HomeCurrent Affairs & GKMock Test 4 by CLATalogue and CLATapult for CLAT 2022

Mock Test 4 by CLATalogue and CLATapult for CLAT 2022

1 minutes read

Mock Test 4 by CLATalogue and CLATapult for CLAT 2022




Read the passage carefully and choose the correct option to the questions given below:​​ The happy man is the man who lives objectively, who has free affections and wide​​ interests,​​ who secures his happiness through these interests and affections and through the fact that​​ they, in turn, make him an entity of interest and fondness to many others. To be the recipient​​ of affection is a potent cause of happiness, but the man who demands affection is not the man​​ upon whom it is bestowed. The man who receives liking is, speaking generally, the man who​​ gives it. But it is useless to attempt to give it as a calculation, in the way in which one might​​ lend money at interest, for acalculated affection is not honest and is not felt to be so by the​​ beneficiary. What then can a man do who is doomed because he is enclosed in self? So long​​ as he continues to think about the causes of his unhappiness, he continues to be self-centred​​ and therefore does not get outside it.​​ It​​ must be of genuine interest, not by simulated interests​​ adopted merely as a medicine. Although this difficulty is real, there is never the less much​​ that he can do if he has rightly diagnosed his trouble. If for instance, his woe is due to a sense​​ of depravity, conscious or unconscious, he can first influence his conscious mind that he has​​ no reason to feel sinful, and then proceed, to plant this rational conviction in his unconscious​​ mind, concerning himself meanwhile with​​ some more or less neutral activity. If he prospers​​ in dismissing the sense of immorality, it is possible that genuine unbiased interests will arise​​ spontaneously. If his trouble is self-pity, he can deal with it in the same manner after first​​ persuading himself that there is nothing extraordinarily unfortunate in his circumstances. If​​ fright is his worry, let him drill exercises designed to give bravery. Courage has been​​ recognized from time immemorial as an important virtue, and a great part of the training of​​ boys and young men has been devoted to producing a type of character capable of​​ fearlessness in battle. But moral courage and intellectual courage have been much less​​ studied. They also, however, have their technique. Admit to yourself every day at least one​​ painful truth, you will find it quite useful. Teach yourself to feel that life would still be worth​​ living even if you were not, as of course, you are, immeasurably superior to all your friends​​ in virtue and in intelligence. Exercises of this kind​​ protracted through numerous years will, at​​ last, enable doing, might free you from the empire of fear on a very​​ large scale.


    • What does calculated affection​​ mean?


      • affection which is recieved​​ unwillingly

      • affection which is​​ temporary

      • affection which is​​ bogus and​​ forge

      • affection which comes as an​​ alm


    • According to the passage, a happy​​ man


      • is​​ self-engaged

      • has free affection and wide​​ interests

      • is free from outward​​ passions

      • has no​​ grudge


    • Which of the following statements is NOT TRUE in the context of the​​ passage?


      • The happy man has wide​​ interests.

      • Courage has been recognized as an important​​ virtue.



      • A happy man lives​​ objectively

      • moral courage and intellectual courage has been extensively​​ studied.


    • Which of the following virtues, according to the passage,​​ has been recognized for long as an important​​ virtue?


      • isolation

      • oblation

      • courage

      • unassertiveness


    • Which of the following words is SIMILAR in the meaning of the word ‘simulated’ as used in the​​ passage?


      • Imitated

      • Accommodated

      • Trusted

      • Directed


    • A man who is​​ suffering from the feeling of self-pity​​ should


      • develop a feeling of​​ fearlessness.

      • persuade himself that everything is alright in his​​ circumstances.

      • seek affection from​​ others.

      • control his passions and​​ emotions


    • Which of the following statements is TRUE in​​ the context of the​​ passage?


      • Passions stem from​​ unhappiness

      • A happy man lives​​ subjectively

      • Virtues have dark sides as​​ well

      • Courage is the virtue to face​​ worries


    • Which of the following statements is SIMILAR in meaning to the word ‘potent’ as used in the​​ passage?


      • adventurous

      • Callous

      • Vigorous

      • shrinking


    • Which of the following words is OPPOSITE in meaning of the word ‘ conviction‘ as used in the​​ passage?


      • Belief

      • Certainity

      • Stance

      • doubt



    • When you think about the cause of your unhappiness,​​ you


  • introspect and​​ look critically at​​ yourself.

