Reasoning the Reason

LEGAL ,LOGICAL , ANALYTICAL REASONING

LEGAL REASONING


1. PRINCIPLE: Consent is a good defence in a civil action for tort but the act should be the same for which consent was given.
FACTS: ‘B’ was formally invited by ‘A’ to his house. ‘B’ after sitting for some time in the drawing room, moved to the bedroom of the house. ‘A’ sued ‘B’ for trespass.
(a) ‘B’ has offended ‘A’ by moving to bedroom.
(b) ‘B’ has interfered with the privacy of ‘A’
(c) ‘B’ has committed trespass as there was no consent of ‘A’ for entry in the bedroom.
(d) ‘B’ has committed no trespass as he entered the house with ‘A’s consent.

2. PRINCIPLE: According to Article 20(1) of the Constitution, no person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of the law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence.
FACTS: ‘P’ was charged with an offence punishable with imprisonment for a term of one year. The Magistrate convicted him and awarded him a punishment of one year imprisonment. While ‘P’ was undergoing the sentence, the law under which ‘P’ was convicted came to be amended and the punishment for the offence of which ‘P’ was convicted was reduced to six months. The defence filed an application to the Magistrate for review of sentence and to commute it to six months. Can the application be allowed?
(a) No, because penal laws only have prospective application.
(b) No, because a penal statute cannot be given retrospective effect.
(c) No, since at the time of coming into force of the amended law, ‘P’ was already serving the sentence and had not completed the full term. Hence, his case should not be dealt under the new law.
(d) Yes, because retrospective application of criminal law, if it is beneficial to the accused, is not against Article 20(1) of the Constitution.
The answers are: 1. (c); 2. (d).


LOGICAL REASONING


Directions (Qs. 1-3): Study the following information and answer the given questions.
Seven people, namely J, K, L, M, N, O and P like seven different cartoon characters namely, Tweety, Wiene, Superman, Garfield, Jerry, Ariel and Popeye. Each of them studies in either of the three standards viz. IV, VIII, XI with at least two of them in a standard. None of the information given is necessarily in the same order.
Only one person studies with M in XI standard. K studies with the one who like Ariel. M does not like Ariel. P studies with only the one who likes Garfield. Neither K nor M likes Garfield. J likes Popeye. J does not study with K. The only who likes Tweety studies with J. N studies with the one who likes Jerry. N does not study in IV standard. Neither K nor O likes Jerry. The one who likes Superman studies with N.

1. Who likes Wiene?
(a) N
(b) O
(c) M
(d) P.

2. Which cartoon character does L like?
(a) Superman
(b) Ariel
(c) Tweety
(d) Jerry.

3. Which of the following statements is true?
(a) Both M and J study in the same standard
(b) K studies in IV standard
(c) J studies with the one who likes Wiene
(d) More than two people study in the standard in which O studies.


ANALYTICAL REASONING


Statement: What is an RDX explosive? From the outside it looks like a simple harmless object, but its real contents are so deadly that they are sufficient to blast off an entire compartment of a train or even a plane.
Conclusions:
I. The RDX explosive can cause massive destruction by killing a number of persons with a single explosion.
II. The RDX explosive is only used to blast planes/trains as it is difficult to recognise in such settings.
(a) Only conclusion I follows
(b) Only conclusion II follows
(c) Both conclusions I and II follow
(d) Neither I nor II follows.

Leave a Comment