CUET Exam  >  CUET Tests  >  English Language Preparation for CUET  >  Languages: Mock Test - 9 - CUET MCQ

Languages: Mock Test - 9 - CUET MCQ


Test Description

40 Questions MCQ Test English Language Preparation for CUET - Languages: Mock Test - 9

Languages: Mock Test - 9 for CUET 2024 is part of English Language Preparation for CUET preparation. The Languages: Mock Test - 9 questions and answers have been prepared according to the CUET exam syllabus.The Languages: Mock Test - 9 MCQs are made for CUET 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, notes, meanings, examples, exercises, MCQs and online tests for Languages: Mock Test - 9 below.
Solutions of Languages: Mock Test - 9 questions in English are available as part of our English Language Preparation for CUET for CUET & Languages: Mock Test - 9 solutions in Hindi for English Language Preparation for CUET course. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CUET Exam by signing up for free. Attempt Languages: Mock Test - 9 | 40 questions in 45 minutes | Mock test for CUET preparation | Free important questions MCQ to study English Language Preparation for CUET for CUET Exam | Download free PDF with solutions
Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 1

The Parliament passed the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, which promises to strengthen the rights of consumers and provides a mechanism for redressal of complaints regarding defects in goods and deficiency in services.Union Food and Consumer Affairs Minister stressed that the overall purpose of the legislation was to ease the process of addressing grievances of consumers.

TheAct also seeks to bring in e-commerce under their jurisdiction and hold celebrities accountable for false and misleading advertisements of products that they endorse.

The Act proposed strict action against the advertiser in case of misleading advertisements but not against the media through which the advertisement is being publicised. It also provides for product liability action on account of harm caused to consumers due to defective products or deficient services.Product liability means the liability of a product manufacturer, service provider or seller to compensate a consumer for any harm or injury caused by a defective good or deficient service.

Under the Act, a consumer is defined as a person who buys any good or avails a service for a consideration.

It does not include a person who obtains a good for resale or a good or service for commercial purpose. It covers transactions through all modes including offline, and online through electronic means, teleshopping, multilevel marketing or direct selling. Only a consumer can bring an action under the Act. Certain consumer rights have been defined in the Act, including the right to: (i) be protected against marketing of goods and services which are hazardous to life and property; (ii) be informed of the quality, quantity, potency, purity, standard and price of goods or services; (iii) be assured of access to a variety of goods or services at competitive prices; and (iv) seek redressal against unfair or restrictive trade practices.

The central government will set up a Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) to promote, protect and enforce the rights of consumers. It will regulate matters related to violation of consumer rights, unfair trade practices, and misleading advertisements. The CCPA will have an investigation wing, headed by a DirectorGeneral, which may conduct inquiry or investigation into such violations.The CCPA may impose a penalty on a manufacturer or an endorser of up to Rs 10 lakh and imprisonment for up to two years for a false or misleading advertisement. In case of a subsequent offence, the fine may extend to Rs 50 lakh and imprisonment of up to five years.

Q. Suppose a misleading advertisement is shown on 'XY' channel and 'ZA' channel for consecutive two weeks. Who all are liable in this case ?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 1

Correct Answer is (c)

The maker of the misleading advertisement. It is clearly mentioned in the 2nd paragraph that only the advertiser is liable and not the channels on which the advertisement is shown (…The Act proposed strict action against the advertiser in case of misleading advertisements but not against the media through which the advertisement is being publicised).Option (a) and (b) are therefore incorrect.

Incorrect Answers

None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above.Option (d) is incorrect as nowhere in the passage is it mentioned that a consumer is liable in such cases.

Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 2

The Parliament passed the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, which promises to strengthen the rights of consumers and provides a mechanism for redressal of complaints regarding defects in goods and deficiency in services.Union Food and Consumer Affairs Minister stressed that the overall purpose of the legislation was to ease the process of addressing grievances of consumers.

TheAct also seeks to bring in e-commerce under their jurisdiction and hold celebrities accountable for false and misleading advertisements of products that they endorse.

The Act proposed strict action against the advertiser in case of misleading advertisements but not against the media through which the advertisement is being publicised. It also provides for product liability action on account of harm caused to consumers due to defective products or deficient services.Product liability means the liability of a product manufacturer, service provider or seller to compensate a consumer for any harm or injury caused by a defective good or deficient service.

Under the Act, a consumer is defined as a person who buys any good or avails a service for a consideration.

It does not include a person who obtains a good for resale or a good or service for commercial purpose. It covers transactions through all modes including offline, and online through electronic means, teleshopping, multilevel marketing or direct selling. Only a consumer can bring an action under the Act. Certain consumer rights have been defined in the Act, including the right to: (i) be protected against marketing of goods and services which are hazardous to life and property; (ii) be informed of the quality, quantity, potency, purity, standard and price of goods or services; (iii) be assured of access to a variety of goods or services at competitive prices; and (iv) seek redressal against unfair or restrictive trade practices.