  • realize that life can be lived in different​​ ways.

  • practise exercise designed to give​​ coverage.

  • become a self-centred​​ person.





DIRECTIONS FOR QUESTIONS (Q. 11 TO Q. 15): The following graph provides​​ data regarding the birthday of students in a class by month. Analyse the graph and answer the given questions



    • What are the total number of students in the​​ class?


      • 63

      • 60

      • 58

      • 67


    • What is the average number of birthdays every month, in the first half of the​​ year?


      • 6

      • 4

      • 7

      • 5


    • What is the average number of birthdays over the months with the least and most birthdays?

      • 4

b)​​ ​​ 4.5

c)​​ ​​ 5.5

d)​​ 6.5


    • Selecting a random student from the class, what is the probability that the chosen student’s birthday falls in​​ September?

a)​​ 8/63

b)​​ ​​ 1/7

c)​​ ​​ 1/9

d)​​ 2/13


Q.15​​ Assuming that no two students share a birthday, what is the probability that any day of the year chosen at random will be a birthday?

a)​​ ​​ 0.12

b)​​ ​​ 0.17

c)​​ ​​ 0.23

d)​​ 0.3


C:\Users\Jasamrit\Desktop\Pie Chsrt.png

DIRECTIONS FOR QUESTIONS (Q. 16 TO Q. 20): The​​ given pie chart analyses the usage of multiple browsers by users. Analyse the chart and answer the given questions.



















    • What is the percentage of users who use neither Internet Explorer, nor Chrome? a)​​ 24.6

b)​​ ​​ 36.9

c)​​ ​​ 16.8

d)​​ ​​ 26.3

    • What is​​ the number of people using Safari, if the number of people using Firefox are 7580?

a)​​ ​​ 800

b)​​ ​​ 840

c)​​ ​​ 750

d)​​ ​​ 900


    • If​​ Opera dissolved and all of its users were evenly distributed among the remaining browsers, which browser would have the maximum percentage​​ increase?

      • Safari

      • Chrome

      • Firefox

      • Internet​​ Explorer


    • If​​ the number of users of Opera are 2520, what are the number of users that use Chrome?

a)​​ ​​ 8400

b)​​ ​​ 9600

c)​​ ​​ 8800

d)​​ ​​ 9300


    • If the number of users were to be divided equally among the five companies,​​ which browser would suffer the most loss?

      • Chrome

      • Opera

      • Firefox

      • Internet​​ Explorer





Direction: Q.21-26: Eight people A, Z, B, Y, C, X, D and E are sitting around a circular table and facing the centre not necessarily in same order. E sits second to​​ the right of Y. Y is not an immediate neighbor of either A or C. C sits third to right of A. X and Z are immediate neighbors. D is not an immediate neighbour of E.

    • Who sits second to the right of the one who sits on the immediate right of​​ D?


      • X

      • E

      • B

      • C


    • How​​ many persons are sitting between X and​​ A?


      • One

      • Two

      • Three

      • Cannot be​​ determined


    • Who sits third to the right of​​ E?


      • Z

      • D

      • X

      • Either Z or​​ X


    • What is the position of Z with respect to​​ B?


      • Immediate​​ right

      • Third to the​​ right

      • Fourth to the​​ left

      • Cannot be​​ determined


    • Three of them are alike in certain way and form a group. Find the one that doesn’t belong to the​​ group

      • EA

      • YB



      • XE

      • CD


    • If X is on the immediate right of A then who among the following sits third to the left of​​ Z?

      • A

      • C

      • E

      • D


Q.27&28: Mohan suggests launching a​​ new insurance policy to cover the services required by elderly people like medical coverage who belong to age group of 60-70. He suggests keeping the premium for policy low enough to attract more customers.

    • Which of the following if true is most likely to​​ weaken the Mohan​​ idea?


      • Not much people under that age group are willing to take insurance​​ policies.

      • Revenue would not be enough to pay for the​​ claims

      • They should target only high income​​ adults

      • None of the​​ above


    • What could be the possible course of action​​ in above​​ case?


