You are here
Home > Uncategorized > CLAT Legal Aptitude Previous Year Questions

CLAT Legal Aptitude Previous Year Questions

Q1. Directions: Each question consists of legal propositions/principles and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Assume principles to be true for the purposes of this section.
Principle:
 Trespass to land means direct interference with the possession of land without lawful justification. Trespass could be committed either by a person himself entering the land of another person or doing the same through some tangible object(s).
Facts:
 ‘A’ throws some stones upon his neighbour’s (B’s) premises. Which of the following derivations is CORRECT?
(a) ‘A’ has committed trespass
(b) ‘A’ has not committed trespass, as he has not entered B’s premises
(c) ‘A’ has committed nuisance
(d) None of the above

Q2. Directions: Each question consists of legal propositions/principles and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Assume principles to be true for the purposes of this section.

Principle:
 Nuisance is an unlawful interference with a person’s use or enjoyment of land or some right over or in connection with it. If the interference is ‘direct’, the wrong is trespass; whereas, if the interference is ‘consequential’, it amounts to nuisance.
Facts:
 ‘A’ plants a tree on his land. However, he allows its branches to project over the land of ‘B’. Which of the following derivations is CORRECT?
(a) ‘A’ has committed trespass
(b) ‘A’ has committed nuisance
(c) ‘A’ has not committed nuisance
(d) None of the above

Q3. Directions: Each question consists of legal propositions/principles and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Assume principles to be true for the purposes of this section.

Principle:
 Interference with another’s goods in such a way as to deny the latter’s title to the goods amounts to conversion, and thus it is a civil wrong. It is an act intentionally done inconsistent with the owner’s right, though the doer may not know of, or intend to challenge, the property or possession of the true owner.
Facts:
 ‘R’ went to a cycle-stand to park his bicycle. Seeing the stand fully occupied, he removed a few bicycles in order to rearrange a portion of the stand and make some space for his bicycle. He parked his bicycle properly, and put back all the bicycles except the one belonging to ‘S’. In fact, ‘R’ was in a hurry, and therefore, he could not put back S’s bicycle. Somebody came on the way and took away S’s bicycle. The watchman of the stand did not take care of it assuming that the bicycle was not parked inside the stand. ‘S’ filed a suit against ‘R’ for conversion. Which of the following derivations is CORRECT?
(a) ‘R’ could not be held liable for the negligence of the watchman
(b) ‘S’ would succeed because R’s act led to the stealing of his bicycle
(c) ‘S’ would not succeed because ‘R’ did not take away the bicycle himself
(d) ‘S’ would not succeed because R’s intention was not bad

Q4. Directions: Each question consists of legal propositions/principles and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Assume principles to be true for the purposes of this section.

Principle:
 Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is bound by law to do it.
Facts:
 ‘A’, a police officer, without warrant, apprehends ‘Z’, who has committed murder.
(a) ‘A’ is guilty of the offence of wrongful confinement
(b) ‘A’ is not guilty of the offence of wrongful confinement
(c) ‘A’ may be guilty of the offence of wrongful restraint
(d) ‘A’ cannot apprehend ‘Z’ without a warrant issued by a court of law

Q5. Directions: Each question consists of legal propositions/principles and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Assume principles to be true for the purposes of this section.

Principle:
 When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone.
Facts:
 Roshan along with two of his friends, Tushar and Tarang proceeded to the house of Darshan in order to avenge an insult made by the brother of Darshan. They opened fire on the members of Darshan’s family. It was found that the shots of Roshan did not hit anyone, but the shots of Tushar and Tarang succeeded in killing Darshan.
(a) Roshan was not liable for the offence of murder of Darshan, as Roshan’s shots did not hit Darshan
(b) Only Tushar and Tarang were liable for the offence of murder of Darshan, as their shots hit Darshan
(c) Roshan along with Tushar and Tarang was liable for the offence of murder of Darshan
(d) Roshan was liable to a lesser extent comparing to his friends for the offence of murder of Darshan, as Roshan’s shots did not hit Darshan

Q6. Directions: Each question consists of legal propositions/principles and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Assume principles to be true for the purposes of this section.