The central government will set up a Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) to promote, protect and enforce the rights of consumers. It will regulate matters related to violation of consumer rights, unfair trade practices, and misleading advertisements. The CCPA will have an investigation wing, headed by a DirectorGeneral, which may conduct inquiry or investigation into such violations.The CCPA may impose a penalty on a manufacturer or an endorser of up to Rs 10 lakh and imprisonment for up to two years for a false or misleading advertisement. In case of a subsequent offence, the fine may extend to Rs 50 lakh and imprisonment of up to five years.

Q. Ankit brought 1000 kgs of wheat from Kartik. He grinds the wheat and uses the flour so produced for making bread, which he then sells in the open market.The wheat turns to be infested with pests making it unsuitable for use. What course of action is available to Ankit ?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 2

Correct Answer is (d)

Ankit cannot take action against Kartik under the Consumer Protection Act. In the 3rd paragraph, it is mentioned that only a consumer can file a case under the Act. Ankit is not a consumer as he purchased the wheat for commercial purposes i.e. for making bread to be sold in the market (…Under the Act, a consumer is defined as a person who buys any good or avails a service for a consideration.

It does not include a person who obtains a good for resale or a good or service for commercial purpose…Only a consumer can bring an action under the Act).

Incorrect Answers

None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above.

  •  

    Option (a) is therefore incorrect.

  •  

    Option (b) is legally correct as per Indian Contract Act but since it is not mentioned in the passage, we cannot use this external knowledge. Hence, it cannot be a correct option.

  •  

    Option (c) is not based on information supplied in the passage.

1 Crore+ students have signed up on EduRev. Have you? Download the App
Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 3

The Parliament passed the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, which promises to strengthen the rights of consumers and provides a mechanism for redressal of complaints regarding defects in goods and deficiency in services.Union Food and Consumer Affairs Minister stressed that the overall purpose of the legislation was to ease the process of addressing grievances of consumers.

TheAct also seeks to bring in e-commerce under their jurisdiction and hold celebrities accountable for false and misleading advertisements of products that they endorse.

The Act proposed strict action against the advertiser in case of misleading advertisements but not against the media through which the advertisement is being publicised. It also provides for product liability action on account of harm caused to consumers due to defective products or deficient services.Product liability means the liability of a product manufacturer, service provider or seller to compensate a consumer for any harm or injury caused by a defective good or deficient service.

Under the Act, a consumer is defined as a person who buys any good or avails a service for a consideration.

It does not include a person who obtains a good for resale or a good or service for commercial purpose. It covers transactions through all modes including offline, and online through electronic means, teleshopping, multilevel marketing or direct selling. Only a consumer can bring an action under the Act. Certain consumer rights have been defined in the Act, including the right to: (i) be protected against marketing of goods and services which are hazardous to life and property; (ii) be informed of the quality, quantity, potency, purity, standard and price of goods or services; (iii) be assured of access to a variety of goods or services at competitive prices; and (iv) seek redressal against unfair or restrictive trade practices.

The central government will set up a Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) to promote, protect and enforce the rights of consumers. It will regulate matters related to violation of consumer rights, unfair trade practices, and misleading advertisements. The CCPA will have an investigation wing, headed by a DirectorGeneral, which may conduct inquiry or investigation into such violations.The CCPA may impose a penalty on a manufacturer or an endorser of up to Rs 10 lakh and imprisonment for up to two years for a false or misleading advertisement. In case of a subsequent offence, the fine may extend to Rs 50 lakh and imprisonment of up to five years.

Q. Ankit brought 1000 kgs of wheat from Kartik. He grinds the wheat and uses the flour so produced for making bread, which he then sells in the open market.The wheat turns to be infested with pests making it unsuitable for use. What course of action is available to Ankit ?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 3

Correct Answer is (b)

Celebrities, e-commerce and product liability. This is mentioned in the 2nd paragraph (…TheAct also seeks to bring in e-commerce under their jurisdiction and hold celebrities accountable…also provides for product liability action).

Incorrect Answers

None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above.Options (a), (c) and (d) are therefore incorrect.

Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 4

The Parliament passed the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, which promises to strengthen the rights of consumers and provides a mechanism for redressal of complaints regarding defects in goods and deficiency in services.Union Food and Consumer Affairs Minister stressed that the overall purpose of the legislation was to ease the process of addressing grievances of consumers.

TheAct also seeks to bring in e-commerce under their jurisdiction and hold celebrities accountable for false and misleading advertisements of products that they endorse.

The Act proposed strict action against the advertiser in case of misleading advertisements but not against the media through which the advertisement is being publicised. It also provides for product liability action on account of harm caused to consumers due to defective products or deficient services.Product liability means the liability of a product manufacturer, service provider or seller to compensate a consumer for any harm or injury caused by a defective good or deficient service.

Under the Act, a consumer is defined as a person who buys any good or avails a service for a consideration.

It does not include a person who obtains a good for resale or a good or service for commercial purpose. It covers transactions through all modes including offline, and online through electronic means, teleshopping, multilevel marketing or direct selling. Only a consumer can bring an action under the Act. Certain consumer rights have been defined in the Act, including the right to: (i) be protected against marketing of goods and services which are hazardous to life and property; (ii) be informed of the quality, quantity, potency, purity, standard and price of goods or services; (iii) be assured of access to a variety of goods or services at competitive prices; and (iv) seek redressal against unfair or restrictive trade practices.

