CLAT PG 2025 Question Paper

Question 1

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage: Live-in relationship, as such, as already indicated, is a relationship which has not been socially accepted in India, unlike many other countries. In Lata Singh v. State of U.P. [(2006) 5 SCC 475: (2006) 2 SCC (Cri) 478] it was observed that a live-in relationship between two consenting adults of heterosexual sex does not amount to any offence even though it may be perceived as immoral. However, in order to provide a remedy in civil law for protection of women, from being victims of such relationship, and to prevent the occurrence of domestic violence in the society, first time in India, the DV Act has been enacted to cover the couple having relationship in the nature of marriage, persons related by consanguinity, marriages, etc. We have few other legislations also where reliefs have been provided to woman placed in certain vulnerable situations. Section 125 Cr.P.C. of course, provides for maintenance of a destitute wife and Section 498-A IPC is related to mental cruelty inflicted on women by her husband and in-laws. Section 304-B IPC deals with the cases relating to dowry death. The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 was enacted to deal with the cases of dowry demands by the husband and family members. The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 provides for grant of maintenance to a legally wedded Hindu wife, and also deals with rules for adoption. The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 refers to the provisions dealing with solemnisation of marriage also deals with the provisions for divorce. For the first time, though, the DV Act, Parliament has recognised a "relationship in the nature of marriage" and not a live-in relationship simpliciter. We have already stated, when we examine whether a relationship will fall within the expression "relationship in the nature of marriage" within the meaning of Section 2(f ) of the DV Act, we should have a close analysis of the entire relationship invariably, it may be a question of fact and degree, whether a relationship between two unrelated persons of the opposite sex meets the tests judicially evolved. (This extract is taken from Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma, (2013) 15 SCC 755)

Question: In which of the following case, the Supreme Court read down the word "adult male" in Section 2(q) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005?

Accepted Answer

Hiral P. Harsora v. Kusum Harsora

Answer

Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma

Answer

Uma Narayan v. Priya Krishna Prasad

Answer

All of the above

Question 2

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage: The jurisdiction of this court has been invoked for protecting the Great Indian Bustard and the Lesser Florican, both of whom are on the verge of extinction. India faces a number of pressing near term challenges that directly impact the right to a healthy environment, particularly for vulnerable and indigenous communities including forest dwellers. The lack of reliable electricity supply for many citizens not only hinders economic development but also disproportionately affects communities, including women and low-income households, further perpetuating inequalities. Therefore, the right to a healthy environment encapsulates the principle that every individual has the entitlement to live in an environment that is clean, safe, and conducive to their well-being. The promotion of renewable energy sources plays a crucial role in promoting social equity by ensuring access to clean and affordable energy of all segments of society, especially in rural and undeserved areas. This contributes to poverty alleviation, enhances quality of life, and fosters inclusive growth and development across the nation. Therefore, transitioning to renewable energy is not just an environmental imperative but also a strategic investment in India's future prosperity, resilience and sustainability. The right to equality under Art. 14 and the right to life under Art. 21 must be appreciated in the context of the decisions of this court, the actions and commitments of the state on national and international level, and scientific consensus on climate change and its adverse effects. By recognising the right to a healthy environment, states are compelled to prioritise environmental protection and sustainable development, thereby addressing the root cause of climate change and safeguarding the well-being of present and future generations. (Extract taken from MK Ranjitsinh and Ors v. Union of India, 2024 SC)

Question: Which of the following Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) specifically addresses climate change?

Accepted Answer

SDG 13

Answer

SDG 31

Answer

SDG 12

Answer

SDG 15

Question 3

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage: The Indian Contract Act is a classical model of contract law that covers various codes that govern general contracts as well as specific contracts. Contract of Bailment, one such type of contract under the Indian law of contract, talks about the delivery of goods from one person to another for a purpose. Under this contract, the bailee is given a right to lien. Right to lien is defined under Section 171 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, which talks about the general right to lien of bankers, wharfingers, factors, attorneys of high courts and policy brokers. Generally, two parties are involved. The banker who lends money to the borrower or the customer, who then provides a security in exchange for the loan. Both parties are entitled to some of the rights that are associated with the securities that were provided. It is a possessory right which allows the bank to have temporary possession of the goods until the customer's outstanding debt is paid. The banker the right to act as the trustee of the property as long as they are acting within their powers as the custodian and do not sell the property without giving notice to the customer. The landmark judgment of Syndicate Bank v. Vijay Kumar and Others dealt with the issue of whether or not a banker's right to lien and set off was a general and customary right guaranteed to them. In furtherance of Halsbury's laws of England, this judgment recognised the banker's right to general lien was a right guaranteed by the law and not the contract. (Extracted with edits from "Critical Analysis of Bankers Right of General Lien" by Alisha Khalid Bhendwade, IJLRA, Vol. II, 2024)

