14
CLATapult™ Code: LLM/CLATalogue/WS4 1. Freedom of speech and expression conferred on him by article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution and he challenges the validity of section 9 (1-A) of the impugned Act as being void under article 13 (1) of the Constitution by reason of its being inconsistent with his fundamental right aforesaid. The Advocate-General of Madras appearing on behalf of the respondents raised a preliminary objection, not indeed to the jurisdiction of this Court to entertain the application under article 32, but to the petitioner resorting to this Court directly for such relief in the first instance. He contended that, as a matter of orderly procedure, the petitioner should first resort to the High Court at Madras which under article 226 of the Constitution has concurrent jurisdiction to deal with the matter. He cited criminal revision petitions under section 435 of the Criminal Procedure Code, applications for bail and applications for transfer under section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code as instances where, concurrent jurisdiction having been given in certain matters to the High Court and the Court of a lower grade, a rule of practice has been established that a party should proceed first to the latter Court for relief before resorting to the High Court. He referred to Emperor v. Bisheswar Prasad Sinha where such a rule of practice was enforced in a criminal revision case, and called our attention also to certain American decisions Urquhart v. Brown and Hooney v. Kolohan as showing that the Supreme Court of the United States ordinarily required that whatever judicial remedies remained open to the applicant in Federal and State Courts should be exhausted before the remedy in the Supreme Court---be it habeas corpus or certiorari-- would be allowed. We are of opinion that neither the instances mentioned by the learned Advocate General nor the American decisions referred to by him are really analogous to the remedy afforded by article 32 of the Indian Constitution. That article does not merely confer power on this Court, as article 226 does on the (1) I.L.R. 56 All. 158. (2) 205 U. S. 179. (3) 294 U.S. 103. Q1. The above excerpt is from which judgment? a. Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras; 1950 AIR 124 b. Indra Sawhney v. UOI; 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217. c. A.K Gopalan v UOI; 1950 AIR 27 d. None of the above Q2. Who among the following was not a part of the bench in the above judgment? a. Hon'ble Justice Fazal Ali (Retd.) b. Hon'ble Justice Kania (Retd.) c. Hon'ble Justice M. Patanjali Mahajan (Retd.) d. Hon'ble Justice Chandrachud (Retd.) Q3. Who among the following judges gave the dissenting opinon? a. Hon'ble Justice Fazal Ali (Retd.) b. Hon'ble Justice Kania (Retd.) c. Hon'ble Justice M. Patanjali Mahajan (Retd.)

Code: LLM/CLATalogue/WS4 · 2020. 4. 22. · Indra Sawhney v. UOI; 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217. c. A.K Gopalan v UOI; 1950 AIR 27 d. None of the above Q2. Who among the following was not

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    1

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Code: LLM/CLATalogue/WS4 · 2020. 4. 22. · Indra Sawhney v. UOI; 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217. c. A.K Gopalan v UOI; 1950 AIR 27 d. None of the above Q2. Who among the following was not

CLATapult™

Code:

LLM/CLATalogue/WS4

1. Freedom of speech and expression conferred

on him by article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution

and he challenges the validity of section 9 (1-A)

of the impugned Act as being void under article

13 (1) of the Constitution by reason of its being

inconsistent with his fundamental right

aforesaid. The Advocate-General of Madras

appearing on behalf of the respondents raised a

preliminary objection, not indeed to the

jurisdiction of this Court to entertain the

application under article 32, but to the petitioner

resorting to this Court directly for such relief in

the first instance. He contended that, as a matter

of orderly procedure, the petitioner should first

resort to the High Court at Madras which

under article 226 of the Constitution has

concurrent jurisdiction to deal with the matter.

He cited criminal revision petitions under

section 435 of the Criminal Procedure Code,

applications for bail and applications for transfer

under section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code as

instances where, concurrent jurisdiction having

been given in certain matters to the High Court

and the Court of a lower grade, a rule of practice

has been established that a party should proceed

first to the latter Court for relief before resorting

to the High Court. He referred to Emperor v.

