnapping
II. Abduction
III. Neither

REASON

(A) Slavery is illegal.
(B) A bas taken him away from B's lawful custody.
(C) A bas forced somebody to go with him against his will.

LEGAL PRINCIPLES 

1. Whoever· causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death or with the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death commits the offence of culpable homicide.

2. Mens rea and actus reus must concur to result in a crime that is punishable by the law.

FACTUAL SITUATION

A and B went for shooting. A knows Z to be behind a bush. B does not know it. A induces B to fire at the bush. B fires and kills Z. Has an offence been committed?

What is true with the rights of the private defence in Criminal law?

When a convict is temporarily released from the prison for a fixed period of time, it is called ____________.

The question contains some basic principles and fact situations in which these basic principles have to be applied. A list of probable decisions and reasons are given. You have to choose a decision with reasons.

Principles:

(1) If a person commits an act by which death is caused to another person and the act is done with the intention of causing death, that person is liable for murder.

(2) A person has a right of self-defense to the extent of causing death to another provided he apprehends death by the act of the latter.

Facts:

Shuva went to a hardware shop owned by Anup. Bargaining on some item led to altercation between the two and Shuva picked up a sharp object and hit at Anup. When Anup started bleeding, his wife Mridula intervened and she was also hit by Shuva and she became unconscious. Finding himself totally cornered, Anup delivered a severe blow to Shuva with a sharp object. Shuva died instantly.

Possible decisions:

(a) Anup murdered Shuva.
(b) Anup killed Shuva with the intention of killing to save himself and his wife
(c) Anup killed Shuva without any intention to do so just to save himself and his wife

Probable reasons for the decision:

(i) If a person kills another instantly on the spot, the intention to kill is obvious.
(ii) Anup used force apprehending death of himself and his wife.
(iii) Anup used disproportionate force.
(iv) There was nothing to show that Shuva wanted to kill Anup or his wife. Your decision with the reason

The question contains some basic principles and fact situations in which these basic principles have to be applied. A list of probable decisions and reasons are given. You have to choose a decision with reasons.

Principles:

1. An employer shall be liable for the wrongs committed by his employees in the course of employment.

2. Third parties must exercise reasonable care to find out whether a person is actually acting in the course of employment.

Facts:

Nandan was appointed by Syndicate Bank to collect small savings from its customers spread over in different places on a daily basis. Nagamma, a housemaid, was one of such 'customers making use of Nandan's service. Syndicate Bank after a couple of years terminated Nandan's service. Nagamma, unaware of this fact, was handing over her savings to Nandan who misappropriated them. Nagamma realized this nearly after three months when she went to the Bank to withdraw money. She filed a complaint against the Bank.

Possible decisions:

(a) Syndicate Bank shall be liable to compensate Nagamma.
(b) Syndicate Bank shall not be liable to compensate Nagamma.
(c) Nagamma has to blame herself for her negligence.

Probable reasons for the decision:

(i) Nandan was not acting in the course of employment after the termination of his service.
(ii) A person cannot blame others for his own negligence.
(iii) Nagamma was entitled to be informed by the Bank about Nandan.
(iv) The Bank is entitled to expect its customers to know the actual position.

The question contains some basic principles and fact situations in which these basic principles have to be applied. A list of probable decisions and reasons are given. You have to choose a decision with reasons.

Principles:

1. Copying including attempt to copy in examinations is a serious offence.
2. One shall not take any unauthorized materials into the examination hall.

Facts:

Rohini, an examinee in PUC., was thoroughly checked while entering into the examination hall. She did not have anything other than authorized materials such as pen, instrument box, etc., with her. As she was writing her paper, an invigilator found close to her feet a bunch of chits. The invigilator on scrutiny found that the chits contained answers to the paper being written by Rohini. Rohini's answers tallied with the answers in the chits. A charge of copying was levelled against Rohini.

Probable decisions:

(a) Rohini shall be punished for copying.
(b) Rohini cannot be punished for copying.

Probable reasons for the decision:

(i) Something lying near the feet does not mean that the person is in possession of that thing.
(ii) The fact that she was checked thoroughly while getting into the hall must be conclusive.
(iii) Similarities between her answers and the answers in the chit indicate that she used those chits.
(iv) After using those chits, she must have failed to dispose of them properly.

The question consists of two statements, one labelled as PRINCIPLE and other as FACT. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.

Principle: Nothing is an offence merely by reason of its being done with the knowledge that it is likely to cause harm, if it is done without any criminal intention to cause harm, and in good faith for the purpose of preventing or avoiding other harm to a person or property.

