1. In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court held that the right to privacy is a fundamental right protected under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court observed that privacy includes preservation of personal intimacies, sanctity of family life, marriage, procreation, sexual orientation, and the home. The Court emphasized that privacy also extends to informational privacy in the digital age.
A citizen challenges a government policy requiring mandatory linking of social media accounts with government ID, claiming it violates privacy rights. The government argues it’s necessary for national security and preventing cyber crimes.
Based on the passage, which of the following best represents the correct legal position?
a) The policy is constitutional as national security always overrides privacy rights
b) The policy is unconstitutional as privacy rights are absolute under Article 21
c) The policy needs to be tested against principles of proportionality and legitimate state interest
d) The policy only affects informational privacy which is not protected under Article 21
Answer: c)
Explanation: The Supreme Court while recognizing privacy as a fundamental right did not make it absolute. Any restriction on privacy rights must pass the test of proportionality and legitimate state interest. The correct approach would be to balance privacy concerns with national security needs, examining if the policy is proportionate to its objectives.
2. Section 375 of IPC defines rape as specific acts against a woman without her consent or against her will. The Supreme Court has held that consent given under misconception of fact amounts to no consent. In a case, R promised to marry S and established physical relations with her. Later, it was discovered that R was already married and had no intention of marrying S.
Which statement correctly reflects the legal position?
a) R cannot be charged with rape as S consented to the physical relations
b) R is guilty of rape as consent was obtained by fraud
c) R can only be charged with cheating, not rape
d) The case depends on proving R’s initial intent when making the promise
Answer: d)
Explanation: The Supreme Court has clarified that in promise-to-marry cases, the crucial factor is the intent at the time of making the promise. If it can be proved that R had no intention of marrying S from the beginning and made false promises only to obtain consent, it would vitiate consent. However, if the promise was genuine at the time but circumstances changed later, it would not amount to rape.
3. The principle of natural justice includes two basic elements: nobody should be a judge in their own cause (nemo judex in causa sua) and both sides must be heard (audi alteram partem). In administrative proceedings, while strict rules of evidence don’t apply, basic principles of natural justice must be followed.
A University expelled a student for alleged misconduct without giving him a hearing but claimed urgency in maintaining discipline. The student challenges the expulsion.
Which is the correct legal position?
a) The expulsion is valid as educational institutions have special powers
b) The expulsion is void as it violates principles of natural justice
c) The expulsion is valid due to urgency exception
d) The expulsion can be validated by giving a post-decision hearing
Answer: b)
Explanation: The right to be heard is a fundamental principle of natural justice. Even in urgent matters, some form of hearing (even if brief) must be provided. The Supreme Court has consistently held that expulsion from educational institutions requires proper hearing as it affects fundamental rights. Urgency alone cannot justify complete denial of hearing.
4. Under contract law, an agreement without consideration is void. However, Section 25 of the Indian Contract Act provides exceptions, including promises made out of natural love and affection between close relatives, if written and registered.
A father writes a registered document promising to pay his son Rs. 10,000 monthly out of natural love. Later, the father stops payment claiming lack of consideration.
What is the correct legal position?
a) The promise is unenforceable due to lack of consideration
b) The promise is enforceable as it falls under Section 25 exception
c) The promise is enforceable only if the son provided some benefit in return
d) The promise is unenforceable as monetary promises need consideration
Answer: b)
Explanation: This case perfectly fits within the exception under Section 25 of the Contract Act. When a promise is made: 1) between close relatives, 2) out of natural love and affection, 3) in writing, and 4) registered, it is enforceable even without consideration. All these conditions are satisfied here.
5. The doctrine of severability states that when some parts of a law violate the Constitution while others don’t, courts may severe the unconstitutional parts while keeping the constitutional portions intact. However, this is possible only if the valid parts can stand independently and the legislature would have enacted them even without the invalid parts.
A law regulates social media platforms with provisions for both content moderation and complete government control over platform operations.
