Practice Questions of Legal Reasoning Based on New CLAT Pattern

Practice Questions of Legal Reasoning Based on New CLAT Pattern

 

Read the passage given below and answer the questions that follow-  ​​ ​​ ​​ ​​ ​​​​ 

Passage I

Modifying the provisions of the anti-dowry laws it had made in a verdict last year, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India has set aside its recommendation for setting up of a “family welfare committee” to look into allegations before arrests are made asserting that there isn’t any scope for courts to constitutionally fill up gaps in penal law. Taking note of the misuse of section 498A​​ of the Indian Penal Code, the Court said that the accused can now seek anticipatory bail.​​ 

The bench, comprising of CJI Dipak Mishra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud said that they were of the opinion that the earlier verdict fell in the legislative sphere and it should be left to the Parliament to come up with safeguards against the misuse of the law. “At this stage, we are obligated to state that we are not in agreement with the decision rendered in Rajesh Sharma vs State of UP, because we are disposed to think that it really curtails the rights of the women who are harassed under Section 498A (subjecting a married woman to cruelty) of the Indian Penal Code. That apart, prima facie, we perceive that the guidelines may be in the legislative sphere”, the bench remarked while disagreeing with the earlier verdict.

There is an introduction of a third agency which has nothing to do with the code and that apart, the committees have been empowered to suggest a report failing which no arrest can be made. The directions to settle a case after it is registered is not a correct expression of law,” the SC has said.​​ 

There should be gender justice for women as dowry has a chilling effect on marriage on the one hand and on the other, there is the right to life and personal liberty of the man,” the bench had said on the 23rd of April while reserving its verdict on a batch of pleas seeking revisiting of the earlier judgment.

 

The SC has also directed the DGPs of all states to ensure that “investigating officers who are in charge of the investigation of cases of offences under Section 498A IPC should be imparted rigorous training with regard to the principles stated by this Court relating to arrest.”

 

The Court also remarked that the misuse of section 498A could have grievous implications for the health of the society. “Such a situation brings in a social disaster that has the potentiality to vertically divide the society,” it said.​​ 

Extracted with edits from:​​ https://www.opindia.com/2018/09/supreme-court-scraps-no-arrest-rule-under-498a-says-earlier-verdict-fell-in-legislative-sphere/​​  by​​ OpIndia,​​ September 2018​​ ​​ ​​  ​​​​  ​​​​ 

1.​​ The line “there isn’t any scope for courts to constitutionally fill up gaps in penal law” relates to the doctrine of-​​ ​​ ​​ ​​ 

(a)​​ eclipse​​ ​​ 

(b)​​ separation of powers​​ between the legislature and judiciary​​ 

(c)​​ lis pendens​​ 

(d) None of the above​​ 

 

2.​​ The​​ given passage suggests that-​​ ​​ ​​ ​​ ​​ ​​ 

(a)​​ the​​ Supreme Court of India is not bound by its previous judgments​​ ​​ 

(b)​​ the​​ Supreme Court of India is not bound by its previous judgments passed by a bench of equal or lower strength of judges​​ ​​ 

(c)​​ the Supreme Court of India is​​ bound by its previous judgments passed by a bench of equal or higher strength​​ of judges​​ ​​ 

(d)​​ None of the above​​ ​​ ​​ ​​ 

 

3.​​ The words ‘third agency’ in the line “There is an introduction of a third agency....” refer to-​​ ​​  ​​ ​​ ​​ ​​​​ 

(a)​​ the welfare committee​​ ​​ ​​ 

(b)​​ the family committee​​ ​​ ​​ ​​ 

(c)​​ the family welfare committee​​ 

(d) the anti-dowry committee​​ 

 

4.​​ From the given passage, it can be inferred that section 498A of the Indian Penal Code​​ is related to-​​ ​​ ​​ 

(a)​​ dowry​​ 

(b)​​ married woman​​ 

(c)​​ cruelty​​ 

(d)​​ All​​ of the above​​ ​​ 

 