Bisheswar Prasad Sinha where such a rule of

practice was enforced in a criminal revision

case, and called our attention also to certain

American decisions Urquhart v. Brown and

Hooney v. Kolohan as showing that the

Supreme Court of the United States ordinarily

required that whatever judicial remedies

remained open to the applicant in Federal and

State Courts should be exhausted before the

remedy in the Supreme Court---be it habeas

corpus or certiorari-- would be allowed. We are

of opinion that neither the instances mentioned

by the learned Advocate General nor the

American decisions referred to by him are really

analogous to the remedy afforded by article

32 of the Indian Constitution. That article does

not merely confer power on this Court, as article

226 does on the (1) I.L.R. 56 All. 158. (2) 205

U. S. 179. (3) 294 U.S. 103.

Q1. The above excerpt is from which

judgment?

a. Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras; 1950

AIR 124

b. Indra Sawhney v. UOI; 1992 Supp (3) SCC

217.

c. A.K Gopalan v UOI; 1950 AIR 27

d. None of the above

Q2. Who among the following was not a part

of the bench in the above judgment?

a. Hon'ble Justice Fazal Ali (Retd.)

b. Hon'ble Justice Kania (Retd.)

c. Hon'ble Justice M. Patanjali Mahajan

(Retd.)

d. Hon'ble Justice Chandrachud (Retd.)

Q3. Who among the following judges gave the

dissenting opinon?

a. Hon'ble Justice Fazal Ali (Retd.)

b. Hon'ble Justice Kania (Retd.)

c. Hon'ble Justice M. Patanjali Mahajan

(Retd.)

Page 2: Code: LLM/CLATalogue/WS4 · 2020. 4. 22. · Indra Sawhney v. UOI; 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217. c. A.K Gopalan v UOI; 1950 AIR 27 d. None of the above Q2. Who among the following was not

CLATapult™

Code:

LLM/CLATalogue/WS4

d. Hon'ble Justice Sudhi Ranjan Mukherjea

(Retd.)

Q4. Constitutionality of which statue was

called into question in the above referred

judgment?

a. Prohibition of forcible Conversion of

Religion Ordinance.

b. Madras Maintenance of Public Order Act,

1949

c. Madras Temple Entry Authorization Act,

1965

d. Tamil Nadu Clinical Establishment Act,

1997

Q5. Which one of the following is the

dissenting opinion of the judgment?

a. Restrictions which s. 9(1-A) authorized are

within the provisions of cl. (2) of art. 19 of

the Constitution and s. 9 (1-A)is not

therefore unconstitutional or void.

b. Apart from libel, slander etc. unless a law

restricting freedom of speech and expression

is directed solely against the undermining of

the security of the State or the overthrow of

it, such law cannot fall within the

reservation under cl. (2) of art. 19 of the

Constitution

c. Freedom of speech and expression includes

freedom propagation of ideas and that

freedom is ensured by the freedom of

circulation.

d. None of the above

The fundamental rights in Part III of the

Constitution represent the basic values

cherished by the people of this country

since the Vedic times and they are

calculated to protect the dignity of the

individual and create conditions in which

every human being can develop his

personality to the fullest extent. But these

freedoms are not and cannot be absolute, for

absolute and unrestricted freedom of one

may be destructive of the freedom of

another. In a well ordered civilized

society, freedom can only be regulated

freedom. It is obvious that Article 21

though couched in negative language

confers fundamental right to life and

personal liberty. The question that

arise for consideration on the language of

Art. 21 is as to what is the meaning and

content of the words .personal liberty' as

used in this Article. In A. K. Gopalan's

case a narrow interpretation was placed on

the words 'personal liberty.' But there was

no definite pronouncement made on this

point.

Since the question before the court was not

so much the interpretation of the words

'personal liberty' as the interrelation

between Arts. 19 and 21. [667 G-H, 668 D-

E, G, H, 669 A] interpretation of the words

Page 3: Code: LLM/CLATalogue/WS4 · 2020. 4. 22. · Indra Sawhney v. UOI; 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217. c. A.K Gopalan v UOI; 1950 AIR 27 d. None of the above Q2. Who among the following was not

CLATapult™

Code:

LLM/CLATalogue/WS4

'personal liberty' as the interrelation

between Arts. 19 and 21. [667 G-H, 668 D-

E, G, H, 669 A]

Q6. The above excerpt is from which

judgment?

a. Maneka Gandhi v. UOI, AIR 1978 597

b. Kharak Singh v. State of UP and ors., AIR

1963 1295

c. R.C Cooper v. UOI, [1973] 3 SCR 530

d. None of the above

Q7. Who among the following was not a part

of the bench in the referred judgment?

a. Hon'ble Justice Hameedulla Beg (Retd)

b. Hon'ble Justice Y.V Chandrachud (Retd)

c. Hon'ble Justice P.N Bhagwati (Retd)

d. None of the above

Q8. The Passport Act of 1967 was ennacted after

which case?

a. Maneka Gandhi v. UOI, AIR 1978 597

b. Satwant Singh Sawheny v. D. Ramarathan,

(1967) 3 S.C.R 525

c. A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras,A.I.R.