      • They should target middle age customers also as they are likely to file claims for many​​ years

      • Clients list should be​​ selective

      • More services should be included the​​ policies

      • Neither of the​​ above


    • Mr. A puts forward the idea that local​​ industries in our country should be protected from foreign competition by way of protective duties.​​ It​​ is a type of tax imposed on foreign goods to protect domestic industries.​​ It ​​ will protect it from foreign competitors. The idea is ​​ to increase demand for domestic products while reducing the volume of imports. Tariffs also provide a source of revenue for the country levying​​ them.

Which of the following if true, could weaken A’s argument.



      • High protective duties result into lesser or no imports and revenues will fall as exports would​​ decrease.

      • Foreign manufactures are unaffected by such​​ duties

      • Without competition, industry would have no need to innovate and result into decline in quality and be more expensive than what foreign competitors​​ produce.

      • It will result in​​ corruption


    • Author 1:​​ Patent or Copyright protection for works done by AI (Artificial Intelligence) should be given in collaboration as works done by AI are result of human​​ interference.

Author 2:​​ AI systems must be recognized on international platforms because some parts of the world fail to recognize their existence.

Author 3:​​ Proper guidelines are needed for granting of patent and copyright and if possible it should be framed at International level and implemented by all the countries.

Author 4:​​ There should also be law governing criminal liability for wrongs done by Artificial​​ Intelligence.

Which of the following conclusion can be drawn based on above arguments –


      • Human race is making efforts everyday to make life​​ easier.

      • Laws regarding AI are ambiguous and needs​​ clarification.

      • A law needs to frame for AI and protection of works done by​​ them.

      • There is urgent need to recognition of AI​​ existence.





Prime Minister [A] said on Wednesday that his government was resigning to give​​ President Vladimir Putin room to carry out​​ the changes​​ he wants to make to the constitution. The unexpected announcement, which came shortly after the president proposed a nationwide vote on sweeping changes that would shift power and make drastic changes​​ to the system of government, means Russia will also get a new prime​​ minister.

Possible candidates include Sergei Sobyanin, the mayor of Moscow, Maxim Oreshkin, the economy minister, or Alexander Novak, the energy minister. Mr. Medvedev made the​​ announcement on State TV who thanked Mr. Medvedev, a close ally, for his work.



President Vladimir Putin said that Mr. Medvedev would take on a new job as deputy head of Russia's Security Council, which President Vladimir Putin chairs. He asked for the outgoing government to remain at work until a new government was appointed.

    • What is the name of the person whose name has been redacted with [A] in the aforementioned in the aforementioned​​ passage?

  • Dmitri​​ Medvedev.

  • Sergie Dmitri.

  • Stalin.

  • None of the​​ above.

    • Who​​ is the longest serving President of Russia?

  • Vladimir Putin.

  • Stalin.

  • Boris​​ Yeltsin.

  • Mikhail​​ Gorbachev

    • Which of the following is NOT actually true about ‘the changes’ which have been discussed in the aforementioned​​ passage?

  • Mikhail Mishutsin has been named​​ as the new Prime Minister of​​ Russia.

  • The system of Russia has changed from Parliamentary to Presidential form of government.

  • The system of Russia has changed from Presidential Parliamentary to form of government.

  • Both A and​​ C.

    • Which of the following is true about​​ India?

  • India follows a presidential form of government.

  • India follows a parliamentary form of​​ government.

  • India follows a mix of parliamentary form of​​ government.

  • India follows a quasi-parliamentary form of​​ government.

    • Which article of the Indian​​ Constitution states that the President shall be vested with the executive powers in​​ India?

  • Article​​ 53

  • Article​​ 73

  • Article​​ 163

  • Article​​ 75

  • has been appointed as Deputy Governor of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI). The post was lying vacant after Viral V​​ Acharya resigned from the post in June last year. He will be the fourth Deputy Governor of the RBI and has been appointed to the post for a period of three years. [A] who is looking after the Monetary Policy Department as the Executive Director, is likely​​ to retain the department, which was handled by Acharya, as the Deputy Governor.

The Reserve Bank of India, headed by Governor Shaktikanta Das, can have a maximum of



  • Deputy Governors. [C] are the other Deputy Governors working at the central​​ bank

    • Identify the name of the person whose name has been replaced with [A] in​​ the aforementioned​​ passage?

  • Michael Debabrata​​ Patra.

  • B P​​ Kanungo.

  • S.​​ Jaishankar.

  • M K Jain..

    • What is the prescribed maximum number of deputy governors at​​ present?

  • Four.

  • Three.

  • Two.

  • None of the​​ above.