The central government will set up a Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) to promote, protect and enforce the rights of consumers. It will regulate matters related to violation of consumer rights, unfair trade practices, and misleading advertisements. The CCPA will have an investigation wing, headed by a DirectorGeneral, which may conduct inquiry or investigation into such violations.The CCPA may impose a penalty on a manufacturer or an endorser of up to Rs 10 lakh and imprisonment for up to two years for a false or misleading advertisement. In case of a subsequent offence, the fine may extend to Rs 50 lakh and imprisonment of up to five years.

Q. Kanika Sharma, a famous actress endorsed a brand of leggings. In the advertisement, the actress says, "100% cotton leggings to keep you cool during summers." Manasa purchase a pair of the same brand leggings relying on the advertisement. It turns out to be only 20% cotton and the rest is nylon.
Choose the best option.

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 4

Correct Answer is (a)

Kanika Sharma is liable for performing a misleading and false advertisement. In the 2nd paragraph, celebrities have been made liable for endorsing misleading and false advertisements (…and hold celebrities accountable for false and misleading advertisements of products that they endorse).

Incorrect Answers

None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above.

  •  

    Option (b) is therefore incorrect.

  •  

    Option (c) is incorrect as advertisements are taken to be true by general public and therefore the rationale of making the advertiser and the celebrities liable.

  •  

    Option (d) is incorrect has Kanika Sharma is liable for misleading and false advertisement and not individually to each consumer who purchases such product.

Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 5

The Parliament passed the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, which promises to strengthen the rights of consumers and provides a mechanism for redressal of complaints regarding defects in goods and deficiency in services.Union Food and Consumer Affairs Minister stressed that the overall purpose of the legislation was to ease the process of addressing grievances of consumers.

TheAct also seeks to bring in e-commerce under their jurisdiction and hold celebrities accountable for false and misleading advertisements of products that they endorse.

The Act proposed strict action against the advertiser in case of misleading advertisements but not against the media through which the advertisement is being publicised. It also provides for product liability action on account of harm caused to consumers due to defective products or deficient services.Product liability means the liability of a product manufacturer, service provider or seller to compensate a consumer for any harm or injury caused by a defective good or deficient service.

Under the Act, a consumer is defined as a person who buys any good or avails a service for a consideration.

It does not include a person who obtains a good for resale or a good or service for commercial purpose. It covers transactions through all modes including offline, and online through electronic means, teleshopping, multilevel marketing or direct selling. Only a consumer can bring an action under the Act. Certain consumer rights have been defined in the Act, including the right to: (i) be protected against marketing of goods and services which are hazardous to life and property; (ii) be informed of the quality, quantity, potency, purity, standard and price of goods or services; (iii) be assured of access to a variety of goods or services at competitive prices; and (iv) seek redressal against unfair or restrictive trade practices.

The central government will set up a Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) to promote, protect and enforce the rights of consumers. It will regulate matters related to violation of consumer rights, unfair trade practices, and misleading advertisements. The CCPA will have an investigation wing, headed by a DirectorGeneral, which may conduct inquiry or investigation into such violations.The CCPA may impose a penalty on a manufacturer or an endorser of up to Rs 10 lakh and imprisonment for up to two years for a false or misleading advertisement. In case of a subsequent offence, the fine may extend to Rs 50 lakh and imprisonment of up to five years.

Q. Garima ordered fried rice at a 3-star restaurant. She found a dead cockroach in it. Decide.

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 5

Correct Answer is (a)

Garima can file a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act. This case falls under deficiency of service by the restaurant. A 3-star restaurant must ensure hygienic food. In the 2nd paragraph, it is mentioned while defining product liability (…Product liability means the liability of a product manufacturer, service provider or seller to compensate a consumer for any harm or injury caused by a defective good or deficient service).

Incorrect Answers

None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above.

  •  

    Option (d) is therefore incorrect.

  •  

    Option (b) is incorrect as though it is a possible course of action, it is not based on the information supplied in the passage.

  •  

    Option (c) is using external knowledge and therefore cannot be a correct option here.

Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 6

The unanimous ruling of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), on Thursday, on the prevention of alleged acts of genocide against Rohingya Muslims has finally pinned legal responsibility on Myanmar's government for the military's large-scale excesses of 2017. The court has further emphasised that an estimated 600,000 Rohingya resident in Myanmar still remained highly vulnerable to attacks from the security forces. The ruling vindicates findings by the UN and human rights groups on the prevalence of hate speech, mass atrocities of rape and extra-judicial killings, and torching of villages in Myanmar's Rakhine province, leading to the forced migration of thousands to Bangladesh. The ruling pertains to the Gambia's suit on behalf of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), alleging that the brutalities by the defence services amounted to crimes of genocide under the 1948 Genocide Convention. Arguing the defence in person during the three-day public hearings last month, Ms. Suu Kyi, who was elected in 2016, insisted that the 2017 violence was proportionate to the threat of insurgency. She even questioned the Gambia's standing to bring the suit, saying that there was no bilateral dispute.