5.​​ Besides safeguarding the rights of women,​​ through the judgment in question,​​ the Supreme Court has also​​ dealt with the issue of false arrests of​​ men in cases falling under section 498A of Indian Penal Code. This statement is-

(a)​​ True​​  ​​​​ ​​ ​​ 

(b)​​ False​​ ​​ ​​ ​​ ​​ ​​ 

(c)​​ Can’t say​​ ​​ ​​ 

(d)​​ None of the above​​ ​​ ​​ ​​ 

 

Passage II​​ 

The arrest of few so-called Human Rights activists after unearth of some evidence that they were conspiring and feeding Maoists for the assassination of Indian PM, in past few days unleashed a sequence of events which ended up in the Supreme Court. The Hon’ble Apex Court passed an ex-parte interim order of conversion of their transit remand into house arrest. Instead of being taken into immediate police custody and furthering investigation in this highly sensitive case, special treatment has been given to the urban Naxal cadres by an exception to the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code and normal criminal jurisprudence of Police investigation.

Imagine, if the arrests were of simple ordinary citizens or of persons from troubled areas or from minority communities under the same charges what would be the response of the Supreme Court if the Writ Petition of similar nature has been filed. It is now a well-settled principle after several pronouncements of Hon’ble Supreme Court itself that if there is an alternate remedy available, writ jurisdiction should not be invoked, which in this case is a bail application at the disposal of Magistrate’s Court. Here the case was not of illegal police detention but of simple police transit remand in pursuance of the investigation in the light of certain unearthed evidence after ‘Bhima-Koregaon’ Violence.

The Supreme Court in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P.,​​  in Para 27 itself dealt with this principle of alternative remedy and refrained High Court for entertaining Writ in such cases and withhold the power of Magistrate.

The way things furthered in Delhi is in complete derogation to the attributes of The Goddess Iustitia (lady justice) which carries a blindfold, a balance, and a sword as a symbol of justice which is free from differentiation of the status of the parties before it.

Thousands of people in India are arrested every day for several crimes and the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code deals with them as per the “Law of Arrest”. Interpretation of Supreme Court itself suggests that Arrest forms the part of Investigation. It is an essential component of the Investigation that if facts and circumstances warrant the accused can be taken into custody and rigorously interrogated. Moreover, it is the Judicial Magistrate who decides the extent of Police remand and such custody. If accused wants to be free after Police remand they can apply for a bail before the Magistrate’s Court or Sessions Court.

The Supreme Court​​ in Babubhai v. State of Gujarat,​​ held in Para 38 that “Unless an extraordinary case of gross abuse of power is made out by those in charge of the investigation, the court should be quite loathe to interfere with the investigation, a field of activity reserved for the police and the executive…”​​ So, the Interim Order of the Court is completely unwarranted, as also there was no any chance of irreparable injury to the​​ petitioners.

If we take judiciary as an extended organ of State within Article 12 of the Constitution, this decision of the court itself is Ultra-Vires the Constitution as being in violation of Article 14 creating an unreasonable classification between two different groups of people, liberal intellectuals and ordinary citizens and privileging one over the other in the Judicial process.​​ 

People in this country usually avoid commenting upon the wisdom of My Lords, but this differential treatment and especially to those who are accused of plotting against the integrity of the country is unpalatable. It seems that protection of freedom to speech is at the radical extreme for those who want to shekel the system of democracy itself. Times will come and go, regimes will change, eras will pass but the credibility of the institution of the judiciary must be sustained, it is the oxygen of a functional democracy amidst the suffocating pressures of suppression.​​ 

Extracted with edits from:​​ https://www.opindia.com/2018/09/if-court-desires-respect-for-law-it-must-make-law-respectable-by-reiterating-that-nobody-is-above-it/​​  by​​ OpIndia,​​ September 2018​​ ​​  ​​​​  ​​​​ 

1.​​ The definition of ‘State’ is provided under-​​ ​​ 

(a)​​ Article 14 of the Indian Constitution​​ 

(b)​​ Article 12 of the Indian Constitution​​ ​​ 

(c)​​ Article 27 of the Indian Constitution​​ 

(d)​​ Article 38 of the Indian Constitution​​ 

 

2.​​ The​​ term “ultra vires” means-​​ ​​ 

(a)​​ in violation of

(b) beyond the given power/authority​​ 

(c) in conformity with​​ 

(d) None of the above​​ 

 

3.​​ By interfering in the arrest of the concerned persons, as discussed in the passage, the Supreme Court appears to have disregarded the judgment​​ given by it in case of-​​ ​​ ​​ 

(a)​​ Sakiri Vasu vs. State of U.P.

