Directions: Given below is a statement of facts of a case. Following the statement are a few principles of law are given in the form of certain propositions. Apply the principles to the facts of the case and encircle the most reasonable answer out of the alternatives given:

Facts: Ravi was walking on a lonely road. Mariyan came with a knife and said to Ravi, “Your life or your purse”. Ravi pulled out his revolver. On seeing it, Maniyan ran. Ravi shot Maniyan in his legs.

Principles: I. Any person may use reasonable force in order to protect his property or person. II. However, the force employed must be proportionate to eh apprehended danger.

Directions: Given below is a statement of legal principle, followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts and select the most appropriate answer among the three alternatives given. Encircle your choice.

A man is guilty of culpable homicide amounting to murder, if the act which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing murder. A is suffering from jaundice and inflammation of the brain and B know this condition very well. Once they had a heated argument on some issue and A slapped B in anger. B lost his self-control and dealt a severe blow on A's head. As a result, A died. The police sought to prosecute B for murder.

Directions: Go through the problem and encircle the most appropriate answer.

Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any property out of the possession of another person, moves that property for such taking, is said to commit theft.

Suresh went into the house of his friend Ramesh to discuss some important matter. Since Ramesh was not at home, Suresh waited for him in the latter's drawing room. When Ramesh did not turn up, Suresh took out a pen from Ramesh's table and wrote down a message and went home. While going back, by force of habit, he just dropped the pen into the pocket. Subsequently, he forgot about it. Since the pen happened to be very valuable one, Ramesh complained to the police and the police traced the pen in Suresh's house.

Directions: Go through the problem and encircle the most appropriate answer.

During a wrestling competition organized in Chanduram Akhada in New Delhi between X and Y, two famous wrestlers. Y died as a result of an injury sustained during the wrestling bout. X and Y were not enemies of each other, but both of them were ambitious to achieve the highest title in wrestling, namely, 'Hind Kesari'. There was some competitive spirit between them. A case is field against X for causing the death of Y. In the court the referee stated that X and Y were wrestling in the usual manner.

Directions: Given below is a statement of legal principle, followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts and select the most appropriate answer among the three alternatives given. Encircle your choice.

Principle: Every person has a right to defend his own person, property or possession against an immediate harm, and to that end, may use reasonable amount of force.

Facts: Mr. Kaul was passing by Mrs. Mattoo's house. At that time, Mrs. Mattoo's dog ran out and bit Mr. Kaul's overcoat. Mr. Kaul turned around and raised the pistol he was carrying in the pocket of his overcoat. The dog ran away, and Mr. Kaul shot the dog as it was running away. Mr. Kaul knew that the dog had attacked so many other people in that locality of Jammu. Mrs. Mattoo claims that her dog was of a rare breed and it was worth Rs. 5000/-. She is planning to bring a legal action against Mr. Kaul for compensation.

Directions: Given below is a statement of legal principle, followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts and select the most appropriate answer among the three alternatives given. Encircle your choice.

Principle: Whoever delivers to any other person as genuine any counterfeit currency which he knows to be counterfeit, but which he did not know to be counterfeit at the time when he received it is guilty of an offence.

Facts: Mr. Ramachandran is a cashier in a School. One evening his wife returned home from market. While she was counting the remaining money, Mr. Ramachandran noticed a counterfeit currency note of Rs. 100. His wife told him that it was given to her by way of change when she gave a Rs. 500 note in the grocery shop by the person at the cash counter. Mr. Ramachandran goes to the same shop with a view to get rid of the counterfeit note. He buys a shaving cream worth Rs. 32.50 and gives the counterfeit note at the cash counter. The cashier inspects the note and relaises that it is counterfeit. He calls the police.

Directions: Given below is a statement of legal principle, followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts and select the most appropriate answer among the three alternatives given. Encircle your choice.

Principle: A bailment is the delivery of goods by one person to another for some purpose, upon a contract that they shall, when the purpose is accomplished, be returned. In all cases of bailment the person whom the goods are delivered is expected to take as much care of the goods as a man of ordinary prudence would, under similar circumstances take of his own goods of similar nature.

Facts: Mrs. Basanti gave 25 gms of pure gold to M/s. Hirlalal Shroff and Company - a firm of jewelers to make two bangles of a particular design out of that gold. The jewelers kept the gold in an almirah in their shop. There was burglary in the shop and the gold given by Mrs. Basanti was stolen along with other jwellery belonging to the firm. The burglars broke open one of the shop windows. The firm had not employed a watchman to guard their valuables during the night. Now Mrs. Basanti brings an action against the firm for compensation.

Directions: Given below is a statement of legal principle, followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts and select the most appropriate answer among the three alternatives given. Encircle your choice.

A person cannot be punished twice for one offence.