Question: The Bailee's right to retain the goods until he receives due remuneration for the services, he has rendered in respect of them is known as:

Accepted Answer

Particular Lien

Answer

General Lien

Answer

Particular Retention

Answer

General Retention

Question 4

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage: Jurisprudence progresses as well as regresses. The late nineteenth-century analysis of rights which Hohfeld brought to completion makes a notable advance in clarity. But rights of each of the four Hohfeldian types are spoken of by Aquinas, as well as by the civilian lawyers of his age (and indeed of earlier ages). The word `right' translates the Latin ius or jus, the root of the word's `justice', `jurist', `juridical', and `jurisprudence'. Though Aquinas does not use the plural forms of the word ius as often as we use the plural `rights', it is a sheer mistake to claim, as some have, that he lacked or repudiated the concept of rights in the modern sense, in which a right is `subjective' in the sense of belonging to someone (the subject of the right). When he defines justice as the steady willingness to give to others what is theirs, Aquinas immediately goes on to treat that phrase as synonymous with their right (ius suum); hence he treats a right/rights (ius/iura) as subjective. He also uses the word to speak of `objective' right, that is, what interpersonal action or relationship is right-morally or legally, depending upon the context. Hobbes, who got inspired much in Benthamite and Austinian positivism, spurned the classical juristic tradition and defined `right' as liberty in the sense of sheer absence of duty. So, people have most rights in the state of nature where they have no duties. This move exemplifies regression in legal and, more generally, in political and moral philosophy. Fortunately, the mistake is quite obvious. If no one has any duties to or in respect of others, it will be more accurate to say that no one has any rights at all. For everyone, in such a state of affairs, is subject to being destroyed or abused by everyone and anyone else, and everyone's actions can be impeded as much as any person or group cares, and is able, to arrange. The truth is that the concept of a right makes little sense save as (the Hohfeldian claim-right) a correlative of someone else's duty, or (the Hohfeldian liberty) as protected by someone else's duty of non-interference, or (the Hohfeldian power) as promoted by the duty of officials and others to recognize and effectuate one's acts-inthe-law (or their ethical counterparts), or (the Hohfeldian immunity) as protected by a similar duty of officials and others not to recognize another's juridical acts as it purportedly bears on my position. (Extracted, with edits and revision, from The Oxford Handbook of Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law, Edited by Jules L. Coleman, Kenneth Einar Himma, and Scott J. Shapiro)

Question: Consider the given statements: Statement I: Rights in Rem are the rights in the things of others, also called encumbrances. Statement II: Rights in Re propria means the right available against the whole world. Statement III: Rights in Personam mean the rights in one's own things. Choose the correct answer:

Accepted Answer

None of the above

Answer

Statement I is correct

Answer

Statements I & II are correct

Answer

Statements I, II & III are correct

Question 5

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage: The Indian Contract Act is a classical model of contract law that covers various codes that govern general contracts as well as specific contracts. Contract of Bailment, one such type of contract under the Indian law of contract, talks about the delivery of goods from one person to another for a purpose. Under this contract, the bailee is given a right to lien. Right to lien is defined under Section 171 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, which talks about the general right to lien of bankers, wharfingers, factors, attorneys of high courts and policy brokers. Generally, two parties are involved. The banker who lends money to the borrower or the customer, who then provides a security in exchange for the loan. Both parties are entitled to some of the rights that are associated with the securities that were provided. It is a possessory right which allows the bank to have temporary possession of the goods until the customer's outstanding debt is paid. The banker the right to act as the trustee of the property as long as they are acting within their powers as the custodian and do not sell the property without giving notice to the customer. The landmark judgment of Syndicate Bank v. Vijay Kumar and Others dealt with the issue of whether or not a banker's right to lien and set off was a general and customary right guaranteed to them. In furtherance of Halsbury's laws of England, this judgment recognised the banker's right to general lien was a right guaranteed by the law and not the contract. (Extracted with edits from "Critical Analysis of Bankers Right of General Lien" by Alisha Khalid Bhendwade, IJLRA, Vol. II, 2024)

Question: Which one of the following is not an essential characteristic of Bailment?

