Preparing for CLAT 2026? Practice these Questions on Legal Reasoning for CLAT UG 2026 and gauge your preparation today!
LEGAL REASONING QUESTIONS
Question 1
Principle: Any agreement made with a minor is void.
Fact: A 16-year-old boy borrowed ₹10,000 from a shopkeeper, promising to repay it in a month. He later refused to pay.
Fact: A 16-year-old boy borrowed ₹10,000 from a shopkeeper, promising to repay it in a month. He later refused to pay.
Options:
A. The boy must repay the amount.
B. The boy is not liable to repay since the agreement is void.
C. The boy’s parents must repay the amount.
D. The shopkeeper can sue the boy in a civil court.
B. The boy is not liable to repay since the agreement is void.
C. The boy’s parents must repay the amount.
D. The shopkeeper can sue the boy in a civil court.
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: According to the principle, any agreement with a minor is void. Since the boy is a minor, the agreement is unenforceable.
Explanation: According to the principle, any agreement with a minor is void. Since the boy is a minor, the agreement is unenforceable.
Question 2
Principle: A person who finds goods belonging to another must take care of them as a reasonable person would.
Fact: Amit found a gold necklace in a park and kept it in his drawer. A month later, it was stolen from his house.
Fact: Amit found a gold necklace in a park and kept it in his drawer. A month later, it was stolen from his house.
Options:
A. Amit is not responsible as he did not steal the necklace.
B. Amit is liable as he failed to take reasonable care of the necklace.
C. Amit can keep the necklace as he found it.
D. Amit should have sold the necklace to avoid liability.
B. Amit is liable as he failed to take reasonable care of the necklace.
C. Amit can keep the necklace as he found it.
D. Amit should have sold the necklace to avoid liability.
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: The principle imposes a duty of care on finders of lost goods. Amit failed to fulfill this obligation by not securing the necklace properly.
Explanation: The principle imposes a duty of care on finders of lost goods. Amit failed to fulfill this obligation by not securing the necklace properly.
Question 3
Principle: A contract without lawful consideration is void.
Fact: Ramesh promises to give ₹1,000 to his friend Ravi without expecting anything in return.
Fact: Ramesh promises to give ₹1,000 to his friend Ravi without expecting anything in return.
Options:
A. The agreement is valid as it involves money.
B. The agreement is void as it lacks lawful consideration.
C. The agreement is valid because Ramesh is free to give a gift.
D. The agreement can be enforced in court.
B. The agreement is void as it lacks lawful consideration.
C. The agreement is valid because Ramesh is free to give a gift.
D. The agreement can be enforced in court.
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: For a contract to be valid, it must involve lawful consideration. A promise to give money without consideration is not enforceable.
Explanation: For a contract to be valid, it must involve lawful consideration. A promise to give money without consideration is not enforceable.
Question 4
Principle: No person shall be punished twice for the same offense.
Fact: Sita was convicted for theft and served her sentence. Later, the police charged her again for the same theft.
Fact: Sita was convicted for theft and served her sentence. Later, the police charged her again for the same theft.
Options:
A. Sita can be punished again since the police found new evidence.
B. Sita cannot be punished twice for the same offense.
C. Sita should appeal against the charges.
D. The court can reopen the case.
B. Sita cannot be punished twice for the same offense.
C. Sita should appeal against the charges.
D. The court can reopen the case.
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: The principle of double jeopardy ensures that no one can be tried or punished for the same offense twice.
Explanation: The principle of double jeopardy ensures that no one can be tried or punished for the same offense twice.
Question 5
Principle: A person who consents to a risk cannot claim damages for the injury arising from that risk.
Fact: John attended a cricket match where a ball hit him on the head, causing injury.
Fact: John attended a cricket match where a ball hit him on the head, causing injury.
Options:
A. John can claim damages from the organizers.
B. John cannot claim damages as he consented to the risk by attending the match.
C. The cricket players are liable to compensate John.
D. The organizers must bear the medical expenses.
B. John cannot claim damages as he consented to the risk by attending the match.
C. The cricket players are liable to compensate John.
D. The organizers must bear the medical expenses.
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: By attending the match, John voluntarily assumed the risk of injury from the game.