1950 S.C. 27.

d. None of the above

Q9. Which judgment was over ruled by this

judgment with regard to the nexus between

Article 14, 19 and 21?

a. Kharak Singh v. State of UP and ors., AIR

1963 1295

b. R.C Cooper v. UOI, [1973] 3 SCR 530

c. A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras,A.I.R.

1950 S.C. 27.

d. Maneka Gandhi v. UOI, AIR 1978 597

Q10. Which of the followings points held in

the above referred case is not correct?

a. The court held that the scope of “personal

liberty” is not be construed in narrow and

stricter sense. The court said that personal

liberty has to be understood in the broader

and liberal sense. Therefore, Article 21 was

given an expansive interpretation. The court

obligated the future courts to expand the

horizons of Article 21 to cover all the

Fundamental Rights and avoid construing it

in narrower sense.

b. The right to travel abroad as held in Satwant

Singh is within the scope of guarantees

mentioned under Article 21.

Page 4: Code: LLM/CLATalogue/WS4 · 2020. 4. 22. · Indra Sawhney v. UOI; 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217. c. A.K Gopalan v UOI; 1950 AIR 27 d. None of the above Q2. Who among the following was not

CLATapult™

Code:

LLM/CLATalogue/WS4

c. The court while delivering this landmark

judgment changed the landscape of the

Constitution by holding that though the

phrase used in Article 21 is “due process”

instead of “procedure established by law ”

however, the procedure must be free from

arbitrariness and irrationality.

d. Even though the Constitution makers must

be respected, but they never intended to

plant such a self – destructive bomb in the

heart if the Constitution. They were never of

the mind that the procedure need not

necessarily be reasonable, just and fair. They

drafted this Constitution for the protection of

the “people of India” and such interpretation

of Article 21 will be counter-productive to

the protection offered by the Constitution.

A. Under copyright law, a work is

considered original if the author created

it from independent thinking void of

duplication. This type of work is known

as an Original Work of Authorship

(OWA). Anyone with an original work of

authorship automatically has the

copyright to that work, preventing

anyone else from using or replicating it.

The copyright can be registered

voluntarily by the original owner if they

would like to get an upper hand in the

legal system in the event that the need

arises.

Q11. "The expression "literary work"

means not only such work which deals

with any particular aspect of literature in

prose and poetry but also indicates work

which is literature i.e. anything in writing

which could be said to come within the

ambit of the literary work." - was held in

which case:

a. Time Warner

Entertainment Company,

L.P and Others v. RPG

Netcom, 2007 (34) PTC

688 (Del) (DB)

b. Camlin Private Limited v.

National Pencil

Industries, 2002 (24) PTC

349 Del (DB).

c. Shyam Lal v. Gaya

Prasad, AIR 1971 All

192.

Page 5: Code: LLM/CLATalogue/WS4 · 2020. 4. 22. · Indra Sawhney v. UOI; 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217. c. A.K Gopalan v UOI; 1950 AIR 27 d. None of the above Q2. Who among the following was not

CLATapult™

Code:

LLM/CLATalogue/WS4

d. None of the above

Q12. Which of the following comes within

the meaning of the term author as per

section 2(d) of the Copyright Act, 1957

(hereinafter referred to as the Act)

a. In relation to a literary or

dramatic work, the author

of the work;

b. In relation to a musical

work, the composer.

c. In relation to any literary,

dramatic, musical or

artistic work which is

computer-generated, the

person who causes the

work to be created.

d. All of the above.

Q13. Which of the following does not

come under the definition of 'Government

Work' as per section 2(k) the Act?

a. The government or any

department of the

government.

b. All or any State

Government.

c. Any court, tribunal or

other judicial authority in

India

d. Any legislature in India.

Q14. When will certain disputes be

referred t the Copyright Board:

a. When there are disputes

regarding the fact that

whether the work has

been published or as to

the date on which a work

was published for the

purposes of Chapter V,

b. whether the term of

copyright for any work is

shorter in any other

country than that

provided in respect of that

work under this Act,

c. Any actionable claims

against a registered copy

right.