    • In which year was the Reserve Bank of India established? a)​​ 1935.

b)​​ ​​ 1923.

c)​​ ​​ 1951.

d)​​ None of the above.

    • Who was the first governor of Reserve Bank of​​ India?

  • C.D.​​ Deshmukh

  • Duvvuri​​ Subbarao

  • Osborn Smith

  • S.​​ Venkatraman

The annual World Future​​ Energy Summit for this year [2020] is being held in [A]. It is the leading global industry event and exhibition for future energy, cleantech and sustainability. Bringing together government and business leaders, 800 specialist exhibitors and 33,500 visitors from 170 countries, it showcases pioneering technologies and ground-breaking thinking​​ in energy,​​ energy efficiency,​​ water,​​ solar,​​ waste​​ and smart cities.

As a global​​ hub for business, innovation and knowledge exchange at the heart​​ of [A]​​ Sustainability Week,​​ the World Future Energy Summit inspires the advancement and transfer of ideas, technology and investment across borders and between the public and private sectors worldwide, helping to stimulate sustainable growth for all stakeholders.

    • Where (the name of the place redacted with [A] in the abovementioned passage) is the World Energy Summit 2020 being​​ held?

  • Dubai.

  • Geneva.

  • London

  • None of the​​ above.








This is not pedantic hair-splitting. On the contrary, it is deeply important, because respect for​​ precedent is at the bedrock of our judicial system, and of the rule of law. Ordinarily, prior judgments of the Supreme Court are binding, and meant to be followed: this is what provides the system the stability and continuity that differentiates the rule of law from the rule of judges. Now if a later bench of the Court wants to go against binding precedent, a series of ground-rules exist to ensure that this can only happen after careful consideration and reflection, and in judicial proceedings where both sides can put their case. These ground rules stipulate, for example, that if a smaller bench feels that the binding decision of a previous, larger bench is incorrect, it “refers” the case to a larger bench to consider; and in general, this referral takes place incrementally (for example, from two judges to three, three to five etc. – although there have, of course, been exceptions). The reason for this – to reiterate – is that respect for precedent requires, logically, that settled law be disturbed only when​​ there are weighty reasons for doing so.

However, there is something more concerning here. If the nine-judge bench is no longer restricting itself to the reference questions – but intends to hear these petitions as well – then it at least potentially follows that the Sabarimala petitions – out of which the review order arose – will also now be the subject matter of the hearing. This would be truly extraordinary: a final judgment of the Court (five judges) would be effectively re-heard by a nine-judge bench,​​ against all existing norms and conventions. Recall that no judgment has yet doubted the​​ correctness​​ of​​ the​​ original​​ Sabarimala​​ decision,​​ or​​ made​​ a​​ reference​​ to​​ have​​ it

reconsidered. In other words, this “second round” with a larger bench is taking place​​ purely by virtue of the Chief Justice exercising his administrative fiat

It should be obvious by now that this is no longer about whether the original judgment in Sabarimala was right or wrong. People can – and do – have different views about that, and it​​ would be entirely open to later benches to reconsider it, following proper procedures. But what is at stake here is something deeper: it is whether precedent continues to have any meaning at the Supreme Court, or whether what we are witnessing is a gradual​​ metamorphosis of the Supreme Court of India into the Supreme Chief Justice of India (a ​​ point I have written about before). Because what has happened here is that a number crucial issues that required judicial consideration in a proper way (whether there​​ is a conflict between Shirur Mutt and Durgah, requiring resolution; whether the referred questions actually affect the pending cases; and whether Sabarimala ought to be reconsidered) have been implicitly decided through the constitution of a nine-judge bench, by administrative​​ fiat.

Source - https://indconlawphil.wordpress.com/2020/01/14/the-curious-continuing-afterlife- of-the-sabarimala-review/



    • What is the context under which the author differentiates between rule of law and rule​​ of​​ judges?

      • Argument​​ about supremacy of the​​ constitution

      • Binding precedents provide stability to the​​ system

      • Questioning the credibility of the​​ court

      • Arbitrary administrative fiats of​​ judges


    • Why does the author believe that the supreme court is being distorted to a one man rule?

      • The court is taking into consideration matters which were not for review before​​ them

      • The Author is being​​ paranoid

      • The court is not following proper procedure established and hence, the administrative fiats are arbitrary

      • The court is exercising​​ extra-territorial​​ jurisdiction.