Rejecting the ICJ's ruling, Myanmar's Foreign Ministry has accused rights groups of presenting the Court with a distorted picture of the prevailing situation. In a statement, it defended the army's action as a legitimate response to violations of the law by the insurgent Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army. However, the above claim is at odds with the findings this week of an Independent Commission of Enquiry established by the government.

The Commission acknowledged that war crimes had indeed been committed during the military campaign, when about 900 people were killed. But there was nothing to back the assertions of gang-rape, or evidence to presume any intent of genocide, it held. Although it could take years before the court pronounces the final verdict in the genocide case, Thursday's injunction is an important victory for the refugees languishing in Bangladeshi camps. It empowers the UN Security Council to prevail upon Myanmar to take appropriate measures for the rehabilitation and repatriation of displaced communities. As the biggest regional player, China could play a constructive role to ensure a speedy return to normalcy in its neighbourhood. India has its own interests in an amicable resolution of Myanmar's internal dispute. Above all, finding closure to the current dispute would mark the completion of Myanmar's return to civilian rule.

Q. Genocide means killing with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.Serbia was alleged to have attempted to exterminate the Bosniak (Bosnian Muslim) population of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Based on the author's reasoning in the passage above, decide the guilt of Serbia?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 6

Correct Answer is (c)

Serbia is guilty since Bosnian Muslim carries an ethnical identity who are subjected to genocide.

Option (c) is the most appropriate choice consistent with reasoning of the author.

Incorrect Answers

None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above and definition of genocide.

Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 7

The unanimous ruling of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), on Thursday, on the prevention of alleged acts of genocide against Rohingya Muslims has finally pinned legal responsibility on Myanmar's government for the military's large-scale excesses of 2017. The court has further emphasised that an estimated 600,000 Rohingya resident in Myanmar still remained highly vulnerable to attacks from the security forces. The ruling vindicates findings by the UN and human rights groups on the prevalence of hate speech, mass atrocities of rape and extra-judicial killings, and torching of villages in Myanmar's Rakhine province, leading to the forced migration of thousands to Bangladesh. The ruling pertains to the Gambia's suit on behalf of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), alleging that the brutalities by the defence services amounted to crimes of genocide under the 1948 Genocide Convention. Arguing the defence in person during the three-day public hearings last month, Ms. Suu Kyi, who was elected in 2016, insisted that the 2017 violence was proportionate to the threat of insurgency. She even questioned the Gambia's standing to bring the suit, saying that there was no bilateral dispute.

Rejecting the ICJ's ruling, Myanmar's Foreign Ministry has accused rights groups of presenting the Court with a distorted picture of the prevailing situation. In a statement, it defended the army's action as a legitimate response to violations of the law by the insurgent Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army. However, the above claim is at odds with the findings this week of an Independent Commission of Enquiry established by the government.

The Commission acknowledged that war crimes had indeed been committed during the military campaign, when about 900 people were killed. But there was nothing to back the assertions of gang-rape, or evidence to presume any intent of genocide, it held. Although it could take years before the court pronounces the final verdict in the genocide case, Thursday's injunction is an important victory for the refugees languishing in Bangladeshi camps. It empowers the UN Security Council to prevail upon Myanmar to take appropriate measures for the rehabilitation and repatriation of displaced communities. As the biggest regional player, China could play a constructive role to ensure a speedy return to normalcy in its neighbourhood. India has its own interests in an amicable resolution of Myanmar's internal dispute. Above all, finding closure to the current dispute would mark the completion of Myanmar's return to civilian rule.

Q. The Armenian Genocide refers to the deliberate and systematic destruction of the Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire during and just after World War I. It was implemented through extensive massacres and deportations, with the deportations consisting of forced marches under conditions designed to lead to the death of the deportees. The total number of resulting deaths is generally held to have been between one and one and a half million. If Armenia brings a suit against Ottoman Empire, based only on the author's reasoning in the given passage, would the International Court entertain the suit?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 7

Correct Answer is (a) International Court would entertain the suit since Armenian population is the target of systematic destruction, massacre, deportation etc. Option (a) is the most appropriate choice consistent with reasoning of the author.

Incorrect Answers

None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above and definition of genocide.

Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 8

The unanimous ruling of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), on Thursday, on the prevention of alleged acts of genocide against Rohingya Muslims has finally pinned legal responsibility on Myanmar's government for the military's large-scale excesses of 2017. The court has further emphasised that an estimated 600,000 Rohingya resident in Myanmar still remained highly vulnerable to attacks from the security forces. The ruling vindicates findings by the UN and human rights groups on the prevalence of hate speech, mass atrocities of rape and extra-judicial killings, and torching of villages in Myanmar's Rakhine province, leading to the forced migration of thousands to Bangladesh. The ruling pertains to the Gambia's suit on behalf of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), alleging that the brutalities by the defence services amounted to crimes of genocide under the 1948 Genocide Convention. Arguing the defence in person during the three-day public hearings last month, Ms. Suu Kyi, who was elected in 2016, insisted that the 2017 violence was proportionate to the threat of insurgency. She even questioned the Gambia's standing to bring the suit, saying that there was no bilateral dispute.

Rejecting the ICJ's ruling, Myanmar's Foreign Ministry has accused rights groups of presenting the Court with a distorted picture of the prevailing situation. In a statement, it defended the army's action as a legitimate response to violations of the law by the insurgent Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army. However, the above claim is at odds with the findings this week of an Independent Commission of Enquiry established by the government.