Explanation: By attending the match, John voluntarily assumed the risk of injury from the game.
Question 6
Principle: Whoever commits an act under a mistake of fact in good faith does not commit a crime.
Fact: Ravi entered a neighbor’s house thinking it was his own and broke a vase.
Fact: Ravi entered a neighbor’s house thinking it was his own and broke a vase.
Options:
A. Ravi is guilty of trespassing.
B. Ravi is not guilty as it was a mistake of fact.
C. Ravi must compensate for the vase but is not guilty.
D. Ravi is guilty of theft.
B. Ravi is not guilty as it was a mistake of fact.
C. Ravi must compensate for the vase but is not guilty.
D. Ravi is guilty of theft.
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: Ravi’s action was based on a mistake of fact and done in good faith, exempting him from criminal liability.
Explanation: Ravi’s action was based on a mistake of fact and done in good faith, exempting him from criminal liability.
Question 7
Principle: A person who commits a crime under duress is not liable.
Fact: Meera stole ₹5,000 from a bank as robbers threatened to harm her family if she didn’t cooperate.
Fact: Meera stole ₹5,000 from a bank as robbers threatened to harm her family if she didn’t cooperate.
Options:
A. Meera is liable as theft is a crime.
B. Meera is not liable as she acted under duress.
C. Meera must return the money but cannot be punished.
D. Meera can sue the robbers.
B. Meera is not liable as she acted under duress.
C. Meera must return the money but cannot be punished.
D. Meera can sue the robbers.
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: The principle exempts individuals from liability if they commit an act under duress.
Explanation: The principle exempts individuals from liability if they commit an act under duress.
Question 8
Principle: The right to freedom of speech is subject to reasonable restrictions.
Fact: Rohit delivered a speech inciting violence against a community.
Fact: Rohit delivered a speech inciting violence against a community.
Options:
A. Rohit’s speech is protected under freedom of speech.
B. Rohit can be punished as his speech incited violence.
C. Rohit should apologize to the community.
D. Rohit cannot be punished if he did not commit violence himself.
B. Rohit can be punished as his speech incited violence.
C. Rohit should apologize to the community.
D. Rohit cannot be punished if he did not commit violence himself.
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: Freedom of speech does not protect acts that incite violence or disrupt public order.
Explanation: Freedom of speech does not protect acts that incite violence or disrupt public order.
Question 9
Principle: A seller must disclose any defect in the goods that a buyer cannot discover with ordinary inspection.
Fact: Anil sold a used car to Rohit without informing him that the engine was damaged.
Fact: Anil sold a used car to Rohit without informing him that the engine was damaged.
Options:
A. Anil is not liable as the car was used.
B. Anil is liable as he failed to disclose a defect.
C. Rohit cannot complain since he did not inspect the car.
D. Rohit can return the car but cannot claim compensation.
B. Anil is liable as he failed to disclose a defect.
C. Rohit cannot complain since he did not inspect the car.
D. Rohit can return the car but cannot claim compensation.
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: The seller is obligated to inform buyers about hidden defects that are not evident during an ordinary inspection.
Explanation: The seller is obligated to inform buyers about hidden defects that are not evident during an ordinary inspection.
Question 10
Principle: A person cannot be held liable for an act done during a medical emergency to save someone’s life.
Fact: A doctor performed surgery on an unconscious patient without consent to save their life.
Fact: A doctor performed surgery on an unconscious patient without consent to save their life.
Options:
A. The doctor is guilty of medical negligence.
B. The doctor is not liable as the act was done in an emergency.
C. The patient can sue the doctor for lack of consent.
D. The hospital is liable for the act.
B. The doctor is not liable as the act was done in an emergency.
C. The patient can sue the doctor for lack of consent.
D. The hospital is liable for the act.
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: Acts done to save a life during an emergency are protected under the principle.
Explanation: Acts done to save a life during an emergency are protected under the principle.
Question 11
Principle: Silence does not amount to acceptance in a contract.
Fact: Amit offered to sell his house to Akash and told him, “If you don’t reply within a week, I’ll assume you accept the offer.” Akash did not respond.
