Sample Logical Reasoning Questions for CLAT 2024

[1] The Jammu and Kashmir Police appear to be under the dangerous delusion that they are the strong arm of a police state. [2] How else could one explain the bizarre threat by the Deputy Inspector General of Kashmir of penal action against anyone expressing a critical view on the clean chit that the police have given themselves in an encounter in the Hyderpora neighborhood of Srinagar in which two innocent civilians were killed?

The inquiry itself seemed distinctly odd—a special investigation team of police officers to inquire into the killing of two civilians by a posse of police, army, and paramilitary personnel, setting aside the first principle of natural justice that no one should be a judge in their own cause.

No surprise, then, that this so-called SIT should have absolved the security forces of any wrongdoing, laying the blame for one civilian killing on the alleged militant who was also killed in that encounter, and attributing the second to “crossfire”.

Only two weapons were recovered from the site of the alleged encounter. A media conference by the police to announce these findings at a time when the government is studying the report of a magistrate’s inquiry into the same incident gives the distinct impression that the police now consider themselves above judicial scrutiny.

Its edict that no member of the public or any local politician should challenge the findings of the SIT only confirms that the force views itself above questions or accountability. Only in Bollywood films of a certain vintage are police officers seen to have such overweening powers to lay down their own rules, and make up their own laws.

Senior police officers in J&K must also remember that the ranks and the constabulary are drawn from the local population. As a civilian force, the J&K police have played a stellar role in countering militancy right from the 1990s.

They have been able to do this primarily because people identify with the police in a way that they may not be with the armed forces. If the police continue in this vein, however, they will find their duties, including dealing with a militancy that does not seem to be disappearing any time soon, becoming even more difficult in a climate where the public loss of trust in government is the biggest challenge.

It falls on the Union Home Ministry, which governs the Union Territory of J&K directly, to disabuse the police leadership of the notion that it is unaccountable. Or else it would invite the conclusion that a mid-ranking officer could not have said what he did without the support and concurrence of the Lieutenant Governor or the political bosses in Delhi.

a) Due to the turbulence that followed the violent encounters in Jammu and Kashmir, the police of the state are given a clean chit to deal with the same in order to maintain the peace of the state.

b) Police force inquiring into the crimes caused by police can never be honest.

c) It is known that two weapons were recovered from the site of the encounter.

d) The police officers of Hyderpora were given the option to evaluate their own actions which is rather unusual.

a) If the union ministry does not step in it would lead to public thinking that the amid-ranking officer could not have said what he did without the support and concurrence of the Lieutenant Governor or the political bosses in Delhi.

b) Police of Jammu and Kashmir shall not consider themselves above the judiciary and shall function within their defined authoritative limits.

c) Police is emerging as the powerful organization in Jammu and Kashmir for its pitfall.

d) Union government must inform the police that they are accountable for their actions.

a) Police announcing its finding to the media is overarching of judicial scrutiny in our country as happened in the Hyderpora incident.

b) Judging one’s own action by self is a crime according to the laws followed by India.

c) People have the freedom to express critical views on incidents in Jammu and Kashmir.

d) The Deputy Inspector General of Kashmir, feels that police have the liberty to exercise coercive and aggressive power in the state of Jammu and Kashmir.

a) [1] and [2] are used as evidence to support two different claims of the author.

b) [1] is a claim of the author and [2] is used as evidence to support a subsequent argument provided later in the passage.

c) [1] is the author’s main claim, and [2] is one of the author’s claims.

d) [1] is one of the claims of the author, and [2] supports that claim.

a) A relative of a citizen, who lost his life, had a troubling connection with an extreme terrorist organization, and the relative was provided a humongous amount for the same.

b) The CCTV footage near a local shop saw all the deceased in the encounter with weapons in hand together.

c) The soldier who goes killed in the encounter is the son of a powerful politician.

d) Kashmir sees a large number of murders being committed due to abject poverty, violence, and crossfire.

1. Explanation: Option (a) is incorrect as it is given in the passage that police do not have any authority to escape from their wrongful actions. They use the clean chit wrongfully and without any justification. It is also nowhere in the passage mentioned that clean chit is used to maintain peace. It is used by police rather than to escape their own unauthorized acts. Option (b) is extreme and farfetched. It is mentioned that such an act is odd and maybe can cause unfairness. Option (c) is a fact. Option (d) is correct as it is provided in the passage that “The inquiry itself seemed distinctly odd—a special investigation team” of police officers to inquire into the killing of two civilians by a posse of police, army, and paramilitary personnel, setting aside the first principle of natural justice that no one should be a judge in their own cause.”

2. Explanation: Option (a) cannot serve as the conclusion to the given passage as it is a suggestion to the issue highlighted in the passage. Option (b) is correct as it provides for the purpose the passage has been written for. Option (c) is incorrect as the police are not mentioned to be the most powerful even though they overarched their power in the Hyderpora incident. It is in fact provided in the passage that the union government is the governing body and has the power to direct police in its action in provided legal authority. Option (d) though mentioned in the passage cannot be taken as the conclusion as the passage aims to say that the police should not exceed its power limit.

3. Explanation: Option (a) is incorrect as the police doing that is not overarching its power. The circumstances are different here as the government was already studying the magistrate’s (judge) inquiry. Option (b) is incorrect as it is seen to be not observed by the SIT of Jammu and Kashmir. It is provided as a principle of natural justice. Even though the same is followed in our country, we cannot assume it on the basis of external information provided. Option (c) is correct as if the assumption is not relevant, then the deputy inspector suppressing the critical views of citizens and the author implying that such an act would provide clean chit to police would not be logical. Option (d) is an inference rather than an assumption.

4. Explanation: The reason for the claim by the author that the police is overarching its power has been provided in [2].

5. Explanation: Option (a) is irrelevant and this won’t weaken the idea of the passage that the police are overarching their power. Option (b) is correct as it would prove that the police are doing the right thing in one way and not overarching their power as evidence has been found. Option (c) is irrelevant. Option (d) is irrelevant.