Legal Reasoning – 1 CEX-SUP-8938/20

Application Sheet-2020 : Legal Caselets-1

Answers and Explanations

1 c 2 d 3 b 4 a 5 b 6 a 7 d 8 d 9 b 10 c
11 b 12 a 13 b 14 c 15 a 16 c 17 b 18 a 19 d 20 b

1. c Patriarchy and age old beliefs which developed into 6. a They may provide short term benefits but the
culture and got enforced in Hindu society. ramifications would far outweigh the initial benefits.
Reason - The author clearly mentions that rules were Reason – The author clearly mentions this in the
made by men during olden days. Moreover, in second beginning of the passage and also towards the end.
paragraph he points out that deities’ wishes were also Option (b) is very vague and quite unreasonable. Option
a reason as in the case of Lord Ayyappa. Option (a) is (c) and (d) are demonizing police officers in general
out of passage. Option (b) cannot be inferred from which is not what the author is trying to portray.
passage. Option (d) is self contradictory.
7. d A Supreme Court ruling and NHRC guidelines. The
2. d The author supports the Supreme Court’s ruling and Supreme Court ruling in PUCL Case. Guidelines and
sees it as a way of women emancipation. law are two very different legal terms. Hence, option (b)
Reason – All through the passage the author is impliedly and (c) are incorrect. Option (a) is not incorrect but (d)
appreciating the Supreme Court ruling. Towards the end is more appropriate.
of the passage he clearly mentions that it is a much
8. d Rajbir is not liable as Aziz was accused in an offence
needed social reform. Hence, option (c) is not correct.
punishable with death. In 4th paragraph, the author
Since the author is happy with Supreme Court decision,
clearly mentions only two situations where police
he does not support any law to undo it whether by
encounter to causing death is justified. Rajbir’s case
Central or State governments. So, options (a) and (b)
falls in the second category as Aziz was to be arrested
are respectively incorrect.
in an offence punishable with death. Option (c) is also
correct but does not give the proper reason which
3. b Yes, both cannot be legally stopped from entering the
immunes Rajbir.
temple.
Reason – The Supreme Court ruling clearly allowed
9. b Sohan is not liable as he threw the stone to protect
women to enter the Sabrimala Temple irrespective of
himself. In 4th paragraph the author clearly mentions
their age. So, option (a) and (c) are incorrect. Option
that death can be caused in exercise of private defence
(d) is not patently incorrect but option (b) is more
which is the case here. Option (c) is not correct as it is
appropriate compared to option (d).
immaterial whether the person posing real threat is
known or stranger.
4. a In practice there would be no difference as the Supreme
Court has already allowed women entry to the temple.
10. c He should be given an opportunity to defend himself. In
Reason – Judgement given by Supreme Court acts as
the first paragraph, the author clearly mentions that it
law throughout the country. Hence, a legislation would
is basic tenet of criminal administration to provide every
legally make no difference. Hence, option (b) is
accused an opportunity to defend himself. All other
incorrect. Option (c) and (d) are incorrect as Parliament
options go against this tenet. Though there is grave
has power to legislate on judicially decided matters and
and irrevocable evidence against Keshab, this does not
this does not mean impinging of judicial powers.
take away his right to defend himself in a court of law.
5. b No, as Supreme Court’s ruling applies only in Indian
11. b The author supports Aadhaar Act but is skeptical about
territory.
its misuse. The author mentions both the advantages
Reason – None of the remaining option are correct as
and disadvantages of Aadhaar Act. He cautions the
option (b) is correct. So whether Shalini is of
reader about its overuse or misuse. He lauds Supreme
menstruating age or there is discrimination based on
Court for restrictions placed on use of data. So options
gender alone is irreverent. Option (d) is not correct as
(a) and (d) are incorrect. He is concerned about misuse
persuasive value may be accepted or rejected.
by both government and private agencies. So options
(c) is incorrect.

