Reasoning the Reason

Reasoning the Reason


1. PRINCIPLE: Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution of India guarantees to all citizens the right to move freely throughout the territory of India. But at the same time, Article 19(5) empowers the State to impose reasonable restrictions on the freedom of movement on the ground of interest of general public.FACTS: Wearing of helmet is made compulsory for all two-wheeler riders by a law enacted by the State. The constitutionality of the law is questioned before the High Court on the ground that it violates Article 19(1)(d) of the petitioner. Will the petitioner succeed? 

(a)Yes, because the restriction is not reasonable and no interest of general public is protected by this law.
(b) No, because the restriction is reasonable as it intends to protect the interest of general public by preventing loss of lives of citizens of India.
(c) Yes, because freedom of movement is a fundamental right of every citizen of India and the State cannot take it away by way of legislation but has to amend the Constitution to take away the fundamental rights.
(d) No, because the freedom of movement will not be violated by the impugned legislation.

2. PRINCIPLES: (1) A careless person becomes liable for his negligence when he owed a duty of care to others. (2) Volenti non fit injura is defence to negligence.
FACTS: K was a friend of L and was teaching her to drive. Prior to such an arrangement K had sought assurances from L that appropriate insurance had been purchased in the event of accident. On the third day, L was executing a simple manoeuvre at slow speed when she panicked which resulted in the car crashing into a lamp-post injuring K. L was subsequently convicted of driving without due care and attention. L denied liability to pay compensation to K on the ground of volenti non fit injuria and also that she was just learning to drive and was not in complete control of the vehicle.

(a) L is liable as the defence of volenti non fit injura was not applicable. Secondly, that the duty of care owed by a learner driver to the public (including passengers) was to be measured against the same standard that would be applied to any other driver.
(b) L is not liable as K voluntarily accompanied her.
(c) L is not liable as she is just learning to drive and duty of care rests upon the instructor.
(d) L is not liable as a learner driver does not owe a duty of care towards public in general and towards the passenger in specific.
The answers are: 1. (b); 2. (a).


Directions (Qs. 1 to 5): Read the following information and select the best answer choice given in each of the questions that follows.
In a study of five brands of pain-relieving tablets P, Q, R, S and T, the brands were tested and ranked against each other as more or less effective per dose. The following results were obtained.
(i) P was more effective than Q.
(ii) The effectiveness of R was less than that of S.
(iii) T was the least effective brand tested.
(iv) Q and R were equally effective.
(v) The effectiveness of S was greater than that of Q.

1. If the above statements are true, which of the following must also be true?
(a) P and S were equally effective
(b) P was the most effective
(c) S was the most effective
(d) R was less effective than P.

2. All the information in the results given above can be derived from which of the following groups of statements?
(a) Statements (i), (ii), (iii)
(b) Statements (i), (iii), (iv)
(c) Statements (i), (ii), (iii), (iv)
(d) Statements (ii), (iii), (iv), and (v).

3. If a sixth brand M is tested and found to be more effective than S, then which of the following must be true if the findings of the study are correct?
(a) M is the most effective of all the six brands tested
(b) At least four of the six brands tested are less effective than M
(c) M is more effective than P
(d) M is less effective than P.

4. If R is more expensive per dose than P, and T is less expensive per dose than R, which of the following must be true, according to the study, for a consumer, who wishes to buy a pain reliever with the greatest effectiveness for the amount spent per dose?
(a) P should be purchased instead of R
(b) P should be purchased instead of T
(c) T should be purchased instead of R
(d) Q should be purchased instead of R if Q is of the same price as S.

5. If Q contains the same amount of an ingredient, X, as S does and more of that ingredient than T does, which of the following is consistent with the results of the study?
(a) The relative effectiveness of the five brands of pain relievers is due to the amount of X the brand contains
(b) R does not contain X, and brands of pain relievers in which X is absent do not have any measurable effectiveness
(c) The absence of X in R would account for R’s being more effective than T, Q and S
(d) The presence of X contributes to the effectiveness of T, Q and S in relieving pain.
The answers are: 1. (d); 2. (c); 3. (b); 4. (a); 5. (d).


1. STATEMENT: Should hunting be banned?
ARGUMENTS: I. Yes, it has been proved to be a definite environment hazard.
II. No, what will the hunters do?
(a) Only argument I is strong
(b) Only argument II is strong
(c) Neither I nor II is strong
(d) Both I and II are strong.

2. STATEMENT: The Government is making efforts to boost tourism in Jammu and Kashmir.
ASSUMPTIONS: I. Tourism in Jammu and Kashmir dropped during last couple of years.
II. Special discount in the railway fare has been announced.
(a) Only assumption I is implicit
(b) Only assumption II is implicit
(c) Neither I nor II is implicit
(d) Both I and II are implicit.

The answers are: 1. (a); 2. (a).

About the author

Editor LU

Leave a Comment