The Commission acknowledged that war crimes had indeed been committed during the military campaign, when about 900 people were killed. But there was nothing to back the assertions of gang-rape, or evidence to presume any intent of genocide, it held. Although it could take years before the court pronounces the final verdict in the genocide case, Thursday's injunction is an important victory for the refugees languishing in Bangladeshi camps. It empowers the UN Security Council to prevail upon Myanmar to take appropriate measures for the rehabilitation and repatriation of displaced communities. As the biggest regional player, China could play a constructive role to ensure a speedy return to normalcy in its neighbourhood. India has its own interests in an amicable resolution of Myanmar's internal dispute. Above all, finding closure to the current dispute would mark the completion of Myanmar's return to civilian rule.

Q. Sarabjit, an Indian who was attacked in a prison in Pakistan where he spent 22 years after being convicted of terrorism and died in Pakistan. Sarabjit was an Indian national convicted of terrorism and spying by a Pakistani court. Can India bring a claim of genocide against Pakistan?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 8

Correct Answer is (b) India cannot bring a claim of genocide since Sarabjit died being charged of terrorism and for not being a part of any group. Option (b) is the most appropriate choice consistent with reasoning of the author.

Incorrect Answers

None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above and definition of genocide.

Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 9

The unanimous ruling of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), on Thursday, on the prevention of alleged acts of genocide against Rohingya Muslims has finally pinned legal responsibility on Myanmar's government for the military's large-scale excesses of 2017. The court has further emphasised that an estimated 600,000 Rohingya resident in Myanmar still remained highly vulnerable to attacks from the security forces. The ruling vindicates findings by the UN and human rights groups on the prevalence of hate speech, mass atrocities of rape and extra-judicial killings, and torching of villages in Myanmar's Rakhine province, leading to the forced migration of thousands to Bangladesh. The ruling pertains to the Gambia's suit on behalf of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), alleging that the brutalities by the defence services amounted to crimes of genocide under the 1948 Genocide Convention. Arguing the defence in person during the three-day public hearings last month, Ms. Suu Kyi, who was elected in 2016, insisted that the 2017 violence was proportionate to the threat of insurgency. She even questioned the Gambia's standing to bring the suit, saying that there was no bilateral dispute.

Rejecting the ICJ's ruling, Myanmar's Foreign Ministry has accused rights groups of presenting the Court with a distorted picture of the prevailing situation. In a statement, it defended the army's action as a legitimate response to violations of the law by the insurgent Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army. However, the above claim is at odds with the findings this week of an Independent Commission of Enquiry established by the government.

The Commission acknowledged that war crimes had indeed been committed during the military campaign, when about 900 people were killed. But there was nothing to back the assertions of gang-rape, or evidence to presume any intent of genocide, it held. Although it could take years before the court pronounces the final verdict in the genocide case, Thursday's injunction is an important victory for the refugees languishing in Bangladeshi camps. It empowers the UN Security Council to prevail upon Myanmar to take appropriate measures for the rehabilitation and repatriation of displaced communities. As the biggest regional player, China could play a constructive role to ensure a speedy return to normalcy in its neighbourhood. India has its own interests in an amicable resolution of Myanmar's internal dispute. Above all, finding closure to the current dispute would mark the completion of Myanmar's return to civilian rule.

Q. Genocide means killing with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. The Government of Sri Lanka has indulged in gross violations of human rights against the innocent Tamil Community in the War against Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in the year 2009, and during such operation, several civilians were killed, tortured and maimed. In such a situation, based only on the author's reasoning in the given passage, would the Government of Sri Lanka be held liable for Genocide?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 9

Correct Answer is (c)

Government of Sri Lanka be held liable since Tamil Community are ethnical and religious group who are subjected to genocide. Option (c) is the most appropriate choice consistent with reasoning of the author.

Incorrect Answers

None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above and definition of genocide.

Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 10

The unanimous ruling of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), on Thursday, on the prevention of alleged acts of genocide against Rohingya Muslims has finally pinned legal responsibility on Myanmar's government for the military's large-scale excesses of 2017. The court has further emphasised that an estimated 600,000 Rohingya resident in Myanmar still remained highly vulnerable to attacks from the security forces. The ruling vindicates findings by the UN and human rights groups on the prevalence of hate speech, mass atrocities of rape and extra-judicial killings, and torching of villages in Myanmar's Rakhine province, leading to the forced migration of thousands to Bangladesh. The ruling pertains to the Gambia's suit on behalf of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), alleging that the brutalities by the defence services amounted to crimes of genocide under the 1948 Genocide Convention. Arguing the defence in person during the three-day public hearings last month, Ms. Suu Kyi, who was elected in 2016, insisted that the 2017 violence was proportionate to the threat of insurgency. She even questioned the Gambia's standing to bring the suit, saying that there was no bilateral dispute.

Rejecting the ICJ's ruling, Myanmar's Foreign Ministry has accused rights groups of presenting the Court with a distorted picture of the prevailing situation. In a statement, it defended the army's action as a legitimate response to violations of the law by the insurgent Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army. However, the above claim is at odds with the findings this week of an Independent Commission of Enquiry established by the government.