A citizen of India, on arrival at the airport, did not declare that he had brought in gold with him. But on search gold was recovered which he had brought in contravention of law. The customs authorities confiscated the gold under the previsions of the Sea Customs Act. Then he was prosecuted under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act. He pleads that he has already been punished by the customs authorities by confiscation of gold and the prosecution under FERA is violative of the Fundamental Right which guarantees that no person shall be punished twice for the same offence. Decide.

Directions: Given below is a statement of legal principle, followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts and select the most appropriate answer among the three alternatives given. Encircle your choice.

Principle: When a criminal act is done by one person in furtherance of the common intention of himself and some other persons, each of such persons is liable for the act in the same manner as if it were done by each one of them.

Facts: A, B and C decided to commit burglary. They broke into a locked house. However, a domestic servant appeared from the out-house before they had finished, and started shouting. A, B and C left the house and started running away. They were pursued by a small crowd. A, on being caught by X, one of the persons pursuing them, stabbed him and ran away. By that time B and C had disappeared. Z died on account of the stab wounds. Later the police could arrest all the three. They were charged for attempted burglary and murder of X.

Directions: Given below is a statement of legal principle, followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts and select the most appropriate answer among the three alternatives given. Encircle your choice.

A person, intentionally causing harm to others, is liable for battery. A person is said to have intended the harm, in sofar as he brings about the harm purposefully or knowingly.

A teacher suffering from arthritis problem was moving around the class room in the course of teaching. As she was moving backwards to reach her chair, a student saw a scorpion moving underneath the chair and immediately rushed to attack the scorpion and in that process, moved the chair. Meanwhile, the teacher fell down in the process of taking her seat and broke her hips. A suit was filed against the student for battery.

Directions: Given below is a statement of legal principle, followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts and select the most appropriate answer among the three alternatives given. Encircle your choice.

Self defence is considered as a universal exception for intentionally causing harm.

The robbers, armed with knives and crowbars, broke the access door of a house and entered into it. The owner of the house took out his gun and threatened to shoot them. The roobers ran out of the house and started pelting stones. The owner opened the fire. Having heard the gun shot, the police rushed to the place and announced that the owner must stop firing. The owner, suspecting mischief, continued to fire and a policeman was injured by a shot. The robbers meanwhile field away. The owner was sued for attacking the public servant on duty.

Directions: Given below is a statement of principle, followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts and select the most appropriate answer among three alternatives given. Encircle your choice and explain why you think your answer is correct in not more than 3 to 4 lines. If it exceeds 4 lines, then penalty may be imposed.

Principle: To be held guilty of an offence, one should have done the act that causes the intended result. Fact: A with the intention to murder B stabs him repeatedly with knife. B is taken to hospital and is found out of danger. Thereafter, due to the negligence of the doctor, B's wounds are infected and he requires surgical intervention. During the time of operation requiring to remove his injured infected leg, B died on account of administration of general anesthesia.

Directions: Given below is a statement of principle, followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts and select the most appropriate answer among three alternatives given. Encircle your choice and explain why you think your answer is correct in not more than 3 to 4 lines. If it exceeds 4 lines, then penalty may be imposed.

Principle 1: Preparation to commit an offence is not an offence. Principle 2: After one has finished preparation to commit an offence, any act done towards committing the offence with intention to commit it, is an attempt to commit the offence which his by itself an offence. Fact: A wants to kill B. He buys a gun and cartridges for committing the murder. He then sets out searching B and when he sees B, he loads his gun and takes aim at B and pulls the trigger. The gun did not fire.

Which of the answer you will feel more appropriate?

Directions: Given below is a statement of principle, followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts and select the most appropriate answer among three alternatives given. Encircle your choice and explain why you think your answer is correct in not more than 3 to 4 lines. If it exceeds 4 lines, then penalty may be imposed.

Principle: Theft is the dishonest moving of property with the intention of taking it out for the person's possession without his consent. Fact: A gives his woolen coat to a dry cleaner along with his wife's sarees for the purpose of dry cleaning. He is told to collect the clothes after two days. When he comes after two days, he finds that he does not have enough money to pay to the dry cleaner. But since due to the winter, he needs the coat desperately, he surreptitiously places the coat near his other goods so that he can quietly take it without the knowledge of the dry cleaner.

Directions: Given below is a statement of principle, followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts and select the most appropriate answer among three alternatives given. Encircle your choice and explain why you think your answer is correct in not more than 3 to 4 lines. If it exceeds 4 lines, then penalty may be imposed.

Principle: An act done by a child between 7 and 12 years of age is not an offence, if he/she is not mature enough to understand the nature and consequences of the act. Fact: A child of 9 years, finds a gold chain in the house of his uncle and gives it to his brother B, aged 5 years asking him not to tell it to anyone. The uncle reported it to the police station and police conucted a search. During the search, the gold coin falls from the pocket of B and when the police asks B, he says that it was given to him by his brother A.