Consists of 25 legal reasoning questions [Criminal Law Questions] . Based on CLAT pattern. Answer Key will be published on 18 Feb 2018. For any query, contact us at firstname.lastname@example.org
Principle: Theft is the dishonest moving of property moving of property with the intention of taking it out from the person’s possession without his consent.
Facts: Three people, A, B, & C, carrying weapons, stormed into a house and asked the inhabitant to give all the jewellery and money. The inhabitants did as they were told.
OPTION 1: A, B and C have committed theft.
OPTION 2: A, B and C have committed robbery.
OPTION 3: A, B and C have committed dacoity.
Option 4: A, B and C have committed no offence.
Principle: Whoever intentionally puts any person in fear of any injury to that person, or to any other, and thereby dishonestly induces the person so put in fear to deliver to any person any property or valuable security, or anything signed or sealed which may be converted into a valuable security, commits “extortion”.
Facts: A threatens to send club-men to plough up Z’s field unless Z will sign and deliver to B a bond binding Z under a penalty to deliver certain produce to B, and thereby induces Z to sign and deliver the bond.
OPTION 1:A has committed theft.
OPTION 2: A has committed extortion.
OPTION 3: A has not committed any offence.
OPTION 4: A has committed both extortion and theft.
Principle: The right to private defence extends not just to protect one body and property but it also extends to protecting other body and property too.
Facts: A went to B’s (his friend) house for taking his money back. On refusal, A started dragging his friend. This attracted the notice of Z (A’s friend’s father), who gave a blow to A thus causing injury to A.
OPTION 1:Z is not liable as he did the act under sudden and grave provocation.
OPTION 2: Z is not liable as the act constitute private defence.
OPTION 3: Z is liable as it was just a friendly gesture on the part of A and Z used inappropriate force.
OPTION 4: Z is not entitled to use private defence.
Principle: Whoever makes any gesture, or any preparation intending or knowing it to be likely that such gesture or preparation will cause any person present to apprehend that he who makes that gesture or preparation is about to use criminal force to that person, is said to commit an assault.
Facts: A begins to unloose the muzzle of a ferocious dog, intending or knowing it to be likely that he may thereby cause Z to believe that he is about to cause the dog to attack Z.
OPTION 1: A has committed assault.
OPTION 2: A has not committed assault since he didn’t hurt Z.
OPTION 3: A has not committed assault since it’s just a friendly action.
OPTION 4: A has committed assault and battery.
Principle: Whoever wrongfully restrains any person in such a manner as to prevent that person from proceedings beyond certain circumscribing limits, is said “wrongfully to confine” that person.
Facts: A places men with firearms at the outlets of a building, and tells Z that they will fire at Z if Z attempts to leave the building.
OPTION 1: A has wrongly confined Z
OPTION 2: A has not wrongly confined Z because Z was allowed to leave the building.
OPTION 3: A may have committed any other offence but not wrongful confinement
OPTION 4: A has committed wrongful restraint.
Principle: Whoever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death, commits the offence of culpable homicide
Facts: A knows Z to be behind a bush. B does not know it A, intending to cause, or knowing it to be likely to cause Z’s death, induces B to fire at the bush. B fires and kills Z.
OPTION 1: Only A has committed culpable homicide.
OPTION 2: A and B, both, have committed culpable homicide.
OPTION 3: Only B has committed culpable homicide.
OPTION 4: A has committed murder.
Principle: Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any moveable property out of the possession of any person without that person’s consent, moves that property in order to such taking, is said to commit theft.
Facts: Z, going on a journey, entrusts his plate to A, the keeper of the warehouse, till Z shall return. A carries the plate to a goldsmith and sells it. Here the plate was not in Z’s possession.
OPTION 1:A has committed theft as soon as he carried the plate to the goldsmith.
OPTION 2: A has not committed theft.
OPTION 3: A has committed criminal breach of trust.
OPTION 4: A has committed criminal misappropriation.