    • Why is the review mechanism of supreme court incremental in​​ nature?


      • More judges translate into better​​ judgements.

      • Reviews have limited grounds than​​ petitions

      • To place a deterrent effect on frivolous​​ appeals

      • Respect for precedent requires settled law to be distrubed only when there are justifiable reasons for​​ it.

Section 35 of the Bill, for instance, empowers the Government to grant a carte blanche authorization to any of its agencies to gather personal data, thereby overriding privacy protections and categorically undermining the two main components required to limit an aspiring surveillance state: accountability and transparency. Privacy protections, the Bill states, can be overridden

  • in the interest of sovereignty and​​ integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order;​​ or

  • for preventing incitement to the commission of any cognizable offence relating to sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public​​ order

The Srikrishna Committee’s Draft Bill, on the other hand, permitted surveillance only if “authorised pursuant to a law” and “in accordance with the procedure established by such law” if “necessary for, and proportionate to, such interests being achieved.” This was in line with the judgment in K.S. Puttaswamy v Union of India, which emphasised that infringements upon privacy must meet the global constitutional standards of proportionality. The 2019 Bill eliminates these procedural restraints and does away with parliamentary or judicial oversight. Moreover, while the draft Bill provided such an exemption to the Government only in the interests of the security of the State, the current Bill further enhances the scope and boundaries of the broad scheme of power the Government​​ enjoys.

The Government’s sweeping power invokes grave privacy concerns, disregards the procedural and content based mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution, and strikes at the very root of the​​ interpretive advance made in the Privacy​​ judgement.

As if this were not unconstitutional enough, the Bill allows the Central Government to collect anonymized “personal” or “non-personal data” from data fiduciaries. Neither term is distinguished nor defined​​ in the bill. This provision is especially alarming in the wake of recent studies, which suggest that no anonymized personal data is protected from re- identification, thus raising a grave concern about confidentiality, privacy, and the ethical use of data. It is hardly a stretch to assume that this Bill, for all practical purposes, might seriously jeopardise the privacy of those set of individuals who espouse political sentiments that the Government may find unfavourable and thereby giving rise to a retributive form of policy​​ making.

Another change which is a cause of worry is the substitution of the judicial members in the selection committee, which is responsible for the appointment of the chairperson and the members of the DPAI, as was envisioned in the​​ draft Bill, with the Cabinet Secretary, Law Secretary, and Electronics and Information and Technology Secretary, thereby making it impervious to judicial and expert influence. While the US Supreme Court maintains that judicial authorization is required before the operation of certain kinds of domestic surveillance, the current Bill mentions no such prerequisite. The Bill further fails to grapple effectively against executive overreach and does not stand the scrutiny of the proportionality

jurisprudence, i.e., the principle which seeks to safeguard citizens from excessive Government​​ measures.

    • What are the two main components to limit an aspiring state from violating the privacy of​​ citizens?

      • A well defined law and an active​​ judiciary

      • Anti-surveillance systems​​ and anti government​​ watchdogs

      • Accountability and​​ Transparency

      • Transparency and Good​​ faith


    • Which among the following options highlight the central problem with Section 35 of the bill?

      • The clause is vaguely​​ worded

      • The clause is not in conformity global constitutional standards of​​ proportionality

      • The clause is seemingly unconstitutional for not providing adequate​​ safeguards

      • The clause is a departure from what the bill originally​​ described.


    • What is the major problem with not having judicial oversight over the​​ surveillance and not having judicial members in the selection​​ committee?





      • Judiciary is the guardian of the constitution and it has a duty to protect​​ it.

      • Judiciary is less corrupt than​​ executive

      • Judiciary would provide checks and balances against governmental​​ excesses

      • Judiciary would not be an accomplice in privacy​​ violations


    • What could be a potential outcome of not having anonymized data protected from​​ re-​​ identification?

      • It may jeopardize the privacy of people who are against the​​ government

      • It may​​ jeopardize the Adhaar biometric privacy​​ system

      • Anonymity would become a myth under a surveillance​​ state

      • Option A & Option​​ C


It was reported that the woman who had complained against the then-Chief Justice was reinstated in service to the Supreme Court. Given, however, that the complainant’s allegation was that she had been dismissed from service because she had refused advances from the then-Chief Justice, this “reinstatement” raises a host of deeply troubling questions about what passes for justice and accountability at the Supreme Court.