Principle:
 No communication made in good faith is an offence by reason of any harm to the person to whom it is made, if it is made for the benefit of that person.
Facts:
 ‘A’, a surgeon, in good faith, communicates to a patient his opinion that he cannot live. The patient dies in consequence of the shock.
(a) ‘A’ has committed the offence of causing death of his patient
(b) ‘A’ has not committed the offence of causing death of his patient
(c) ‘A’ has only partially committed the offence of causing death of his patient
(d) None of the above

Q7. Directions: Each question consists of legal propositions/principles and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Assume principles to be true for the purposes of this section.

Principle:
 Whoever, being legally bound to furnish information on any subject to any public servant, as such, furnishes, as true, information on the subject which he knows or has reason to believe to be false, has committed a punishable offence of furnishing false information.
Facts:
 Sawant, a landholder, knowing of the commission of a murder within the limits of his estate, willfully misinforms the Magistrate of the district that the death has occurred by accident in consequence of the bite of a snake.
(a) Sawant is not guilty of the offence of furnishing false information to the Magistrate
(b) Sawant is guilty of the offence of furnishing false information to the Magistrate
(c) Sawant is not legally bound to furnish true information to the Magistrate
(d) Sawant has the discretion to furnish true information to the Magistrate, as the murder was committed within the limits of his estate

Q8. Directions: Each question consists of legal propositions/principles and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Assume principles to be true for the purposes of this section.

Principle:
 Whoever unlawfully or negligently does any act which is, and which he knows or has reason to believe to be, likely to spread the infection of any disease dangerous to life, shall be guilty of a negligent act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life.
Facts:
 ‘K’, a person, knowing that he is suffering from Cholera, travels by a train without informing the railway officers of his condition.
(a) ‘K’ has committed an unlawful and negligent act, which is likely to spread the infection of Cholera disease dangerous to the life of fellow-passengers
(b) Railway officers are guilty of an unlawful and negligent act, as ‘K’ who is suffering from Cholera disease has travelled by the train
(c) ‘K’ has not committed an unlawful and negligent act, which is likely to spread the infection of Cholera disease dangerous to the life of fellow-passengers
(d) Both ‘K’ and Railway officers are guilty of an unlawful and negligent act, which is likely to spread the infection of Cholera disease dangerous to the life of fellow-passengers

Q9. Directions: Each question consists of legal propositions/principles and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Assume principles to be true for the purposes of this section.

Principle:
 Whoever drives any vehicle, or rides, on any public way in a manner so rash or negligent as to endanger human life, or to be likely to cause hurt or injury to any other person, has committed an offence, which shall be punished in accordance with the law.
Facts:
 ‘X’, a truck driver, driving his vehicle rashly and negligently at a high speed climbed the footpath and hit ‘Y’, a pedestrian, from behind causing his death.
(a) ‘X’ is not guilty of rash and negligent driving
(b) ‘Y’ should have taken sufficient care on the footpath
(c) ‘X’ is guilty of rash and negligent driving
(d) ‘X’ is only in part guilty of rash and negligent driving

Q10. Directions: Each question consists of legal propositions/principles and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Assume principles to be true for the purposes of this section.

Principle:
 Whoever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death, commits the offence of culpable homicide.
Facts:
 ‘A’ knows ‘Z’ to be behind a bush. ‘B’ does not know it. ‘A’, intending to cause, or knowing it to be likely to cause Z’s death, induces ‘B’ to fire at the bush. ‘B’ fires and kills ‘Z’.
(a) ‘B’ has committed the offence of culpable homicide
(b) ‘A’ has committed the offence of culpable homicide
(c) Both ‘A’ and ‘B’ have committed the offence of culpable homicide
(d) None of them has committed the offence of culpable homicide

Q11. Directions: Each question consists of legal propositions/principles and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Assume principles to be true for the purposes of this section.

Principle:
 Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that person’s consent, moves that property in order to such taking, is said to commit theft.
Facts:
 ‘Z’, going on a journey, entrusts his plate to the possession of ‘A’, the keeper of a warehouse, till ‘Z’ shall return. Then, ‘A’ carries the plate to a goldsmith and sells it.
(a) ‘A’ has committed theft
(b) ‘A’ has not committed theft
(c) ‘A’ lawfully sold the plate to the goldsmith
(d) None of the above is true

Q12. Directions: Each question consists of legal propositions/principles and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Assume principles to be true for the purposes of this section.

