Question numbers 1 to 4 consist of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to as ‘principle’) and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this Section. In other words, in answering these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those are given herein below for every question. Further, you must not assume any facts other than those stated in the question. The objective of this section is to test your interest towards study of law, research aptitude and problem solving ability, even if the ‘most reasonable conclusion’ arrived at may be absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law.
Therefore, to answer a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option.
1. Principle: When a person makes such a statement which lowers other person’s reputation in the estimation of other persons, is liable for committing defamation.
Facts: ‘A’ writes a letter to ‘B’ in which he uses abusive language against ‘B’ and also states that ‘B’ is a dishonest person. ‘A’ put the letter in a sealed envelope and delivered it to ‘B’.
(a) ‘A’ has committed a moral wrong
(b) ‘A’ has not committed defamation
(c) ‘A’ has not committed moral wrong
(d) ‘A’ has committed defamation.
2. Principle: The Constitution of India guarantees certain fundamental rights to its citizens. The Constitution also provides that these rights cannot be taken away by state even by a law. For violation of this, the person adversely affected by the law may approach the High Court or the Supreme Court for the issuance of an appropriate writ. One of these rights includes the freedom to form association that implies the right to join an association or not to join such an association.
Facts: Owing to some industrial disturbances created by XATU, one of the several trade unions in AB Chemicals (Pvt) Ltd., the Company issued a circular to all its employees that as far as possible the employees may disassociate with XATU. Navin is an employee of AB Chemicals and the current General Secretary of XATU. Aggrieved by this circular, which affected the fundamental rights of his
and other members of the Union, approaches the High Court of the state for a relief.
(a) The Company’s circular is illegal and has to be quashed by the Court.
(b) The prohibition against any imposition of restriction against a fundamental right is not applicable to anybody other than the state and hence Navin will not get any relief from the High Court.
(c) The circular interferes with the freedom guaranteed by the Constitution and hence the High Court can issue an appropriate writ.
(d) Circular issued by a Company amounts to law in the constitutional sense and hence the High Court can issue a writ as pleaded for by Navin.
3. Principle: When a person falsifies something with the intent to deceive another person or entity is forgery and is a criminal act. Changing or adding the signature on a document, deleting it, using or possessing the false writing is also considered forgery. In the case of writing to fall under the definition, the material included must have been fabricated or altered significantly in order to represent something it is actually not.
Facts: John was a publisher of ancient books and papers. In one of his books on the World Wars, he gave photograph of some letters written by famous historic personalities. A researcher in history noted that in the pictures of some of the letters printed in the book, John had added some words or sentences in his own handwriting to give completeness to the sentences, so that the readers will get a clear picture of the writer’s intention. The researcher challenges the originality of those pictures and claims that the book containing the forged letters should be banned. Examine the validity of the researcher’s demand.
(a) As forgery amounts to adding or deleting anything from an original document, the demand of the researcher is valid
(b) The additions in the letters were made by the publisher in his own handwriting would have made material alteration to the original meaning and hence amounted to forgery
(c) Allowing forged publications to be circulated among the public is as good as committing fraud on the public, so the publication should be banned
(d) The additions were made to give clarity to the original document and did not in any sense change the contents of the documents and hence there is no forgery as alleged by the researcher.
4. Principle: Negligence is actionable in law. In simple terms, negligence is the failure to take proper care over something.
Facts: A, a doctor, conducted a hysterectomy sincerely on B and left a small cotton swab inside the abdomen. As a consequence of which B developed some medical problems and had to undergo another surgery. Is A liable?
(a) As only a small swab was left in the abdomen, there was no negligence.
(b) A is not liable as he did not foresee any consequences at the time of surgery.
(c) Liability for negligence does not arise here as A performed the operation sincerely
(d) A is liable for the negligence as he failed to take proper care during the surgery.
Answers: 1 (b), 2 (b), 3 (c), 4 (d).