Facts: Mr. Sharman, the Captain of a steam vessel, suddenly and without any fault or negligence on his part, finds himself in such a position that, before he can stop his vessel, he must inevitably run down a boat B, with twenty or thirty passengers on board, unless he changes the course of his vessel, and that, by changing his course, he must incur the risk of running down a boat C with only two passengers on board and which he may possibly clear.

The question consists of two statements, one labelled as PRINCIPLE and other as FACT. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.

Principle: Nothing is an offense which is done by a person who, at the time of doing it, by reason of unsound state of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act or something that he is doing is either wrong or contrary to law.

Facts: X takes his son Y who is three years old, for bathing to the well. He throws his son inside the well so that the son can have a good bath. After 10 minutes he also jumps into the well to take bath and get his son out of the well. Both were rescued by the villagers but his son was found dead.

The question consists of two statements, one labelled as PRINCIPLE and other as FACT. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.

Principle: Ignorance of Fact is excused but ignorance of law is no excuse

Facts: X was a passenger from Zurich to Manila in a Swiss Plane. When the plane landed at the Airport of Bombay on 28 Nov. 1962 it was found on searching that X carried 34 kg of Gold Bars on his person and that he had not declared it in the ‘Manifest for Transit’. On 26th Nov. 1962, the Government of India had issued a notification modifying its earlier exemption, making it mandatory now that the gold must be declared in the “Manifest” of the aircraft

Z is carried off by a tiger. X fires at the tiger, knowing that the shot might kill Z, but with no intention to kill Z, and in good faith trying to save Z. X’s shot, however, gives Z a mortal wound. Choose the correct option

Y makes an attempt to steal some jewels by breaking open a box and finds, after opening the box, that there is no jewel in it. Choose the appropriate answer.

A lady wanted to get a railway ticket but finding a crowd near the ticket window at the station, asked Raju, who was near the window, to get a ticket for her and handed him money for the same. Raju took the money and instead of getting the ticket, ran away with it. What offense has been committed by Raju?

Given below is a statement of legal principle followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer.

Legal Principle: A right to action cannot arise out of illegal activity.

Factual Situation: A and B were thieve- engaged in stealing cars and other vehicles once they stole a car, and while driving off they had to cross a city. They engaged a drive: to drive them through the city since they did not know the route inside. The indicator lamp of the car was not working and the thieves have not realized this, and therefore, had not told about it to the driver. While driving, through the city, the car was hit by another vehicle because of the faulty indicator. In the accident, the driver was injured and he filed a sue: against A and B.

Decision:

The question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.

Principle: Whoever takes away with him any minor person less than sixteen years of age, if a male, or less than eighteen years of age, if a female out of the keeping of parents of such minor person without the consent of such parent, is said to kidnap such minor person.

Facts: A female born on January 01, 1995, got admitted to an undergraduate program of a reputed University on July 01, 2012. She became friendly with one of the boys, born on June 01, 1994, of her class. The boy and the girl decided to marry. The parents of the boy agreed but the family of the girl did not agree. On December 15, 2012, the girl made a call from her Blackberry to the boy. The girl told the boy to come in his car at a particular place and time. The boy reached the stipulated place before the stipulated time. He waited there for about half an hour. The girl reached the stipulated place. She opened the door of the car and sat beside the boy who was on the driving seat. Without exchanging any pleasantries, the boy drove the car to an unknown place. The father of the girl lodged an FIR in the nearest police on January 20, 2013.

The question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.

Principle: Nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age.

Facts: A child born on January 01, 2005 killed another child B on December 30, 2011.

The question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.

Principle: Whoever by words, either spoken or written brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the Government established by law in India shall be punished. However, comments expressing disapprobation of the administrative or other action of the Government without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection, do not constitute an offense.

Facts: A renowned Professor of Economics wrote a critical comment on the economic policies of the Government of India in a National Daily. This piece of writing generated academic debate not only in the print media but also on television and internet. A student of law asked the fellow Indians on a social networking website to assemble at a particular place for peaceful and silent demonstration against the said economic policies on a stipulated date and time. The crowd assembled at that venue and started shouting anti-government slogans. Police arrested the professor.

The question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.

Principle: Whoever attempts to commit an offense punishable by the Indian Penal Code and in such attempt does any act towards the commission of the offense, shall be punished. Stealing is an offense punishable by the Indian Penal Code.

Facts: A makes an attempt to steal some jewels by breaking open a box and after so opening the box, finds that there is no jewel in it.