Which approach should courts take?
a) Strike down the entire law as government control is unconstitutional
b) Uphold the entire law as content moderation is necessary
c) Examine if content moderation provisions can stand independently
d) Automatically preserve content moderation and remove control provisions
Answer: c)
Explanation: Following the doctrine of severability, courts must first identify which provisions violate constitutional principles. Then they must analyze if the valid provisions (content moderation) can operate independently and if the legislature would have enacted them separately. The decision depends on this analysis, not automatic severance or complete striking down.
6. Criminal law recognizes the defense of necessity where an accused commits a crime to prevent a greater harm. However, this defense is available only when there was no reasonable alternative and the harm prevented was significantly greater than the crime committed.
During a flood, A breaks into B’s house to save a drowning child, causing property damage.
What is the correct legal position?
a) A is guilty as private property cannot be damaged
b) A has a valid defense of necessity
c) A is liable unless B consented to the break-in
d) A must compensate B regardless of the defense
Answer: b)
Explanation: This is a classic case where necessity defense applies. A’s action meets both requirements: 1) saving the child’s life was a significantly greater benefit than the property damage caused, and 2) breaking in was the only reasonable option in flood conditions. The law recognizes such actions as non-criminal though civil liability might still apply.
7. Copyright law protects original literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works. However, fair use allows limited use of copyrighted material without permission for purposes such as criticism, commentary, parody, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research.
A professor uses substantial portions of a copyrighted book in their research paper, providing criticism and new insights.
Which statement is legally correct?
a) This is copyright infringement as permission wasn’t obtained
b) This qualifies as fair use for academic research
c) This is allowed only if limited to quotes under 50 words
d) The use is legal only if the book is cited
Answer: b)
Explanation: Fair use doctrine specifically protects academic research and criticism. The key factors are: 1) purpose of use (research/criticism), 2) nature of copyrighted work, 3) amount used relative to necessity, and 4) effect on market value. Here, the use for academic criticism and research with new insights strongly supports fair use, even if substantial portions were used.
8. The doctrine of constructive liability in criminal law makes all participants in a shared criminal enterprise liable for consequences that were natural and probable results of the enterprise, even if not specifically intended by each participant.
During a planned robbery, A keeps watch while B enters the house. When confronted, B panics and kills the resident, which wasn’t part of the original plan.
What is A’s liability?
a) A has no liability for the murder
b) A is liable as principal offender for murder
c) A is constructively liable for the murder
d) A is only liable for robbery
Answer: c)
Explanation: Under constructive liability, A shares responsibility for the murder because: 1) they were participating in the criminal enterprise (robbery), 2) death was a natural and probable consequence of armed robbery, even if unplanned, and 3) such outcome was foreseeable. The doctrine ensures participants can’t escape liability by claiming the specific act wasn’t intended.
9. Environmental law follows the ‘polluter pays’ principle, making those who produce pollution responsible for paying for damage to the natural environment. However, establishing causation between specific pollution and environmental damage can be complex.
Multiple industries operate near a river. Fish population declines significantly, but each industry claims others are responsible.
What is the correct legal approach?
a) All industries must be acquitted due to unclear causation
b) Industries should share liability proportionate to their pollution levels
c) Only industries directly on riverbank are liable
d) The biggest industry should bear full liability
Answer: b)
Explanation: Courts have evolved the principle of proportionate liability in environmental cases where multiple polluters contribute to damage. Each polluter’s liability is determined based on: 1) their contribution to pollution, 2) nature of polluting activities, and 3) proximity to damage. This ensures fairness while upholding the polluter pays principle despite complex causation.
10. The law recognizes vicarious liability where employers are held liable for employees’ acts done in course of employment. However, if an employee acts outside scope of employment or in personally motivated conduct, the employer may not be liable.
A delivery driver employed by Company X, while making deliveries, negligently injures a pedestrian while taking a small personal detour to buy coffee.
What is the correct position regarding Company X’s liability?
a) Company X has no liability as driver was on personal detour
b) Company X is fully liable as driver was during work hours
c) Company X is liable as the detour was minor and connected to work
d) Liability depends solely on whether delivery was completed
Answer: c)
Explanation: Courts apply a flexible approach to “course of employment.” Minor deviations (don’t automatically break the employment connection.
Subscribe for updates
Join 10,000+ subscribers.
RU
Ruchika Mohapatra
Contributing author
Have a doubt about this?Ask Doubts