Fact: Amit offered to sell his house to Akash and told him, “If you don’t reply within a week, I’ll assume you accept the offer.” Akash did not respond.
Options:
A. Akash is bound by the contract.
B. Akash is not bound as silence does not constitute acceptance.
C. The contract is valid as a week passed without objection.
D. Akash must compensate Amit for any losses.
B. Akash is not bound as silence does not constitute acceptance.
C. The contract is valid as a week passed without objection.
D. Akash must compensate Amit for any losses.
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: Silence cannot be interpreted as acceptance unless explicitly agreed upon.
Explanation: Silence cannot be interpreted as acceptance unless explicitly agreed upon.
Question 12
Principle: The occupier of a premises owes a duty of care to lawful visitors.
Fact: Shalini slipped on a wet floor in a supermarket where no warning sign was displayed.
Fact: Shalini slipped on a wet floor in a supermarket where no warning sign was displayed.
Options:
A. The supermarket is liable for Shalini’s injury.
B. Shalini is responsible for her carelessness.
C. The staff is individually liable.
D. Shalini should have been more cautious.
B. Shalini is responsible for her carelessness.
C. The staff is individually liable.
D. Shalini should have been more cautious.
Correct Answer: A
Explanation: The supermarket failed in its duty of care by not displaying a warning sign.
Explanation: The supermarket failed in its duty of care by not displaying a warning sign.
Question 13
Principle: Any person who uses false representation to deceive another is guilty of fraud.
Fact: Ramesh sold a painting to Sudhir claiming it was painted by a famous artist. Later, Sudhir discovered it was fake.
Fact: Ramesh sold a painting to Sudhir claiming it was painted by a famous artist. Later, Sudhir discovered it was fake.
Options:
A. Ramesh is not guilty as Sudhir agreed to buy the painting.
B. Ramesh is guilty of fraud as he knowingly misrepresented the painting.
C. Sudhir cannot complain since he did not verify the painting’s authenticity.
D. The sale is valid, but Sudhir can ask for a discount.
B. Ramesh is guilty of fraud as he knowingly misrepresented the painting.
C. Sudhir cannot complain since he did not verify the painting’s authenticity.
D. The sale is valid, but Sudhir can ask for a discount.
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: Ramesh knowingly made a false representation, which amounts to fraud under the principle.
Explanation: Ramesh knowingly made a false representation, which amounts to fraud under the principle.
Question 14
Principle: A contract is voidable if consent is obtained through coercion.
Fact: Vijay was forced to sign a contract at gunpoint.
Fact: Vijay was forced to sign a contract at gunpoint.
Options:
A. The contract is void because it was signed under coercion.
B. The contract is valid since Vijay signed it.
C. The contract is voidable at Vijay’s option.
D. Vijay can sue the person who coerced him but must fulfill the contract.
B. The contract is valid since Vijay signed it.
C. The contract is voidable at Vijay’s option.
D. Vijay can sue the person who coerced him but must fulfill the contract.
Correct Answer: C
Explanation: A contract made under coercion is not automatically void but is voidable at the discretion of the coerced party.
Explanation: A contract made under coercion is not automatically void but is voidable at the discretion of the coerced party.
Question 15
Principle: A person is not liable for harm caused by an inevitable accident.
Fact: During a heavy storm, a tree in Ravi’s garden fell and damaged his neighbor’s car.
Fact: During a heavy storm, a tree in Ravi’s garden fell and damaged his neighbor’s car.
Options:
A. Ravi is liable for the damage.
B. Ravi is not liable as the accident was inevitable.
C. Ravi must pay half the cost of the damage.
D. Ravi should have prevented the tree from falling.
B. Ravi is not liable as the accident was inevitable.
C. Ravi must pay half the cost of the damage.
D. Ravi should have prevented the tree from falling.
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: The damage resulted from an inevitable accident, and Ravi cannot be held liable for it.
Explanation: The damage resulted from an inevitable accident, and Ravi cannot be held liable for it.
For More Legal Reasoning Questions for CLAT, click here!
Subscribe for updates
Join 10,000+ subscribers.
RU
Ruchika Mohapatra
Contributing author
Have a doubt about this?Ask Doubts