(b)​​ Babubhai vs. State of Gujarat​​ ​​ 

(c)​​ either (a) or (b)​​ 

(d)​​ both (a) and (b)​​ ​​ 

 

4.​​ In the case discussed by the author, the Supreme Court appears to have passed a pro tem order. This statement is-​​ 

(a)​​ True​​ 

(b)​​ False​​  ​​​​ ​​ ​​ 

(c)​​ Can’t say

(d)​​ Partly true​​ ​​ 

 

5.​​ The​​ phrase “plotting against the integrity of the country” used by the author refers to-

(a)​​ plotting of attack on the Indian Parliament​​ 

(b)​​ plotting of attack on the Supreme Court​​ 

(c)​​ plotting assassination of the President of India​​ ​​ 

(d)​​ plotting assassination of the Prime Minister of India​​ 

 

Answer key with explanations  ​​ ​​ ​​ ​​ ​​ ​​​​ 

Passage I

Question 1 - Option (b) is the correct answer.

Explanation​​ ​​ The​​ line​​ given in the question and the line “it should be left to the Parliament to come up with safeguards....,​​ when read together,​​ indicate​​ that option (b) is correct.​​ 

 

Question 2 - Option (a) is the correct answer.​​ 

Explanation​​ ​​ A plain reading of the given passage indicates that option (a) is correct. The passage does not mention anything in respect of the strength of judges​​ passing​​ a judgment.​​ ​​ 

 

Question 3 - Option​​ (c) is the correct answer.​​ 

Explanation​​ ​​ A reading of the first paragraph makes it clear that the reference to ‘third agency’ is a reference to the family welfare committee.​​  ​​​​  ​​​​ 

 

Question 4 – Option (d) is the correct answer.​​ 

Explanation​​ ​​ A plain reading of the given passage, including the line “Section 498A (subjecting a married woman to cruelty)”,​​ indicates that option (d) is correct.​​ 

 

Question 5​​ ​​ Option (a) is the correct answer.​​ 

Explanation –​​ The passage states that the Supreme Court has directed rigorous training to be given to investigating officers in respect of arrest in cases involving section 498A. Hence, option (a) is correct. ​​ 

 

Passage II

Question 1 - Option (b) is the correct answer.

Explanation​​ ​​ The​​ line “If​​ we take judiciary as an extended organ of State within Article 12 of the Constitution....” indicates that option (b) is correct.​​ ​​ 

 

Question 2 - Option​​ (b) is the correct answer.​​ 

Explanation​​ ​​ On reading the term “ultra vires” with the words following it i.e. “as being in violation of Article 14.....” it becomes clear that ‘ultra vires’ means exceeding the given power/authority.​​ ​​ ​​ 

 

Question 3 - Option (d) is the correct answer.​​ 

Explanation​​ ​​ On reading the decisions given by the Supreme Court in both the cases cited by the author,​​ it becomes clear that option (d) is correct.

 

Question 4 – Option (a) is the correct answer.​​ 

Explanation –​​ Pro tem​​ is another word for ‘interim’ hence option (a) is correct.​​ 

 

Question 5​​ ​​ Option (d) is the correct answer.​​ 

Explanation​​ ​​ A reading of the first paragraph indicates that option (d) is correct.​​ 

 

Take our test on offences against property under ipc here.

Read our post on the Landmark Judgements of 2019-2020.

Read our post on Elements of Crime.

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

Got doubts about CLAT 2020? Find all your answers and much more here.

Get CLATalogue' Posts in Your Inbox