Page 6: Code: LLM/CLATalogue/WS4 · 2020. 4. 22. · Indra Sawhney v. UOI; 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217. c. A.K Gopalan v UOI; 1950 AIR 27 d. None of the above Q2. Who among the following was not

CLATapult™

Code:

LLM/CLATalogue/WS4

d. None of the above

B. The Government of India Act 1919 was

an act of the British Parliament that

sought to increase the participation of

Indians in the administration of their

country. The act was based on the

recommendations of a report by Edwin

Montagu, the then Secretary of State for

India, and Lord Chelmsford, India’s

Viceroy between 1916 and 1921. Hence

the constitutional reforms set forth by this

act are known as Montagu-Chelmsford

reforms or Montford reforms.

The topic, ‘Government of India Act

1919’ is important for IAS Exam and

is a part of Modern Indian History.

This article will provide relevant facts

about the act and aspirants can also

download the notes PDF from the

link provided in the article.

Q15. Which of the following was a

drawback of the Act of 1919?

a. Too much power

centralized with the

Governor-General in

Council

b. The Governor did not act

as a constitutional head

c. Both a and b

d. None

Q16. The failure of the Government of

India Act lead to which movement:

a. First Non-Co-operation

Movement

b. Purna swaraj

c. Civil Disobedience

Movement

d. Niedermayer–Hentig

Expedition

Q17. Which were the changes adopted by

the Indian Independence Act, 1947

a. Abolition of the

sovereignty and

responsibility of the

British Parliament

b. The Governor and the

Provincial Governors to

act as constitutional

heads.

c. None of the above

d. Both a and b

Q18. The Constitution of India came into

effect on:

a. 26th November, 1949

Page 7: Code: LLM/CLATalogue/WS4 · 2020. 4. 22. · Indra Sawhney v. UOI; 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217. c. A.K Gopalan v UOI; 1950 AIR 27 d. None of the above Q2. Who among the following was not

CLATapult™

Code:

LLM/CLATalogue/WS4

b. 26th January, 1950

c. 15th August, 1947

d. None of the above

C. The public offering of shares is

offering and placement of securities on a

stock exchange/regulated market

through which the companies raise

money via capital markets or simply

acquire listed statute. The process

relates to offering of shares, as well as

hybrid instruments (convertible or

exchangeable bonds, preferred

shares). The process relates to issuers

(companies, municipalities, banks,

other) in respect to initial public offering

(IPO), secondary public offering (SPO),

capital increase and other offerings that

shall follow the public offering

procedure.

Q19. Which one of the following is a

mandate for a company before making a

public offer

a. Ensure that the securities

being offered are being

offered for the first time.

b. Apply for registration of

the securities in a

registered stock exchange

c. Make a formal

application before NCLT

where the company is

registered.

d. Both a and c.

Q20. The Medellin Cartel Co. Ltd intends

to make public offerings of some shares of

their company. If they apply for

registration of those shares in the Cali

Stock Exchange, the Guatelajara Stock

Exchange, Stock exchange of Santiago

and the Stock exchange of Tijuana. Cali

and Tijuana allowed the application while

the other two did not allow the

application. What are the option before

the Medellin Cartel:

a. Only issue shares and

specify the names of the

Stock Exchanges where it

is listed

b. Appeal against the Stock

Exchanges where it was

not listed.

c. The approval by the two

is inconsequential as it

was rejected by atleast

one stock exchange

d. B and c

Q21. Can shares be allotted for

consideration other than cash:

a. Yes

b. No.

Page 8: Code: LLM/CLATalogue/WS4 · 2020. 4. 22. · Indra Sawhney v. UOI; 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217. c. A.K Gopalan v UOI; 1950 AIR 27 d. None of the above Q2. Who among the following was not

CLATapult™

Code:

LLM/CLATalogue/WS4

c. Depends on what has

been specified in the

prospectus

d. Section 121 of the Act

Q22. Which of the following is not a

condition for a company to pay

commission for underwriting:

a. The payment of such

commission must be

authorized by the Article

of the Company.

b. An order must be obtain

permitting employment of

an underwriter from the

NCLT

c. The commission must be

paid out of the proceeds

of the issue or the profit

of the company

d. There shall not be paid

commission to any

underwriter on securities

which are not offered to

the public for

subscription.

D. The basic requirement of Section 62

was discussed by the Supreme Court in

the case of Lata Construction & Ors v.