Accepted Answer

Physical delivery of goods

Answer

Delivery of goods for some purpose

Answer

After the purpose is accomplished, the goods must be returned

Answer

Goods may be returned to the owner or otherwise disposed of according to the directions of the person delivering them

Question 6

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage: Vivian Bose, J., had observed that Section 106 of the Evidence Act is designed to meet certain exceptional cases in which it would be impossible for the prosecution to establish certain facts which are particularly within the knowledge of the accused. In Shambu Nath Mehra vs. The State of Ajmer (1956 SCR 199) the learned Judge has stated the legal principle thus: "This lays down the general rule that in a criminal case the burden of proof is on the prosecution and section 106 is designed to meet certain exceptional cases in which it would be impossible, or at any rate disproportionately difficult for the prosecution to establish facts which are `especially' within the knowledge of the accused and which he could prove without difficulty or inconvenience. The word `especially' underscores facts that are pre-eminently or exceptionally within the knowledge of the accused. It added, if the section were to be interpreted otherwise, it would lead to the very startling conclusion that in a murder case the burden lies on the accused to prove that he did not commit the murder because who could know better than him whether he did or did not." It is evident that it cannot be the intention and Privy Council has twice refused to construe this section, as reproduced in certain other Acts outside India, to mean that the burden lies on the accused person to show that he did not commit the crime for which he is tried. These cases are Attygalle v. the King. 1936 PC 169 (AIR V 23) (A) and Seneviratne v. R, 1936-3 All ER 36 at p.49 (B). In case resting on circumstantial evidence, an accused person's failure to provide a reasonable explanation as required by S. 106 could serve as an additional link in the chain of circumstances. (Based on facts from State of West Bengal vs. Mir Mohammad Omar & Ors, AIR 2000 SUPREME COURT 2988)

Question: Under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, in cases where the burden of proof lies on the prosecution, which of the following accurately reflects the relationship between Section 101 and 106 of IEA, 1872?

Accepted Answer

Section 106 is an exception to Section 101

Answer

Section 106 is intended to relieve the prosecution of their duty to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt under Section 101

Answer

Both A and B

Answer

Neither A nor B

Question 7

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage: As new situations arise; the law has to be evolved in order to meet the challenge of such new situations. Law cannot afford to remain static. It should keep pace with changing socio-economic norms. We have to evolve new principles and lay down new norms which would adequately deal with the new problems which arise in a highly industrialized economy. We cannot allow our judicial thinking to be constricted by reference to the law as it prevails in England or for that matter in any other foreign country. We no longer need the crutches of a foreign legal order. We are certainly prepared to receive light from whatever source it comes but we have to build up our own jurisprudence and we cannot countenance an argument that merely because the new law does not recognize the rule of strict and absolute liability, we cannot have it too. Court should not feel inhibited by this rule merely because the new law does not recognise the rule of strict and absolute liability. The enterprise must be held to be under an obligation to provide that the hazardous or inherently dangerous activity in which it is engaged must be conducted with the highest standards of safety. The court discussed the scope of the Epistolary jurisdiction and reiterated that procedure being merely a handmaid of justice should not stand in the way to access to justice. (Extracted with edits from M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987) 1 SCC 395)

Question: In India the `Absolute Liability' theory on the basis of injuries caused by the hazardous industries was propounded by:

Accepted Answer

P.N. Bhagwati, C.J.

Answer

V.R. Krishna Iyer, J.

Answer

Kuldip Singh, J.

Answer

M.N. Venkatachaliah, C.J.