Question One: As the Supreme Court has provided no reasons for reinstatement, there is – at least formally – a presumption that the original dismissal was unlawful. If the originaldismissal was unlawful, it immediately puts paid to the “disgruntled employee” theory that was bandied around in open Court last year, as a form of character assassination. Who will now (a) take responsibility for the unlawful dismissal, and (b) for the “disgruntled employee” narrative that happened under the watch of Supreme Court judges?

Question 2: The informal “ad-hoc” Committee of three Supreme Court judges who examined the allegations and issued a “clean chit” to the Chief Justice, did so on the basis of their belief that the complaint had no merits.​​ It​​ follows from that fact that the three Supreme Court ​​ judges believed that the complainant had lied about being sexually harassed (there is no other way to spin this). Lying about sexual harassment allegations against the Chief Justice of India​​ is a very serious matter. These days, the Supreme Court and government lawyers like to constantly throw around allegations of people “maligning” the institution by writing articles; well, if there is one thing that does “malign” the institution, it is (presumably) trying to trap the Chief Justice in a false sexual harassment case. But if that is true, then what is the Supreme Court doing reinstating the complainant?​​ In​​ particular, keep in mind that the head of the ad-hoc Committee was Bobde J., who is now​​ the Chief Justice – and who, therefore, would presumably have signed off on this reinstatement. How can the present Chief Justice simultaneously hold the views that a complainant levelled false allegations against the then- Chief Justice, but also that the​​ complainant should be reinstated into​​ service?

After the initial article reporting the reinstatement was written, the Hindustan Times carried a report stating that the reinstatement happened after the complainant “agreed not to pursue the​​ matter.” This report raises a second set of disturbing questions.

Question 3: It is normally understood that there is a right of appeal from a first-instance decision (although, as the Supreme Court set up an “informal ad-hoc Committee” to deal with this issue, it is​​ unclear what rules it would have followed for an appeal). Reinstatement at the cost of giving up that right is tantamount to blackmail. Was the Supreme Court involved in any way in brokering this deal, and therefore complicit in blackmail?

Question 4: The​​ Hindustan Times reports that the complainant’s assurance was given at the insistence of a “top government functionary.” Why is a “top government functionary” involved in these proceedings? Given that the Executive is the largest litigant before the Supreme​​ Court – and even as we speak, defending a large number of constitutional challenges on far-reaching issues – does that not raise deeply disturbing questions about the separation of powers and what channels of communication (if any) exist between government and​​ Court?

Source - https://indconlawphil.wordpress.com/2020/01/23/the-sexual-harassment-complaint- five-questions/

    • Why is there a presumption that the dismissal of the employee was​​ unlawful?


      • The theory of disgruntled​​ employee

      • Supreme Court must follow​​ due process before​​ dismissing

      • Supreme court did not provide any reasons for​​ reinstatement

      • Influence of the top government​​ functionary


    • What is the fallacy in Chief Justice Bobde’s​​ views?


      • People writing articles maligning the supreme court and yet them​​ being​​ litigants

      • Believing that the complainant levelled false allegations against the then-Chief Justice and yet they were​​ reinstated

      • Pronouncing judgements and yet letting the top government functionary speak to the media about the​​ issue

      • None of the​​ above


    • What is the context under which the supreme court may be complicit in​​ blackmail?


      • Having top government functionary settle matters which affect supreme court’s image.

      • Reinstating an employee who was accused of levelling false​​ charges

      • Reinstatement of an​​ employee in exchange of not exercising right to​​ appeal

      • None of the​​ above




Visit our complete collection of legal reasoning questions and posts.

Read our legal reasoning post on void agreements and the practice questions here

Read CLATapult’s post on offer and acceptance here. Also, try their mocks for more legal reasoning practice questions.

Visit CLATalogue for more legal reasoning practice questions for CLAT 2022.

First published on May 11, 2020. 

Aditya Anand
Aditya Anand
Aditya is 93.1% sure that he knows Japanese. We think he speaks Japanese in Bhojpuri accent.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Lawctopus Law School
Lawctopus Law School

Cracking the CLAT!

Get access to all major CLAT updates, study material, and more.

Effective Guide to

You can unsubscribe any time.


Takes a second to click the verification link 

sent to your email.