Dr. Rameshchandra Ramniklal Shah,

novation requires a complete substitution

of a new contract in place of the old one

and only in that condition the original

contract does not have to be performed.

The new substituted contract should

rescind or completely alter the terms of

the original contract. In Ramdayal v.

Maji Devdiji, the court observed that

novation takes place by introducing new

terms in the contract or by introducing

new parties. A contract of novation

requires a party to agree to extinguish or

discharge his obligation or debt. Unless

this has been accomplished there can be

no novation. Therefore the test is to know

whether the parties intended to enter into

a new contract between them or not.

Q23. A owes money to B under a contract.

It is agreed between A,B and C, that B

shall thenceforth accept C as his debtor,

instead of . The old debt of A to B is at an

end, and a new debt from C to B has been

contracted.

This is an example to

a. Recession of contract

b. Revocation of Contract

c. Novation of contract

d. Alteration of contract

Page 9: Code: LLM/CLATalogue/WS4 · 2020. 4. 22. · Indra Sawhney v. UOI; 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217. c. A.K Gopalan v UOI; 1950 AIR 27 d. None of the above Q2. Who among the following was not

CLATapult™

Code:

LLM/CLATalogue/WS4

Q24. Novation of contract is a

a. Question of fact

b. Question of law

c. Mixed question of fact

and law

d. Immaterial in deciding a

dispute relating to

contract

Q25. Section 65 proceeds on the premise

that:

a. The parties have a bona

fide intention to perform

the contract

b. That there is an

agreement between the

parties

c. That either parties have

received a benefit out of

the contract

d. Parties intend not to

proceed with the contract

Q26. Who made the observation that

the object of Concession Theory was to

keep personality under lock and key?

a. Maintland

b. Starke

c. Bodin

d. Kelson

Q27. The 277th Law Commission Report

is on:

a. Report on Simultaneous Elections

b. Wrongful Prosecution (Miscarriage of

Justice): Legal Remedies

c. Legal Framework: Gambling And Sports

Betting Including In Cricket In India

d. Review of the Contempt of Courts Act,

1971

Q28. The COI has no provision for the

removal of:

a. Vice President

b. Chief Justice of India

c. Chief Justice of High Courts

d. Governor

Q29. The Supreme Court in Wild Life

Warden v Komarrikkal Elias held that

elephant tusk is a property of the

Government and presumption under

which Section of the Kerela Forest Act

is attracted?

a. Section 68

b. Section 69

c. Section 70

d. Section 71

Page 10: Code: LLM/CLATalogue/WS4 · 2020. 4. 22. · Indra Sawhney v. UOI; 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217. c. A.K Gopalan v UOI; 1950 AIR 27 d. None of the above Q2. Who among the following was not

CLATapult™

Code:

LLM/CLATalogue/WS4

Q30. The Environment Protection Act

was passed in order to implement the

decisions of:

a. Montreal Protocol

b. Paris Agreement

c. United Nations Conference on the

Human Environment

d. Kyoto Protocol

Q31. Who has the power to give

directions in writing to any person,

officer or any authority and such

person, officer or authority shall be

bound to comply with such directions

under EPA, 1986?

a. State Government

b. Central Government

c. President

d. Minister of Environment, Forest and

Climate Change

Q32. The word ‘occupier’ has been

inserted in the Air (PREVENTION

AND CONTROL OF POLLUTION)

ACT, 1981 through

a. Act 47 of 1987

b. Act 6 of 1974

c. Act 36 of 1977

d. Act 19 of 2010

Q33. Environmental Impact

Assessment (EIA) is

mandatory under which one

of the following India

legislations:

a. Indian Forest Act

b. Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution)

Act

c. Wildlife Protection Act

d. Environment (Protection) Act

Q34. Article 1 refers India as:

a. Union of States

b. Federation of States

c. Socialist secular state

d. None of the above

Q35. Who under Article 2 has the power

to admit or establish new states?

a. President

b. Parliament

c. President in consultation with the Prime

Minister

d. President in consultation with the Chief

Justice of India

Q36. Under Article 15(4) the State can

Page 11: Code: LLM/CLATalogue/WS4 · 2020. 4. 22. · Indra Sawhney v. UOI; 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217. c. A.K Gopalan v UOI; 1950 AIR 27 d. None of the above Q2. Who among the following was not

CLATapult™

Code:

LLM/CLATalogue/WS4

make provision for advancement of

backward

classes:

a. Economically and religiously

b. Culturally and financially

c. Socially and educationally

d. Socially or educationally

Q37. The two additional grounds

provided under Article 16 to

prevent discrimination in matters

of public employment are (in

relation to Article 15):

a. Sex and place of birth

b. Descent and place of residence

c. Caste and creed

d. Color and place of residence

Q38. Reasonable restrictions on the

right to move freely throughout the

territory of India can be imposed in

the interests of :

a. Sovereignty and integrity of India

b. Public order or morality

c. Security of State

d. Interests of general public and protection

of interests of Scheduled Tribes

Q39. The maximum period for preventive

detention of any person shall not be

longer than:

a. 1 month

b. 3 months

c. 6 months

d. 2 months

Q40. Minorities under Article 30 can be

based on:

a. Religion or culture

b. Culture or language

c. Religion or Language

d. Caste or language

Q41. The Vice President is ex-officio:

a. Supreme Commander of Armed Forces

of India

b. Chairman of Council of States

c. Speaker of Lok Sabha

d. None of the above

Q42. The total number of ministers,

including the Prime Minister shall not

exceed

a. 10 % of the total number of members of

House of People

b. 12% of the total number of House of

People

Page 12: Code: LLM/CLATalogue/WS4 · 2020. 4. 22. · Indra Sawhney v. UOI; 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217. c. A.K Gopalan v UOI; 1950 AIR 27 d. None of the above Q2. Who among the following was not

CLATapult™

Code:

LLM/CLATalogue/WS4

c. 15% of the total number of House of

People

d. 21% of House of People

Q43. The President can appoint

members to the Rajya Sabha who have

special knowledge and practical

experience in which of the following

matters:

a. Culture, art, cinema and social service

b. Literature, science, art and social service

c. Cinema, Sports, science and social

service

d. Entertainment, science, art and social

service

Q44. Which Article provides for

powers, privileges etc. Of the House

of Legislatures and of the Members

and Committees thereof:

a. Article 105

b. Article 194

c. Article 111

d. Article 195

Q45. The appointment of ad hoc judges

under Article 127 of COI takes place by:

a. CJI in consultation with the President

after consultation with the Chief

Justice of the High Court

b. CJI in consultation with the President

c. Quorum of the Supreme Court judges

d. None of the above.

Q46. Which Article provides for special

provisions with respect to Delhi:

a. Article 237

b. Article 239

c. Article 239 A

d. Article 239 AA

Q47. Individuals with gross income

upto Rs. --lakhs will not need to pay

any tax if they make investments in

provident funds and prescribed

equities?

a. Rs. 6 lakh

b. Rs. 6.5 lakh

c. Rs. 7 lakh

d. Rs. 7.5 lakhs

Q48. How many punishments are

provided under Section 53 in Indian

Penal code?

a. 6

b. 5

Page 13: Code: LLM/CLATalogue/WS4 · 2020. 4. 22. · Indra Sawhney v. UOI; 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217. c. A.K Gopalan v UOI; 1950 AIR 27 d. None of the above Q2. Who among the following was not

CLATapult™

Code:

LLM/CLATalogue/WS4

c. 4

d. 3

Q49. Which offence has the lowest

punishment under IPC?

a. Misconduct in public by a drunken

person

b. Statements inducing mischief

c. Trespassing burial places

d. Disturbing religious places

Q50. Under which Chapter offences

related to Decency and Morality are

provided?

a. Chapter XIII

b. Chapter XIV

c. Chapter XV

d. Chapter XVI

ANSWER KEY

QUESTION ANSWER

1 A

2 D

3 A

4 B

5 A

6 A

7 D

8 B

9 C

10 C

11 C

12 D

13 B

14 C

15 C

16 D

17 B

18 D

19 B

20 D

21 A

22 B

23 C

24 C

25 B

26 D

27 B

28 A

29 B

30 C

31 B

32 A

33 D

Page 14: Code: LLM/CLATalogue/WS4 · 2020. 4. 22. · Indra Sawhney v. UOI; 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217. c. A.K Gopalan v UOI; 1950 AIR 27 d. None of the above Q2. Who among the following was not

CLATapult™

Code:

LLM/CLATalogue/WS4

34 A

35 B

36 D

37 C

38 D

39 B

40 C

41 B

42 C

43 B

44 A

45 A

46 D

47 B

48 B

49 A

50 B