The Commission acknowledged that war crimes had indeed been committed during the military campaign, when about 900 people were killed. But there was nothing to back the assertions of gang-rape, or evidence to presume any intent of genocide, it held. Although it could take years before the court pronounces the final verdict in the genocide case, Thursday's injunction is an important victory for the refugees languishing in Bangladeshi camps. It empowers the UN Security Council to prevail upon Myanmar to take appropriate measures for the rehabilitation and repatriation of displaced communities. As the biggest regional player, China could play a constructive role to ensure a speedy return to normalcy in its neighbourhood. India has its own interests in an amicable resolution of Myanmar's internal dispute. Above all, finding closure to the current dispute would mark the completion of Myanmar's return to civilian rule.

Q. Genocide means killing with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.Simele are stateless people which cannot be put strictly into any national, ethnical, racial or religious group. In the 20th century, the Simele massacre was committed by the armed forces of the Kingdom of Iraq during a campaign which systematically targeted the Assyrians of northern Iraq in August 1933. Is Iraq guilty?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 10

Correct Answer is (b)

Simele are stateless people which cannot be put strictly into any national, ethnical, racial or religious group. Therefore they cannot be subjected to genocide. Option (b) is the most appropriate choice consistent with reasoning of the author.

Incorrect Answers

None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above and definition of genocide.

Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 11

The unanimous ruling of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), on Thursday, on the prevention of alleged acts of genocide against Rohingya Muslims has finally pinned legal responsibility on Myanmar's government for the military's large-scale excesses of 2017. The court has further emphasised that an estimated 600,000 Rohingya resident in Myanmar still remained highly vulnerable to attacks from the security forces. The ruling vindicates findings by the UN and human rights groups on the prevalence of hate speech, mass atrocities of rape and extra-judicial killings, and torching of villages in Myanmar's Rakhine province, leading to the forced migration of thousands to Bangladesh. The ruling pertains to the Gambia's suit on behalf of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), alleging that the brutalities by the defence services amounted to crimes of genocide under the 1948 Genocide Convention. Arguing the defence in person during the three-day public hearings last month, Ms. Suu Kyi, who was elected in 2016, insisted that the 2017 violence was proportionate to the threat of insurgency. She even questioned the Gambia's standing to bring the suit, saying that there was no bilateral dispute.

Rejecting the ICJ's ruling, Myanmar's Foreign Ministry has accused rights groups of presenting the Court with a distorted picture of the prevailing situation. In a statement, it defended the army's action as a legitimate response to violations of the law by the insurgent Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army. However, the above claim is at odds with the findings this week of an Independent Commission of Enquiry established by the government.

The Commission acknowledged that war crimes had indeed been committed during the military campaign, when about 900 people were killed. But there was nothing to back the assertions of gang-rape, or evidence to presume any intent of genocide, it held. Although it could take years before the court pronounces the final verdict in the genocide case, Thursday's injunction is an important victory for the refugees languishing in Bangladeshi camps. It empowers the UN Security Council to prevail upon Myanmar to take appropriate measures for the rehabilitation and repatriation of displaced communities. As the biggest regional player, China could play a constructive role to ensure a speedy return to normalcy in its neighbourhood. India has its own interests in an amicable resolution of Myanmar's internal dispute. Above all, finding closure to the current dispute would mark the completion of Myanmar's return to civilian rule.

Q. An act which causes death and is done with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such injury as is reasonably likely to lead to death, amounts to murder. Culpable homicide is not murder if it is committed without premeditation in a sudden fight in the heat of passion. A fight breaks out between fans of Calcutta Club Riders (CCR) and Punjab Maharajas Tigers (PMT) to decide which team is the second last in the tournament. A CCR fan smashes a bottle of beer on to a PMT fan's face. The PMT fan, bleeding, takes the broken bottle and stabs the CCR fan, thereby killing him. What offence if any has been committed?

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 11

Correct Answer is (c)

The PMT fan killed in the heat of the sudden quarrel.

He was no longer defending himself.

Incorrect Answers

None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above.

Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 12

This idea to strip citizenship faded away due to the Supreme Court's ruling. President Donald J. Trump revived the idea to strip the citizenship of Americans accused of terrorism and took it much further than the extreme case of a suspected terrorist. He proposed that Americans who protest government policies by burning the flag could lose their citizenship - meaning, among other things, their right to vote - as punishment.

"Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag - if they do, there must be consequences - perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail", wrote the next President of the free world on a social media site.

Trump wrote the post shortly after Fox News aired a segment about a dispute at Hampshire College in Massachusetts, which removed the American flag from its campus flagpole after protests over his election victory; during one demonstration, someone burned a flag.

Even if Mr. Trump were to persuade Congress to enact a criminal statute, a dramatic shift in the balance between government power and individual freedom will occur; anyone convicted and sentenced could point to clear Supreme Court precedents to make the case for a constitutional violation.

The obstacles include the precedent that the Constitution does not allow the government to expatriate Americans against their will, through a landmark 1967 case, Afroyim v. Rusk. They also include a 1989 decision, Texas v. Johnson, in which the court struck down criminal laws banning flag burning, ruling that the act was a form of political expression protected by the First Amendment.