Question 8

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage: "The power to pardon is a part of the constitutional scheme, and we have no doubt, in our mind, that it should be so treated also in the Indian Republic. It has been reposed by the people through the Constitution in the Head of the State, and enjoys high status. It is a constitutional responsibility of great significance, to be exercised when occasion arises in accordance with the discretion contemplated by the context. It is not denied, and indeed it has been repeatedly affirmed in the course of argument by learned counsels appearing for the Petitioner that the power to pardon rests on the advice tendered by the Executive to the President, who subject to the provisions of Art. 74(1) of the Constitution, must act in accordance with such advice. " We are of the view that it is open to the President in the exercise of the power vested in him by Art. 72 of the Constitution to scrutinise the evidence on the record of the criminal case and come to a different conclusion from that recorded by the court in regard to the guilt of, and sentence imposed on the accused. In doing so, the President does not amend or modify or supersede the judicial record. The judicial record remains intact, and undisturbed. The President acts in a wholly different plane from that in which the Court acted. He acts under a constitutional power, the nature of which is entirely different from the judicial power and cannot be regarded as an extension of it. This is so, notwithstanding that the practical effect of the Presidential act is to remove the stigma of guilt from the accused or to remit the sentence imposed on him. It is apparent that the power under Art. 72 entitles the President to examine the record of evidence of the criminal case and to determine for himself whether the case is one deserving the grant of the relief falling within that power. We are of opinion that the President is entitled to go into the merits of the case notwithstanding that it has been judicially concluded by the consideration given to it by this Court. In Kehar Singh v. Union of India, 1989 SC, this court stated that the same obviously means that the affected party need not be given the reasons. The question whether reasons can or cannot be disclosed to the Court when the same is challenged was not the subject-matter of consideration. In any event, the absence of any obligation to convey the reasons does not mean that there should not be legitimate or relevant reasons for passing the order. [Extract from the judgment of Shatrughan Chauhan v. Union of India 2014 (3) SCC 1]

Question: The President's power to grant a pardon

Accepted Answer

Cannot be delegated as it is expressly conferred on the President

Answer

Can be delegated to the Council of Ministers

Answer

Cannot be delegated as it is an essential legislative function

Answer

Can be delegated to the Vice-president in the absence of the President

Question 9

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage: Dominic Ongwen, a former commander of the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) in Uganda, was convicted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in February 2021. The case marked a significant milestone in international criminal law, focusing on issues of child soldiering, forced marriage, and sexual and gender-based violence. Ongwen was found guilty of 61 counts of crimes against humanity and war crimes, including murder, torture, enslavement, forced marriage, rape, and conscription of children under the age of 15 into armed groups. The ICC's judgment emphasized the importance of accountability for leaders who exploit children in conflicts and commit sexual and gender-based crimes. A critical aspect of the judgment was the consideration of Ongwen's own history as a child soldier. Ongwen was abducted by the LRA at around the age of nine and was forced to commit atrocities as he rose through the ranks. The court balanced this background against the gravity of his crimes, ultimately ruling that his personal history did not absolve him of responsibility for his actions as an adult commander. The judgment is also notable for its comprehensive approach to reparations for victims. The ICC ordered collective reparations, including symbolic measures like memorials, physical and psychological rehabilitation, and financial compensation to support the victims and their communities. This case reinforces the ICC's commitment to addressing serious international crimes, particularly those involving vulnerable populations such as children and women and underscores the principles of justice and reparation in international criminal law. (This extract is taken from Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen (ICC, 2021))

Question: The concept of "crimes against humanity" includes which of the following acts, as exemplified in the Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen case?

Accepted Answer

Enslavement, forced marriage, and sexual violence

Answer

Piracy and terrorism

Answer

Espionage and sabotage

Answer

Intellectual property theft

Question 10

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage: Dominic Ongwen, a former commander of the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) in Uganda, was convicted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in February 2021. The case marked a significant milestone in international criminal law, focusing on issues of child soldiering, forced marriage, and sexual and gender-based violence. Ongwen was found guilty of 61 counts of crimes against humanity and war crimes, including murder, torture, enslavement, forced marriage, rape, and conscription of children under the age of 15 into armed groups. The ICC's judgment emphasized the importance of accountability for leaders who exploit children in conflicts and commit sexual and gender-based crimes. A critical aspect of the judgment was the consideration of Ongwen's own history as a child soldier. Ongwen was abducted by the LRA at around the age of nine and was forced to commit atrocities as he rose through the ranks. The court balanced this background against the gravity of his crimes, ultimately ruling that his personal history did not absolve him of responsibility for his actions as an adult commander. The judgment is also notable for its comprehensive approach to reparations for victims. The ICC ordered collective reparations, including symbolic measures like memorials, physical and psychological rehabilitation, and financial compensation to support the victims and their communities. This case reinforces the ICC's commitment to addressing serious international crimes, particularly those involving vulnerable populations such as children and women and underscores the principles of justice and reparation in international criminal law. (This extract is taken from Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen (ICC, 2021))

Question: In the context of international criminal law, what does the principle of "individual criminal responsibility" entail?

Accepted Answer

Individuals can be held personally liable for committing war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide

Answer

Only states can be held accountable for international crimes

Answer

Individuals are immune from prosecution if they act under state orders

Answer

Only military personnel can be held responsible for international crimes

Question 11

CLAT PG 2025 Question Paper with Answers