Principle:
 Whoever makes any false document or part of a document with intent to cause damage or injury, to the public or to any person, or to support any claim or title, or to cause any person to part with property, or to enter into any express or implied contract, or with intent to commit fraud or that fraud may be committed, commits forgery.
Facts:
 ‘A’ without Z’s authority, affixes Z’s seal to a document purporting to be a conveyance of an estate from ‘Z’ to ‘A’, with the intention of selling the estate to ‘B’ and thereby of obtaining from ‘B’ the purchase-money.
(a) ‘B’ has committed forgery
(b) ‘Z’ has committed forgery
(c) ‘A’ has committed forgery
(d) ‘A’ and ‘B’ have committed forgery

Q13. Directions: Each question consists of legal propositions/principles and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Assume principles to be true for the purposes of this section.

Principle:
 Whoever intentionally uses force to any person, without that person’s consent, in order to the committing of any offence, or intending by the use of such force to cause, or knowing it to be likely that by the use of such force he will cause injury, fear or annoyance to the person to whom the force is used, is said to use criminal force to that other.
Facts:
 ‘Z’ is riding in a palanquin. ‘A’, intending to rob ‘Z’, seizes the pole and stops the palanquin. Here ‘A’ has caused cessation of motion to ‘Z’, and ‘A’ has done this by his own bodily power.
(a) ‘A’ has used criminal force to ‘Z’
(b) ‘A’ has no intention to use criminal force to ‘Z’
(c) ‘A’ has used force with the consent of ‘Z’
(d) None of the above is correct

Q14. Directions: Each question consists of legal propositions/principles and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Assume principles to be true for the purposes of this section.

Principle:
 One of the essential conditions for a marriage between any two persons to be solemnized under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 is that at the time of marriage the male has completed the age of twenty-one years and the female the age of eighteen years. If the said condition is not fulfilled such a marriage is null and void.
Facts:
 ‘A’, a male aged twenty-two years, proposes to marry ‘B’, a female aged sixteen years, at Delhi in the month of June 2014 under the Special Marriage Act, 1954.
(a) Marriage between ‘A’ and ‘B’ can be legally solemnized under the Special Marriage Act, 1954
(b) Marriage between ‘A’ and ‘B’ cannot be legally solemnized under the Special Marriage Act, 1954
(c) Marriage between ‘A’ and ‘B’ can remain valid for A under the Special Marriage Act, 1954
(d) None of the above is correct

Q15. Directions: Each question consists of legal propositions/principles and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Assume principles to be true for the purposes of this section.

Principle:
 Under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 either the husband or the wife can move a petition for a decree of divorce on the ground of desertion. The term ‘desertion’ means desertion of the petitioner by the other party to the marriage for a continuous period of not less than two years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition, without reasonable cause and without the consent or against the wish of such party and includes the willful neglect of the petitioner by the other party to the marriage, and its grammatical variations and cognate expressions shall be construed accordingly. It is also said that desertion is withdrawal not from a place but from a state of things.
Facts:
 Rohan, a technocrat, went to the US in January 2011 for pursuing his higher studies for a period of three years. In facts, Rohan went to US with the consent of his wife Basanti, who stayed at her parents’ home, and with a promise of his return to India upon the completion of his studies. From US he has quite often been in touch with his wife. Subsequently, Rohan has got a job there in US and he wishes to take his wife. She refuses to go to US and, in the meanwhile, she files a petition for a decree of divorce on the ground of desertion by her husband.
(a) Rohan’s three year stay in US in the above context can amount to a ground of desertion for divorce.
(b) Rohan’s three year stay in US in the above context cannot amount to a ground of desertion for divorce.
(c) Rohan’s continued stay after three years can amount to a ground of desertion for divorce.
(d) Basanti’s refusal can amount to a ground of desertion for divorce.
 
1. (a) 2. (b) 3. (b) 4. (b) 5. (c) 6. (b) 7. (b) 8. (a) 9. (c) 10. (b) 11. (b) 12. (c) 13. (a) 14. (b) 15. (b)

Top
error: Content is protected !!