David D. Cole, a Georgetown University law professor who co-wrote the Supreme Court briefs in the flag-burning case and who is about to become national legal director at the American Civil Liberties Union, said he wondered if Mr. Trump's strategy was to goad people into burning flags in order to "marginalize" the protests against him.

But he also called Mr. Trump's proposal "beyond the pale."

"To me it is deeply troubling that the person who is going to become the most powerful government official in the United States doesn't understand the first thing about the First Amendment - which is you can't punish people for expressing dissent - and also doesn't seem to understand that citizenship is a constitutional right that cannot be taken away, period, under any circumstances," he said.

Q. Jinkal is a Joint Managing Director of a public limited company. He being in charge of the factory situated at USA was flying National Flag at the office premises of his factory. He was not allowed to do so by the Government officials on the ground that the same is impermissible under the Flag Code. Will the Right to fly the National Flag freely with respect and dignity saved within the meaning of First Amendment. Based on the author's interpretation which of the following is true.

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 12

Option (b) can be deduced from the last line of the fourth paragraph. Paragraph mentions "They also include a 1989 decision,Texas v. Johnson, in which the court struck down criminal laws banning flag burning, ruling that the act was a form of political expression protected by the First Amendment."

Therefore all the remaining options (a), (c) or (d) aren't even talked of in the passage.

Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 13

This idea to strip citizenship faded away due to the Supreme Court's ruling. President Donald J. Trump revived the idea to strip the citizenship of Americans accused of terrorism and took it much further than the extreme case of a suspected terrorist. He proposed that Americans who protest government policies by burning the flag could lose their citizenship - meaning, among other things, their right to vote - as punishment.

"Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag - if they do, there must be consequences - perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail", wrote the next President of the free world on a social media site.

Trump wrote the post shortly after Fox News aired a segment about a dispute at Hampshire College in Massachusetts, which removed the American flag from its campus flagpole after protests over his election victory; during one demonstration, someone burned a flag.

Even if Mr. Trump were to persuade Congress to enact a criminal statute, a dramatic shift in the balance between government power and individual freedom will occur; anyone convicted and sentenced could point to clear Supreme Court precedents to make the case for a constitutional violation.

The obstacles include the precedent that the Constitution does not allow the government to expatriate Americans against their will, through a landmark 1967 case, Afroyim v. Rusk. They also include a 1989 decision, Texas v. Johnson, in which the court struck down criminal laws banning flag burning, ruling that the act was a form of political expression protected by the First Amendment.

David D. Cole, a Georgetown University law professor who co-wrote the Supreme Court briefs in the flag-burning case and who is about to become national legal director at the American Civil Liberties Union, said he wondered if Mr. Trump's strategy was to goad people into burning flags in order to "marginalize" the protests against him.

But he also called Mr. Trump's proposal "beyond the pale."

"To me it is deeply troubling that the person who is going to become the most powerful government official in the United States doesn't understand the first thing about the First Amendment - which is you can't punish people for expressing dissent - and also doesn't seem to understand that citizenship is a constitutional right that cannot be taken away, period, under any circumstances," he said.

Q. Johnson, a member of the Revolutionary Communist Youth Brigade, participated in a political demonstration against the Administration and certain companies. Johnson marched through the streets, shouted chants, destroyed property, broke windows and threw trash, beer cans, soiled diapers and various other items, and held signs outside the offices of several companies. When Johnson reached the City Hall, he poured kerosene on the flag and set it on fire. Trump administration passed an order to strip his citizenship. Johnson challenged the order. In such a case, based on the author's reasoning, what is the most likely outcome of the case:

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 13

Option ( c) is not m entioned i n the passage.
Passage has simply talked about one incident and not the ability of Trump as a whole. Option (b) is consistent with the David D. Cole's opinion mentioned in the last paragraph . Option (b) is clearly supported by the last two paragraphs.

Option (d) is too generic as "the path of any politician" is a broad phrase. Hence, option (b) is the best answer.

Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 14

This idea to strip citizenship faded away due to the Supreme Court's ruling. President Donald J. Trump revived the idea to strip the citizenship of Americans accused of terrorism and took it much further than the extreme case of a suspected terrorist. He proposed that Americans who protest government policies by burning the flag could lose their citizenship - meaning, among other things, their right to vote - as punishment.

"Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag - if they do, there must be consequences - perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail", wrote the next President of the free world on a social media site.

Trump wrote the post shortly after Fox News aired a segment about a dispute at Hampshire College in Massachusetts, which removed the American flag from its campus flagpole after protests over his election victory; during one demonstration, someone burned a flag.

Even if Mr. Trump were to persuade Congress to enact a criminal statute, a dramatic shift in the balance between government power and individual freedom will occur; anyone convicted and sentenced could point to clear Supreme Court precedents to make the case for a constitutional violation.

The obstacles include the precedent that the Constitution does not allow the government to expatriate Americans against their will, through a landmark 1967 case, Afroyim v. Rusk. They also include a 1989 decision, Texas v. Johnson, in which the court struck down criminal laws banning flag burning, ruling that the act was a form of political expression protected by the First Amendment.