Principle: Preparation to commit an offence is not an offence. After preparation to commit an offence, any act done towards committing the offence with intention to commit, is an attempt to commit the offence which is by itself an offence
Facts: Batman buys a gun from ‘Lucius Shop’ with an intention to kill Alfred. He starts searching for him, and when he sees him, he loads the gun and takes aim at him. But the gun didn’t fire.
OPTION 1: Batman is not guilty of murder.
OPTION 2: Batman is guilty of murder from the time he loads his gun
OPTION 3: Batman is guilty of murder from the time he takes aim at Alfred.
OPTION 4: Batman is guilty of murder from the time he starts looking for Alfred.
Principle: Whoever does any act so rashly or negligently as to endanger human life or the personal safety of others is said to have committed an offence.
Fact: Mr. Mangeskar owns a Rajdoot which has very good pick up and speed. He teaches at GNLU. One day it was getting late for the college as he woke up late in the morning. He got ready and was rushing to the college so that he would not miss the class. He was riding the motor cycle at a speed of 100 km per hour at PDPU road which was crowded. He was very good at riding the motorcycle. People who were using the road got annoyed / scared with the way Mr. Mangeskar was riding the motorcycle.
OPTION 1: Mr. Mangeskar has committed an act of rash and negligent driving.
OPTION 2: Mr. Mangeskar is very good in driving and there is no need for others to be panicky about his driving.
OPTION 3: Mr. Mangeskar is very punctual person and doesn’t want to miss his classes.
OPTION 4: Rajdoot bike is in very good condition and can be driven at high speed.
Principle: When two or more persons agree to do an illegal act, it is criminal conspiracy punishable with imprisonment.
Facts: Mr. Bharath is a student of B.E. in Computer Science. He loves his computer very much. He considers his computer as his close friend and companion. On 1.4.2006, while interacting with his computer, he hacked into the Bank account of Mr. Javed and was successful in withdrawing money from Mr. Javed’s bank account. He did it to please his girlfriend.
OPTION 1:Mr. Bharath has committed an offence.
OPTION 2: Mr. Bharath has committed a cybercrime.
OPTION 3: Mr. Bharath has committed the offence of criminal conspiracy.
OPTION 4: Mr. Bharath has not committed the offence of criminal conspiracy.
Principle: Anybody with an intention to cause damage to the public or to any person, causes destruction of any property, he is said to have committed the offence of Mischief.
Facts: The workers of Corporate Firms were on strike demanding higher bonus. In the course of the strike, a worker by name Maddy Chandan has thrown stones at the company and damaged the costly glass windows.
OPTION 1: Maddy Chandan was justified in his act as the employer company behaved unreasonably by not paying the bonus properly.
OPTION 2: Maddy Chandan was on strike along with other workers. Hence he has immunity from all actions.
OPTION 3: Maddy Chandan has committed the offence of Mischief.
OPTION 4: Maddy Chandan has not committed the offence of mischief as he has only expressed his freedom of speech and expression which is a Fundamental Right.
Principle: When five or more persons jointly commit robbery, they are said to have committed the offence of dacoity.
Facts: Six persons agreed to commit robbery in the house of Miss Aashka, a jeweller merchant. It was agreed that robbery would be committed on the night of 1st May 2006 at about midnight. On the agreed day at the agreed time, only four of them were present. They committed robbery without waiting for the arrival of the other two.
OPTION 1:The offence of dacoity has been committed. There are six persons involved though only four have committed robbery
OPTION 2: The offence of dacoity was not committed as the robbery was committed only by four persons.
OPTION 3: There is a conspiracy to commit the offence of Dacoity.
OPTION 4: The other two persons are deemed to have participated in the robbery. Hence the offence of dacoity was committed.
Principle: A person, intentionally causing harm to others, is liable for battery. A person is said to have intended the harm, insofar as he brings about the harm purposefully or knowingly.
Facts: A teacher suffering from arthritis problem was moving around the classroom in the course of teaching/ As she was moving back 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.
OPTION 1: The student is not liable since he wanted to save the teacher and others from the scorpion.
OPTION 2: The student is liable since he knew that the teacher would be taking her seat.
OPTION 3: The student should be held additionally liable for the lack of attention to the teaching.
[Go to next page]