Legal Reasoning – 1 Page 1

12. a It has restricted the sharing of biometric details of
individuals to government for national security. The
author mentions this in 3rd paragraph. Option (b) is
incorrect as no such appellate mechanism is discussed
in the passage. Option (c) is incorrect as High Court is
not involved in the mentioned process. The Supreme
Court has only declared some sections of the Aadhaar
Act unconstitutional and not the entire statute. So,
option (d) is incorrect.
13. b A government public distribution system which seeks
mandatory registration of Aadhaar to get subsidized food
grains from ration shops.
Reason – The author in 3rd paragraph elaborately
discusses the different section of the Aadhaar Act which
have been scrapped. One such section is where private
companies seek Aadhaar. So, options (d) and (a) are
ruled out. Option (c) seeks Aadhaar of entire family as
against the individual applicant. So it is incorrect. Option
(b) is the only most appropriate option left.
14. c Arjan was to be married to Kiara. He sought her
biometric information from the relevant authority.
Reason – Aadhaar act empowers the government to
collect personal data. No citizen has power to get
information of another citizen. Aadhaar is required for
bank account openings. So option (a) is justified in law.
Option (b) is also justified as under section 47 individuals
can also file a complaint. Option (d) is justified as the
passage does not explicitly bar such acts.
15. a It would have no legal effect on Aadhaar Act.
Reason – Indian laws apply only in India. So option (c)
is incorrect. The disclosure of mass surveillance may
prompt Indian Parliament to dilute the Aadhaar Act. But
this is a discretionary action. We may choose to or not
do it. There is no legal compulsion. On the same
reasoning option (b) is incorrect. Similarly first part of
option (d) is correct but the second part is not as we
don’t know for sure from the passage what would the
court decide.
16. c State legislature can pass a resolution on a Central
Law if it violates the Constitution
Reason - The author is trying to bring home the point
that Kerala’s Assembly only passed a ‘resolution’
against CAA. Such resolution can be passed by a State
Assembly if the State Assembly thinks it violates the
constitution. Further, the question of legislative
competence is not attracted as it is only a resolution
and not a legislation. The author does not directly
comment on the validity of CAA. So options (a) and (b)
are patently incorrect.
Page 2
17. b Because the Central Government announced
establishment of a citizen’s register soon after passing
the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA).
Reason - The author mentions the government decided
to come up with a citizen’s register which justified the
widespread opposition against the Citizenship
Amendment Act across the country. Kerala became
the first state to pass a formal resolution but this has
no relation to the opposition being justified. So, option
(a) is not correct. Further option (c) and (d) are not
related to the reason for justification of opposition
against CAA.
18. a The Chief Minister cannot be held liable for discretionary
acts of the Speaker of the Assembly.
Reason - The Speaker of a State Assembly is the
ultimate authority to decide on admission or rejection
of a resolution. The Speaker of Kerala Assembly
accepted the resolution condemning the Citizenship
Amendment Act (CAA). Hence, the Chief Minister
should not be held answerable for Speaker ’s
discretionary decision.
19. d The legislation will not get constitutional sanctity as
Chhattisgarh is duty bound to honour the Citizenship
Amendment Act (CAA) provided the CAA is within the
constitutional mandate.
Reason - In paragraph three, the author clearly mentions
that all states have a duty to honour central laws.
Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) is a central act.
Though a requisite is given that such central law must
be in accordance with the constitution. Given this
information, option (d) is the most appropriate option
as it mentions that the legislation passed by
Chhattisgarh will be invalid presuming CAA is
constitutionally valid.
20. b The resolution passed by Kerala Assembly may be
legally unaffected.
Reason - As the resolution is not a legislation and only
a political opinion. However, since the Supreme Court
has now decided the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA)
to constitutional, it is uncertain from the passage
whether the resolution will fail or not. Hence, option (b)
seems most appropriate as it is leaving scope for
resolution to be either legally correct or incorrect.
Legal Reasoning – 1