David D. Cole, a Georgetown University law professor who co-wrote the Supreme Court briefs in the flag-burning case and who is about to become national legal director at the American Civil Liberties Union, said he wondered if Mr. Trump's strategy was to goad people into burning flags in order to "marginalize" the protests against him.

But he also called Mr. Trump's proposal "beyond the pale."

"To me it is deeply troubling that the person who is going to become the most powerful government official in the United States doesn't understand the first thing about the First Amendment - which is you can't punish people for expressing dissent - and also doesn't seem to understand that citizenship is a constitutional right that cannot be taken away, period, under any circumstances," he said.

Q. Which of the following views can be correctly attributed to the opinion of Mr. Trump regarding the flag burning

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 14

According to the fourth paragraph, Trump wrote the message after Fox news aired a segment on a college protest in Massachusetts. Option (b) is too generic. Hence, option c is the answer.

Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 15

This idea to strip citizenship faded away due to the Supreme Court's ruling. President Donald J. Trump revived the idea to strip the citizenship of Americans accused of terrorism and took it much further than the extreme case of a suspected terrorist. He proposed that Americans who protest government policies by burning the flag could lose their citizenship - meaning, among other things, their right to vote - as punishment.

"Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag - if they do, there must be consequences - perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail", wrote the next President of the free world on a social media site.

Trump wrote the post shortly after Fox News aired a segment about a dispute at Hampshire College in Massachusetts, which removed the American flag from its campus flagpole after protests over his election victory; during one demonstration, someone burned a flag.

Even if Mr. Trump were to persuade Congress to enact a criminal statute, a dramatic shift in the balance between government power and individual freedom will occur; anyone convicted and sentenced could point to clear Supreme Court precedents to make the case for a constitutional violation.

The obstacles include the precedent that the Constitution does not allow the government to expatriate Americans against their will, through a landmark 1967 case, Afroyim v. Rusk. They also include a 1989 decision, Texas v. Johnson, in which the court struck down criminal laws banning flag burning, ruling that the act was a form of political expression protected by the First Amendment.

David D. Cole, a Georgetown University law professor who co-wrote the Supreme Court briefs in the flag-burning case and who is about to become national legal director at the American Civil Liberties Union, said he wondered if Mr. Trump's strategy was to goad people into burning flags in order to "marginalize" the protests against him.

But he also called Mr. Trump's proposal "beyond the pale."

"To me it is deeply troubling that the person who is going to become the most powerful government official in the United States doesn't understand the first thing about the First Amendment - which is you can't punish people for expressing dissent - and also doesn't seem to understand that citizenship is a constitutional right that cannot be taken away, period, under any circumstances," he said.

Q. Suppose in the US Congress a bill is introduced to expatriate Americans accused and suspected of terrorism as well as burning the flag. This bill was fiercely opposed by the house during its introduction.Based on the author's reasoning, what can be the justification for the opposition

Detailed Solution for Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 15

Refer to the first paragraph's first line. It clearly mentions option d as the reason.

Languages: Mock Test - 9 - Question 16

This idea to strip citizenship faded away due to the Supreme Court's ruling. President Donald J. Trump revived the idea to strip the citizenship of Americans accused of terrorism and took it much further than the extreme case of a suspected terrorist. He proposed that Americans who protest government policies by burning the flag could lose their citizenship - meaning, among other things, their right to vote - as punishment.

"Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag - if they do, there must be consequences - perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail", wrote the next President of the free world on a social media site.

Trump wrote the post shortly after Fox News aired a segment about a dispute at Hampshire College in Massachusetts, which removed the American flag from its campus flagpole after protests over his election victory; during one demonstration, someone burned a flag.

Even if Mr. Trump were to persuade Congress to enact a criminal statute, a dramatic shift in the balance between government power and individual freedom will occur; anyone convicted and sentenced could point to clear Supreme Court precedents to make the case for a constitutional violation.

The obstacles include the precedent that the Constitution does not allow the government to expatriate Americans against their will, through a landmark 1967 case, Afroyim v. Rusk. They also include a 1989 decision, Texas v. Johnson, in which the court struck down criminal laws banning flag burning, ruling that the act was a form of political expression protected by the First Amendment.

David D. Cole, a Georgetown University law professor who co-wrote the Supreme Court briefs in the flag-burning case and who is about to become national legal director at the American Civil Liberties Union, said he wondered if Mr. Trump's strategy was to goad people into burning flags in order to "marginalize" the protests against him.

But he also called Mr. Trump's proposal "beyond the pale."

"To me it is deeply troubling that the person who is going to become the most powerful government official in the United States doesn't understand the first thing about the First Amendment - which is you can't punish people for expressing dissent - and also doesn't seem to understand that citizenship is a constitutional right that cannot be taken away, period, under any circumstances," he said.

Q. United States established a new vetting measure to keep radical Islamic terrorists out of the United States of America. In pursuance of the same an executive order is signed to remove Americans of Iranian, Syrian, Yemeni and Libyan Origin. If this is true, then, based on the author's reasoning and precedents cited in the passage above, will the order stand the scrutiny of law: