CLAT Practice Test - 21

The first visible change to the body—occurring 15 to 20 minutes after death—is pallor mortis, in which the body begins to pale. Pallor mortis occurs because blood stops moving through the capillaries, the smallest of the body’s blood vessels. This process is identical for all people, but it’s less immediately apparent on people with darker skin. Meanwhile, the body cools, decreasing in temperature about 1.5 °F (0.84 °C) per hour. But even when the body is cold, it’s still full of life. Damaged blood cells pour out of their broken vessels and trigger discoloration on the skin’s surface. Though this discoloration begins to set in about an hour after death, it usually isn’t visible until a few hours later. In death, chemical bridges gradually form between the actin and the myosin, so the muscles contract and stay that way till the bridges break down. This stiffness, known as rigor mortis, occurs about two to six hours after death. Rigor mortis adds to the difficulty of performing an autopsy or preparing a body for a funeral, as the body loses the flexibility it had during life. Among the living things in the human body are bacteria. While the body is alive, they are concentrated in the gut but are mostly kept out of other internal organs by the immune system. After death, though, these bacteria are free to “feed” on the whole body. First, they digest the intestines and nearby tissue. Then they expand their reach, entering the capillaries and making their way into the heart and brain to feast.

Decomposition takes time. How much time may depend on such factors as the cause of death, the environmental conditions, or even the clothing on the body. Decomposition is “a continuous process,” explained forensic scientist M. Lee Goff to Medical News Today, “beginning at the point of death and ending when the body has been reduced to a skeleton.” To slow that arguably gruesome process, humans have devised various practices for preserving the body. A well-preserved body has long been a chief mortuary concern, especially when it will be displayed during a period of mourning. Embalming is one way of preserving a body after death. A wide variety of substances—including vinegar, wine, brandy, and honey—have been used to “pickle” corpses and thus delay putrefaction. In the modern procedure of embalming, blood is drained from the veins, and another fluid, usually based on a solution of formaldehyde in water, is injected into a major artery. Though this version of embalming isn’t permanent, it serves its purpose—giving the body a lifelike appearance in the days after death when it will be viewed by mourners.

Q. The modern procedure of embalming is suitable for?

The first visible change to the body—occurring 15 to 20 minutes after death—is pallor mortis, in which the body begins to pale. Pallor mortis occurs because blood stops moving through the capillaries, the smallest of the body’s blood vessels. This process is identical for all people, but it’s less immediately apparent on people with darker skin. Meanwhile, the body cools, decreasing in temperature about 1.5 °F (0.84 °C) per hour. But even when the body is cold, it’s still full of life. Damaged blood cells pour out of their broken vessels and trigger discoloration on the skin’s surface. Though this discoloration begins to set in about an hour after death, it usually isn’t visible until a few hours later. In death, chemical bridges gradually form between the actin and the myosin, so the muscles contract and stay that way till the bridges break down. This stiffness, known as rigor mortis, occurs about two to six hours after death. Rigor mortis adds to the difficulty of performing an autopsy or preparing a body for a funeral, as the body loses the flexibility it had during life. Among the living things in the human body are bacteria. While the body is alive, they are concentrated in the gut but are mostly kept out of other internal organs by the immune system. After death, though, these bacteria are free to “feed” on the whole body. First, they digest the intestines and nearby tissue. Then they expand their reach, entering the capillaries and making their way into the heart and brain to feast.

Decomposition takes time. How much time may depend on such factors as the cause of death, the environmental conditions, or even the clothing on the body. Decomposition is “a continuous process,” explained forensic scientist M. Lee Goff to Medical News Today, “beginning at the point of death and ending when the body has been reduced to a skeleton.” To slow that arguably gruesome process, humans have devised various practices for preserving the body. A well-preserved body has long been a chief mortuary concern, especially when it will be displayed during a period of mourning. Embalming is one way of preserving a body after death. A wide variety of substances—including vinegar, wine, brandy, and honey—have been used to “pickle” corpses and thus delay putrefaction. In the modern procedure of embalming, blood is drained from the veins, and another fluid, usually based on a solution of formaldehyde in water, is injected into a major artery. Though this version of embalming isn’t permanent, it serves its purpose—giving the body a lifelike appearance in the days after death when it will be viewed by mourners.

Q. “Muscles contract” when we die. Which of the following is not the correct usage of the term ‘contract’?

Why on Earth is it taking so long for the world's richest countries to take action on climate change? For a partial answer, we can look back to the controversy that started a decade ago this November, which came to be known as Climategate. In a 2010 paper in the journal Environmental Values, the sociologist Brigitte Nerlich looked at what happened. Climategate began with the leaking of emails sent to and from climate scientists at the University of East Anglia, in the UK. The leaked file included more than 1,000 emails, but climate skeptics quickly seized on just a few of them: some messages in which scientists debated the publication of potentially flawed work, and some others in which they discussed adjusting data using a ""trick""-a piece of mathematical jargon that commentators misinterpreted as an effort to deceive the public.

In the U.S. and UK, conservative bloggers quickly latched onto the messages as proof of dishonesty among climate scientists. Nerlich writes that they effectively reached their audiences with a few specific phrases. One of these was the word ""Climate-gate"" itself apparently first used by conservative UK writer James Delingpole. The ‘gate’ suffix, referring back to Watergate, is a familiar method used by partisans and members of the media to indicate a serious scandal.

Looking at the messaging in blog posts about Climategate, Nerlich found that another common theme was ""science as a religion."" Climate change deniers accused environmentalists and scientists of irrationally clinging to their belief in human-made climate change in the face of what they saw as evidence that it was a hoax. ""The Global Warming religion is as virulent and insidious as all mind-bending cults of absolute certitude, and yet it has become mainstream orthodoxy and infallible spirituality faster than any faith-based cult in history,"" as one blogger put it.

Nerlich notes that, when it comes to scientists' levels of certainty, climate change deniers wanted to have it both ways. Any hint of uncertainty-which is almost always a factor in scientific analysis, especially concerning predictions about complex systems-was presented as a reason not to believe that change was happening at all. But too much certainty became proof that scientists were no longer operating from evidence, but instead trying to justify a cult- like faith.

Ultimately, Climategate was shown to be a fabrication. In April 2010, an independent panel cleared the climate scientists of any wrongdoing in the leaked messages. Yet the controversy apparently succeeded in changing public opinion, at least temporarily. In February of 2010, the Guardian reported that, in the previous year, the proportion of British adults who believed that climate change was ""definitely"" a reality had dropped from 44 to 31 percent.

Q. In the second paragraph the author mentions "trick" in quotes in order to highlight that the adjusting of data was:

Why on Earth is it taking so long for the world's richest countries to take action on climate change? For a partial answer, we can look back to the controversy that started a decade ago this November, which came to be known as Climategate. In a 2010 paper in the journal Environmental Values, the sociologist Brigitte Nerlich looked at what happened. Climategate began with the leaking of emails sent to and from climate scientists at the University of East Anglia, in the UK. The leaked file included more than 1,000 emails, but climate skeptics quickly seized on just a few of them: some messages in which scientists debated the publication of potentially flawed work, and some others in which they discussed adjusting data using a ""trick""-a piece of mathematical jargon that commentators misinterpreted as an effort to deceive the public.

In the U.S. and UK, conservative bloggers quickly latched onto the messages as proof of dishonesty among climate scientists. Nerlich writes that they effectively reached their audiences with a few specific phrases. One of these was the word ""Climate-gate"" itself apparently first used by conservative UK writer James Delingpole. The ‘gate’ suffix, referring back to Watergate, is a familiar method used by partisans and members of the media to indicate a serious scandal.

Looking at the messaging in blog posts about Climategate, Nerlich found that another common theme was ""science as a religion."" Climate change deniers accused environmentalists and scientists of irrationally clinging to their belief in human-made climate change in the face of what they saw as evidence that it was a hoax. ""The Global Warming religion is as virulent and insidious as all mind-bending cults of absolute certitude, and yet it has become mainstream orthodoxy and infallible spirituality faster than any faith-based cult in history,"" as one blogger put it.

Nerlich notes that, when it comes to scientists' levels of certainty, climate change deniers wanted to have it both ways. Any hint of uncertainty-which is almost always a factor in scientific analysis, especially concerning predictions about complex systems-was presented as a reason not to believe that change was happening at all. But too much certainty became proof that scientists were no longer operating from evidence, but instead trying to justify a cult- like faith.

Ultimately, Climategate was shown to be a fabrication. In April 2010, an independent panel cleared the climate scientists of any wrongdoing in the leaked messages. Yet the controversy apparently succeeded in changing public opinion, at least temporarily. In February of 2010, the Guardian reported that, in the previous year, the proportion of British adults who believed that climate change was ""definitely"" a reality had dropped from 44 to 31 percent.

Q. Why did some of the conservative users add the suffix ‘gate’ in Climategate?

Why on Earth is it taking so long for the world's richest countries to take action on climate change? For a partial answer, we can look back to the controversy that started a decade ago this November, which came to be known as Climategate. In a 2010 paper in the journal Environmental Values, the sociologist Brigitte Nerlich looked at what happened. Climategate began with the leaking of emails sent to and from climate scientists at the University of East Anglia, in the UK. The leaked file included more than 1,000 emails, but climate skeptics quickly seized on just a few of them: some messages in which scientists debated the publication of potentially flawed work, and some others in which they discussed adjusting data using a ""trick""-a piece of mathematical jargon that commentators misinterpreted as an effort to deceive the public.

In the U.S. and UK, conservative bloggers quickly latched onto the messages as proof of dishonesty among climate scientists. Nerlich writes that they effectively reached their audiences with a few specific phrases. One of these was the word ""Climate-gate"" itself apparently first used by conservative UK writer James Delingpole. The ‘gate’ suffix, referring back to Watergate, is a familiar method used by partisans and members of the media to indicate a serious scandal.

Looking at the messaging in blog posts about Climategate, Nerlich found that another common theme was ""science as a religion."" Climate change deniers accused environmentalists and scientists of irrationally clinging to their belief in human-made climate change in the face of what they saw as evidence that it was a hoax. ""The Global Warming religion is as virulent and insidious as all mind-bending cults of absolute certitude, and yet it has become mainstream orthodoxy and infallible spirituality faster than any faith-based cult in history,"" as one blogger put it.

Nerlich notes that, when it comes to scientists' levels of certainty, climate change deniers wanted to have it both ways. Any hint of uncertainty-which is almost always a factor in scientific analysis, especially concerning predictions about complex systems-was presented as a reason not to believe that change was happening at all. But too much certainty became proof that scientists were no longer operating from evidence, but instead trying to justify a cult- like faith.

Ultimately, Climategate was shown to be a fabrication. In April 2010, an independent panel cleared the climate scientists of any wrongdoing in the leaked messages. Yet the controversy apparently succeeded in changing public opinion, at least temporarily. In February of 2010, the Guardian reported that, in the previous year, the proportion of British adults who believed that climate change was ""definitely"" a reality had dropped from 44 to 31 percent.

Q. Why did the climate change deniers use the analogy of science as a religion?

Why on Earth is it taking so long for the world's richest countries to take action on climate change? For a partial answer, we can look back to the controversy that started a decade ago this November, which came to be known as Climategate. In a 2010 paper in the journal Environmental Values, the sociologist Brigitte Nerlich looked at what happened. Climategate began with the leaking of emails sent to and from climate scientists at the University of East Anglia, in the UK. The leaked file included more than 1,000 emails, but climate skeptics quickly seized on just a few of them: some messages in which scientists debated the publication of potentially flawed work, and some others in which they discussed adjusting data using a ""trick""-a piece of mathematical jargon that commentators misinterpreted as an effort to deceive the public.

In the U.S. and UK, conservative bloggers quickly latched onto the messages as proof of dishonesty among climate scientists. Nerlich writes that they effectively reached their audiences with a few specific phrases. One of these was the word ""Climate-gate"" itself apparently first used by conservative UK writer James Delingpole. The ‘gate’ suffix, referring back to Watergate, is a familiar method used by partisans and members of the media to indicate a serious scandal.

Looking at the messaging in blog posts about Climategate, Nerlich found that another common theme was ""science as a religion."" Climate change deniers accused environmentalists and scientists of irrationally clinging to their belief in human-made climate change in the face of what they saw as evidence that it was a hoax. ""The Global Warming religion is as virulent and insidious as all mind-bending cults of absolute certitude, and yet it has become mainstream orthodoxy and infallible spirituality faster than any faith-based cult in history,"" as one blogger put it.

Nerlich notes that, when it comes to scientists' levels of certainty, climate change deniers wanted to have it both ways. Any hint of uncertainty-which is almost always a factor in scientific analysis, especially concerning predictions about complex systems-was presented as a reason not to believe that change was happening at all. But too much certainty became proof that scientists were no longer operating from evidence, but instead trying to justify a cult- like faith.

Ultimately, Climategate was shown to be a fabrication. In April 2010, an independent panel cleared the climate scientists of any wrongdoing in the leaked messages. Yet the controversy apparently succeeded in changing public opinion, at least temporarily. In February of 2010, the Guardian reported that, in the previous year, the proportion of British adults who believed that climate change was ""definitely"" a reality had dropped from 44 to 31 percent.

Q. Why does the author mention that the proportion of British adults who believed that climate change was "definitely" a reality had dropped from 44 to 31 percent?

Why on Earth is it taking so long for the world's richest countries to take action on climate change? For a partial answer, we can look back to the controversy that started a decade ago this November, which came to be known as Climategate. In a 2010 paper in the journal Environmental Values, the sociologist Brigitte Nerlich looked at what happened. Climategate began with the leaking of emails sent to and from climate scientists at the University of East Anglia, in the UK. The leaked file included more than 1,000 emails, but climate skeptics quickly seized on just a few of them: some messages in which scientists debated the publication of potentially flawed work, and some others in which they discussed adjusting data using a ""trick""-a piece of mathematical jargon that commentators misinterpreted as an effort to deceive the public.

In the U.S. and UK, conservative bloggers quickly latched onto the messages as proof of dishonesty among climate scientists. Nerlich writes that they effectively reached their audiences with a few specific phrases. One of these was the word ""Climate-gate"" itself apparently first used by conservative UK writer James Delingpole. The ‘gate’ suffix, referring back to Watergate, is a familiar method used by partisans and members of the media to indicate a serious scandal.

Looking at the messaging in blog posts about Climategate, Nerlich found that another common theme was ""science as a religion."" Climate change deniers accused environmentalists and scientists of irrationally clinging to their belief in human-made climate change in the face of what they saw as evidence that it was a hoax. ""The Global Warming religion is as virulent and insidious as all mind-bending cults of absolute certitude, and yet it has become mainstream orthodoxy and infallible spirituality faster than any faith-based cult in history,"" as one blogger put it.

Nerlich notes that, when it comes to scientists' levels of certainty, climate change deniers wanted to have it both ways. Any hint of uncertainty-which is almost always a factor in scientific analysis, especially concerning predictions about complex systems-was presented as a reason not to believe that change was happening at all. But too much certainty became proof that scientists were no longer operating from evidence, but instead trying to justify a cult- like faith.

Ultimately, Climategate was shown to be a fabrication. In April 2010, an independent panel cleared the climate scientists of any wrongdoing in the leaked messages. Yet the controversy apparently succeeded in changing public opinion, at least temporarily. In February of 2010, the Guardian reported that, in the previous year, the proportion of British adults who believed that climate change was ""definitely"" a reality had dropped from 44 to 31 percent.

Q. Which one of the following can replace the phrase "absolute certitude" as used in the fourth paragraph?

Why on Earth is it taking so long for the world's richest countries to take action on climate change? For a partial answer, we can look back to the controversy that started a decade ago this November, which came to be known as Climategate. In a 2010 paper in the journal Environmental Values, the sociologist Brigitte Nerlich looked at what happened. Climategate began with the leaking of emails sent to and from climate scientists at the University of East Anglia, in the UK. The leaked file included more than 1,000 emails, but climate skeptics quickly seized on just a few of them: some messages in which scientists debated the publication of potentially flawed work, and some others in which they discussed adjusting data using a ""trick""-a piece of mathematical jargon that commentators misinterpreted as an effort to deceive the public.

In the U.S. and UK, conservative bloggers quickly latched onto the messages as proof of dishonesty among climate scientists. Nerlich writes that they effectively reached their audiences with a few specific phrases. One of these was the word ""Climate-gate"" itself apparently first used by conservative UK writer James Delingpole. The ‘gate’ suffix, referring back to Watergate, is a familiar method used by partisans and members of the media to indicate a serious scandal.

Looking at the messaging in blog posts about Climategate, Nerlich found that another common theme was ""science as a religion."" Climate change deniers accused environmentalists and scientists of irrationally clinging to their belief in human-made climate change in the face of what they saw as evidence that it was a hoax. ""The Global Warming religion is as virulent and insidious as all mind-bending cults of absolute certitude, and yet it has become mainstream orthodoxy and infallible spirituality faster than any faith-based cult in history,"" as one blogger put it.

Nerlich notes that, when it comes to scientists' levels of certainty, climate change deniers wanted to have it both ways. Any hint of uncertainty-which is almost always a factor in scientific analysis, especially concerning predictions about complex systems-was presented as a reason not to believe that change was happening at all. But too much certainty became proof that scientists were no longer operating from evidence, but instead trying to justify a cult- like faith.

Ultimately, Climategate was shown to be a fabrication. In April 2010, an independent panel cleared the climate scientists of any wrongdoing in the leaked messages. Yet the controversy apparently succeeded in changing public opinion, at least temporarily. In February of 2010, the Guardian reported that, in the previous year, the proportion of British adults who believed that climate change was ""definitely"" a reality had dropped from 44 to 31 percent.

Q. Which of the following could be an apposite title to the passage?

Faith in entities is often an act of personal commitment not amenable to falsification, but trust in a scientific process can be established with confidence-building measures and full disclosure of all relevant data. Any mass campaign that involves voluntary effort on the part of the public can succeed only when transparency and open communication channels are the tools of choice. If the poor rate of uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine in most of the States in the country is any indication, the government has not taken the people of the country along, in what is a purely voluntary exercise, but one vested with great power to retard the pace of the epidemic. For instance, Tamil Nadu, a State perceived to be largely health literate, and relatively well-equipped with health infrastructure, achieved only over 16% of its targeted coverage on the launch day. On the second day of vaccination, the compliance further dropped; in some States, vaccination was suspended. A marked favouring of the Covishield vaccine over Covaxin was also noticed in multiple States.

But none of this is a surprise. The signs, verily, were out there for everyone to see, for a long time indeed. Studies measured high levels of vaccine hesitancy among the general population, and among health-care workers, the first in the line list of people to receive free vaccination. Clearly, vaccine hesitancy was not addressed sufficiently, or not taken seriously enough. With the sequence of events that followed the clearance of Emergency Use Authorisation (in Covaxin, it is emergency use authorisation in ‘clinical trial mode’) — a high-handed announcement with little attempt to put out compelling evidence in the public domain, or answer multiple queries in press conferences — vaccine hesitancy merely dug its heels in deeper. The inability of the government and agencies involved to amicably resolve controversies surrounding the clearance for Covaxin, even before it was able to produce interim data on efficacy from phase-3 trials, has had a direct consequence, as witnessed by poor numbers in its uptake so far. A vaccine, unequivocally, is public good, but the lack of transparency surrounding the roll-out of the COVID vaccines has done little to enhance trust in this experiential principle. This uncommon haste in trying to lunge towards the tape while still some distance from the finish line might have been justified if the state had taken the people along. Vaccinating the nation, however, is less a race than a slow and steady process. Building confidence in the process is crucial to achieving the task at hand. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s oft-repeated mantra, ‘Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas’, is very relevant here. And the Health Ministry must do whatever it takes to make a success of the vaccination drive.

Q. Which of the following could be deduced from the passage?

Faith in entities is often an act of personal commitment not amenable to falsification, but trust in a scientific process can be established with confidence-building measures and full disclosure of all relevant data. Any mass campaign that involves voluntary effort on the part of the public can succeed only when transparency and open communication channels are the tools of choice. If the poor rate of uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine in most of the States in the country is any indication, the government has not taken the people of the country along, in what is a purely voluntary exercise, but one vested with great power to retard the pace of the epidemic. For instance, Tamil Nadu, a State perceived to be largely health literate, and relatively well-equipped with health infrastructure, achieved only over 16% of its targeted coverage on the launch day. On the second day of vaccination, the compliance further dropped; in some States, vaccination was suspended. A marked favouring of the Covishield vaccine over Covaxin was also noticed in multiple States.

But none of this is a surprise. The signs, verily, were out there for everyone to see, for a long time indeed. Studies measured high levels of vaccine hesitancy among the general population, and among health-care workers, the first in the line list of people to receive free vaccination. Clearly, vaccine hesitancy was not addressed sufficiently, or not taken seriously enough. With the sequence of events that followed the clearance of Emergency Use Authorisation (in Covaxin, it is emergency use authorisation in ‘clinical trial mode’) — a high-handed announcement with little attempt to put out compelling evidence in the public domain, or answer multiple queries in press conferences — vaccine hesitancy merely dug its heels in deeper. The inability of the government and agencies involved to amicably resolve controversies surrounding the clearance for Covaxin, even before it was able to produce interim data on efficacy from phase-3 trials, has had a direct consequence, as witnessed by poor numbers in its uptake so far. A vaccine, unequivocally, is public good, but the lack of transparency surrounding the roll-out of the COVID vaccines has done little to enhance trust in this experiential principle. This uncommon haste in trying to lunge towards the tape while still some distance from the finish line might have been justified if the state had taken the people along. Vaccinating the nation, however, is less a race than a slow and steady process. Building confidence in the process is crucial to achieving the task at hand. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s oft-repeated mantra, ‘Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas’, is very relevant here. And the Health Ministry must do whatever it takes to make a success of the vaccination drive.

Q. Which of the following is true regarding the tone of the author in the passage?

Faith in entities is often an act of personal commitment not amenable to falsification, but trust in a scientific process can be established with confidence-building measures and full disclosure of all relevant data. Any mass campaign that involves voluntary effort on the part of the public can succeed only when transparency and open communication channels are the tools of choice. If the poor rate of uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine in most of the States in the country is any indication, the government has not taken the people of the country along, in what is a purely voluntary exercise, but one vested with great power to retard the pace of the epidemic. For instance, Tamil Nadu, a State perceived to be largely health literate, and relatively well-equipped with health infrastructure, achieved only over 16% of its targeted coverage on the launch day. On the second day of vaccination, the compliance further dropped; in some States, vaccination was suspended. A marked favouring of the Covishield vaccine over Covaxin was also noticed in multiple States.

But none of this is a surprise. The signs, verily, were out there for everyone to see, for a long time indeed. Studies measured high levels of vaccine hesitancy among the general population, and among health-care workers, the first in the line list of people to receive free vaccination. Clearly, vaccine hesitancy was not addressed sufficiently, or not taken seriously enough. With the sequence of events that followed the clearance of Emergency Use Authorisation (in Covaxin, it is emergency use authorisation in ‘clinical trial mode’) — a high-handed announcement with little attempt to put out compelling evidence in the public domain, or answer multiple queries in press conferences — vaccine hesitancy merely dug its heels in deeper. The inability of the government and agencies involved to amicably resolve controversies surrounding the clearance for Covaxin, even before it was able to produce interim data on efficacy from phase-3 trials, has had a direct consequence, as witnessed by poor numbers in its uptake so far. A vaccine, unequivocally, is public good, but the lack of transparency surrounding the roll-out of the COVID vaccines has done little to enhance trust in this experiential principle. This uncommon haste in trying to lunge towards the tape while still some distance from the finish line might have been justified if the state had taken the people along. Vaccinating the nation, however, is less a race than a slow and steady process. Building confidence in the process is crucial to achieving the task at hand. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s oft-repeated mantra, ‘Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas’, is very relevant here. And the Health Ministry must do whatever it takes to make a success of the vaccination drive.

Q. Which of the following is true on the basis of the passage?

1.Vaccine hesitancy has been caused due to the non-transparency with respect to the vaccine

2. All the vaccines being used in India have not even passed the trial stage

3. Tamil Nadu is the only state which has shown hesitancy with respect to the vaccine uptake

Faith in entities is often an act of personal commitment not amenable to falsification, but trust in a scientific process can be established with confidence-building measures and full disclosure of all relevant data. Any mass campaign that involves voluntary effort on the part of the public can succeed only when transparency and open communication channels are the tools of choice. If the poor rate of uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine in most of the States in the country is any indication, the government has not taken the people of the country along, in what is a purely voluntary exercise, but one vested with great power to retard the pace of the epidemic. For instance, Tamil Nadu, a State perceived to be largely health literate, and relatively well-equipped with health infrastructure, achieved only over 16% of its targeted coverage on the launch day. On the second day of vaccination, the compliance further dropped; in some States, vaccination was suspended. A marked favouring of the Covishield vaccine over Covaxin was also noticed in multiple States.

But none of this is a surprise. The signs, verily, were out there for everyone to see, for a long time indeed. Studies measured high levels of vaccine hesitancy among the general population, and among health-care workers, the first in the line list of people to receive free vaccination. Clearly, vaccine hesitancy was not addressed sufficiently, or not taken seriously enough. With the sequence of events that followed the clearance of Emergency Use Authorisation (in Covaxin, it is emergency use authorisation in ‘clinical trial mode’) — a high-handed announcement with little attempt to put out compelling evidence in the public domain, or answer multiple queries in press conferences — vaccine hesitancy merely dug its heels in deeper. The inability of the government and agencies involved to amicably resolve controversies surrounding the clearance for Covaxin, even before it was able to produce interim data on efficacy from phase-3 trials, has had a direct consequence, as witnessed by poor numbers in its uptake so far. A vaccine, unequivocally, is public good, but the lack of transparency surrounding the roll-out of the COVID vaccines has done little to enhance trust in this experiential principle. This uncommon haste in trying to lunge towards the tape while still some distance from the finish line might have been justified if the state had taken the people along. Vaccinating the nation, however, is less a race than a slow and steady process. Building confidence in the process is crucial to achieving the task at hand. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s oft-repeated mantra, ‘Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas’, is very relevant here. And the Health Ministry must do whatever it takes to make a success of the vaccination drive.

Q. Which of the following is not consistent with the passage?

Faith in entities is often an act of personal commitment not amenable to falsification, but trust in a scientific process can be established with confidence-building measures and full disclosure of all relevant data. Any mass campaign that involves voluntary effort on the part of the public can succeed only when transparency and open communication channels are the tools of choice. If the poor rate of uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine in most of the States in the country is any indication, the government has not taken the people of the country along, in what is a purely voluntary exercise, but one vested with great power to retard the pace of the epidemic. For instance, Tamil Nadu, a State perceived to be largely health literate, and relatively well-equipped with health infrastructure, achieved only over 16% of its targeted coverage on the launch day. On the second day of vaccination, the compliance further dropped; in some States, vaccination was suspended. A marked favouring of the Covishield vaccine over Covaxin was also noticed in multiple States.

But none of this is a surprise. The signs, verily, were out there for everyone to see, for a long time indeed. Studies measured high levels of vaccine hesitancy among the general population, and among health-care workers, the first in the line list of people to receive free vaccination. Clearly, vaccine hesitancy was not addressed sufficiently, or not taken seriously enough. With the sequence of events that followed the clearance of Emergency Use Authorisation (in Covaxin, it is emergency use authorisation in ‘clinical trial mode’) — a high-handed announcement with little attempt to put out compelling evidence in the public domain, or answer multiple queries in press conferences — vaccine hesitancy merely dug its heels in deeper. The inability of the government and agencies involved to amicably resolve controversies surrounding the clearance for Covaxin, even before it was able to produce interim data on efficacy from phase-3 trials, has had a direct consequence, as witnessed by poor numbers in its uptake so far. A vaccine, unequivocally, is public good, but the lack of transparency surrounding the roll-out of the COVID vaccines has done little to enhance trust in this experiential principle. This uncommon haste in trying to lunge towards the tape while still some distance from the finish line might have been justified if the state had taken the people along. Vaccinating the nation, however, is less a race than a slow and steady process. Building confidence in the process is crucial to achieving the task at hand. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s oft-repeated mantra, ‘Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas’, is very relevant here. And the Health Ministry must do whatever it takes to make a success of the vaccination drive.

Q. Which of the following is the antonym for the word, confidence?

On a magical Tuesday, India’s cricketing history gained a luminous chapter even as the shadows lengthened at Brisbane’s Gabba. When Rishabh Pant’s winning four aptly concluded a tense pursuit of 328 on a nerve-wracking fifth day of the fourth Test, Ajinkya Rahane’s men seized the series at 2-1 to retain (no of times) the Border-Gavaskar Trophy. As far as role-reversals go, this was stunning in its execution and jaw-dropping in its impact. It was a verdict that seemed improbable after India’s 36, its lowest ever Test score, during the debilitating loss in the first game at Adelaide. But India progressed despite losing personnel to injuries or personal reasons. Skipper Virat Kohli took paternity leave while other regulars had to be benched following a spate of injuries. Yet, Rahane’s men persevered, right from the established Cheteshwar Pujara and R. Ashwin to the latest rookies in the squad — Shubman Gill and Washington Sundar. At various points, the experienced professional and the fresh debutant joined forces and nourished miraculous dreams. The turn-around at Melbourne was followed by the stone-walling at Sydney. Finally, in a long tour that commenced on November 12, last year, a second-wind was found in the climax. India did not have any of its frontline bowlers at Brisbane but Mohammed Siraj astutely helmed the attack and Tim Paine’s men were defeated by three wickets.

Winning a Test series against Australia in its backyard is considered as cricket’s highest benchmark for excellence. This yardstick has lasted for two decades ever since the previous dominant outfit, the West Indies, suffered a decline. Seen in that context, what India has achieved over the course of two tours — in 2018-19 and the just concluded 2020-21 face-off — is nothing short of stupendous. Twice, India has defeated Australia by identical margins (2-1). However, the latest act will rank right up in an all-time list of great Test series ever since the sport’s longest format commenced at Melbourne in 1877. When India last toured Australia, the host was blighted by the ball-tampering scandal and Steve Smith and David Warner were rightly put to pasture. Cut to the present, the visitor was up against a full-strength home unit. These are fraught times due to the pandemic and resultant bio-bubble angst, and even stepping out for a coffee is deemed an offence. To make it worse, India was never at its optimum potential and with every passing day, its list of the walking-wounded grew. There were even wry jokes about how coach Ravi Shastri may be forced to turn out considering his diminishing resources. But India thrived and just like it did at Eden Gardens in 2001, adversity became its springboard for success against an old adversary.

Q. Which of the following could be an appropriate title to the passage?

On a magical Tuesday, India’s cricketing history gained a luminous chapter even as the shadows lengthened at Brisbane’s Gabba. When Rishabh Pant’s winning four aptly concluded a tense pursuit of 328 on a nerve-wracking fifth day of the fourth Test, Ajinkya Rahane’s men seized the series at 2-1 to retain (no of times) the Border-Gavaskar Trophy. As far as role-reversals go, this was stunning in its execution and jaw-dropping in its impact. It was a verdict that seemed improbable after India’s 36, its lowest ever Test score, during the debilitating loss in the first game at Adelaide. But India progressed despite losing personnel to injuries or personal reasons. Skipper Virat Kohli took paternity leave while other regulars had to be benched following a spate of injuries. Yet, Rahane’s men persevered, right from the established Cheteshwar Pujara and R. Ashwin to the latest rookies in the squad — Shubman Gill and Washington Sundar. At various points, the experienced professional and the fresh debutant joined forces and nourished miraculous dreams. The turn-around at Melbourne was followed by the stone-walling at Sydney. Finally, in a long tour that commenced on November 12, last year, a second-wind was found in the climax. India did not have any of its frontline bowlers at Brisbane but Mohammed Siraj astutely helmed the attack and Tim Paine’s men were defeated by three wickets.

Winning a Test series against Australia in its backyard is considered as cricket’s highest benchmark for excellence. This yardstick has lasted for two decades ever since the previous dominant outfit, the West Indies, suffered a decline. Seen in that context, what India has achieved over the course of two tours — in 2018-19 and the just concluded 2020-21 face-off — is nothing short of stupendous. Twice, India has defeated Australia by identical margins (2-1). However, the latest act will rank right up in an all-time list of great Test series ever since the sport’s longest format commenced at Melbourne in 1877. When India last toured Australia, the host was blighted by the ball-tampering scandal and Steve Smith and David Warner were rightly put to pasture. Cut to the present, the visitor was up against a full-strength home unit. These are fraught times due to the pandemic and resultant bio-bubble angst, and even stepping out for a coffee is deemed an offence. To make it worse, India was never at its optimum potential and with every passing day, its list of the walking-wounded grew. There were even wry jokes about how coach Ravi Shastri may be forced to turn out considering his diminishing resources. But India thrived and just like it did at Eden Gardens in 2001, adversity became its springboard for success against an old adversary.

Q. Which of the following would the author agree with?

On a magical Tuesday, India’s cricketing history gained a luminous chapter even as the shadows lengthened at Brisbane’s Gabba. When Rishabh Pant’s winning four aptly concluded a tense pursuit of 328 on a nerve-wracking fifth day of the fourth Test, Ajinkya Rahane’s men seized the series at 2-1 to retain (no of times) the Border-Gavaskar Trophy. As far as role-reversals go, this was stunning in its execution and jaw-dropping in its impact. It was a verdict that seemed improbable after India’s 36, its lowest ever Test score, during the debilitating loss in the first game at Adelaide. But India progressed despite losing personnel to injuries or personal reasons. Skipper Virat Kohli took paternity leave while other regulars had to be benched following a spate of injuries. Yet, Rahane’s men persevered, right from the established Cheteshwar Pujara and R. Ashwin to the latest rookies in the squad — Shubman Gill and Washington Sundar. At various points, the experienced professional and the fresh debutant joined forces and nourished miraculous dreams. The turn-around at Melbourne was followed by the stone-walling at Sydney. Finally, in a long tour that commenced on November 12, last year, a second-wind was found in the climax. India did not have any of its frontline bowlers at Brisbane but Mohammed Siraj astutely helmed the attack and Tim Paine’s men were defeated by three wickets.

Winning a Test series against Australia in its backyard is considered as cricket’s highest benchmark for excellence. This yardstick has lasted for two decades ever since the previous dominant outfit, the West Indies, suffered a decline. Seen in that context, what India has achieved over the course of two tours — in 2018-19 and the just concluded 2020-21 face-off — is nothing short of stupendous. Twice, India has defeated Australia by identical margins (2-1). However, the latest act will rank right up in an all-time list of great Test series ever since the sport’s longest format commenced at Melbourne in 1877. When India last toured Australia, the host was blighted by the ball-tampering scandal and Steve Smith and David Warner were rightly put to pasture. Cut to the present, the visitor was up against a full-strength home unit. These are fraught times due to the pandemic and resultant bio-bubble angst, and even stepping out for a coffee is deemed an offence. To make it worse, India was never at its optimum potential and with every passing day, its list of the walking-wounded grew. There were even wry jokes about how coach Ravi Shastri may be forced to turn out considering his diminishing resources. But India thrived and just like it did at Eden Gardens in 2001, adversity became its springboard for success against an old adversary.

Q. Which of the following is true with regards to the Border Gavaskar trophy in accordance to the passage?

On a magical Tuesday, India’s cricketing history gained a luminous chapter even as the shadows lengthened at Brisbane’s Gabba. When Rishabh Pant’s winning four aptly concluded a tense pursuit of 328 on a nerve-wracking fifth day of the fourth Test, Ajinkya Rahane’s men seized the series at 2-1 to retain (no of times) the Border-Gavaskar Trophy. As far as role-reversals go, this was stunning in its execution and jaw-dropping in its impact. It was a verdict that seemed improbable after India’s 36, its lowest ever Test score, during the debilitating loss in the first game at Adelaide. But India progressed despite losing personnel to injuries or personal reasons. Skipper Virat Kohli took paternity leave while other regulars had to be benched following a spate of injuries. Yet, Rahane’s men persevered, right from the established Cheteshwar Pujara and R. Ashwin to the latest rookies in the squad — Shubman Gill and Washington Sundar. At various points, the experienced professional and the fresh debutant joined forces and nourished miraculous dreams. The turn-around at Melbourne was followed by the stone-walling at Sydney. Finally, in a long tour that commenced on November 12, last year, a second-wind was found in the climax. India did not have any of its frontline bowlers at Brisbane but Mohammed Siraj astutely helmed the attack and Tim Paine’s men were defeated by three wickets.

Winning a Test series against Australia in its backyard is considered as cricket’s highest benchmark for excellence. This yardstick has lasted for two decades ever since the previous dominant outfit, the West Indies, suffered a decline. Seen in that context, what India has achieved over the course of two tours — in 2018-19 and the just concluded 2020-21 face-off — is nothing short of stupendous. Twice, India has defeated Australia by identical margins (2-1). However, the latest act will rank right up in an all-time list of great Test series ever since the sport’s longest format commenced at Melbourne in 1877. When India last toured Australia, the host was blighted by the ball-tampering scandal and Steve Smith and David Warner were rightly put to pasture. Cut to the present, the visitor was up against a full-strength home unit. These are fraught times due to the pandemic and resultant bio-bubble angst, and even stepping out for a coffee is deemed an offence. To make it worse, India was never at its optimum potential and with every passing day, its list of the walking-wounded grew. There were even wry jokes about how coach Ravi Shastri may be forced to turn out considering his diminishing resources. But India thrived and just like it did at Eden Gardens in 2001, adversity became its springboard for success against an old adversary.

Q. Which of the following is the meaning of the word debilitating?

On a magical Tuesday, India’s cricketing history gained a luminous chapter even as the shadows lengthened at Brisbane’s Gabba. When Rishabh Pant’s winning four aptly concluded a tense pursuit of 328 on a nerve-wracking fifth day of the fourth Test, Ajinkya Rahane’s men seized the series at 2-1 to retain (no of times) the Border-Gavaskar Trophy. As far as role-reversals go, this was stunning in its execution and jaw-dropping in its impact. It was a verdict that seemed improbable after India’s 36, its lowest ever Test score, during the debilitating loss in the first game at Adelaide. But India progressed despite losing personnel to injuries or personal reasons. Skipper Virat Kohli took paternity leave while other regulars had to be benched following a spate of injuries. Yet, Rahane’s men persevered, right from the established Cheteshwar Pujara and R. Ashwin to the latest rookies in the squad — Shubman Gill and Washington Sundar. At various points, the experienced professional and the fresh debutant joined forces and nourished miraculous dreams. The turn-around at Melbourne was followed by the stone-walling at Sydney. Finally, in a long tour that commenced on November 12, last year, a second-wind was found in the climax. India did not have any of its frontline bowlers at Brisbane but Mohammed Siraj astutely helmed the attack and Tim Paine’s men were defeated by three wickets.

Winning a Test series against Australia in its backyard is considered as cricket’s highest benchmark for excellence. This yardstick has lasted for two decades ever since the previous dominant outfit, the West Indies, suffered a decline. Seen in that context, what India has achieved over the course of two tours — in 2018-19 and the just concluded 2020-21 face-off — is nothing short of stupendous. Twice, India has defeated Australia by identical margins (2-1). However, the latest act will rank right up in an all-time list of great Test series ever since the sport’s longest format commenced at Melbourne in 1877. When India last toured Australia, the host was blighted by the ball-tampering scandal and Steve Smith and David Warner were rightly put to pasture. Cut to the present, the visitor was up against a full-strength home unit. These are fraught times due to the pandemic and resultant bio-bubble angst, and even stepping out for a coffee is deemed an offence. To make it worse, India was never at its optimum potential and with every passing day, its list of the walking-wounded grew. There were even wry jokes about how coach Ravi Shastri may be forced to turn out considering his diminishing resources. But India thrived and just like it did at Eden Gardens in 2001, adversity became its springboard for success against an old adversary.

Q. Which of the following is true on the basis of the passage?

1. David Warner is a debutant in the current series from the Australian Team

2. There has been no experienced player which played the series against Australia

3. The test series was of 4 matches

Each year, thousands of children die worldwide and the childhoods and development of millions more are scarred by harmful practices perpetrated by parents, relatives, religious and community leaders and other adults.

Violations of children’s rights can legitimately be described as harmful practices, but the common characteristic of the violations is that they are based on tradition, culture, religion or superstition and are perpetrated and actively condoned by the child’s parents or significant adults within the child’s community. Indeed, they often enjoy majority support within communities or whole states.

Many identified practices involve gross and unlawful discrimination against groups of children, including gender discrimination, and discrimination against children with disabilities. The practices are based on tradition and/or superstition, religious belief, false information or beliefs about child development and health. Many involve extreme physical violence and pain, leading in some cases intentionally, to death or serious injury. Others involve mental violence. All are an assault on the child’s human dignity and violate universally agreed international human rights standards.

The continued legality and social and cultural acceptance of a very wide range of these practices in many states illustrates a devastating failure of human rights mechanisms to provoke the necessary challenge, prohibition and elimination. Comprehensive, children’s rights-based analysis and action are needed now. Above all, there must be an assertion of every state’s immediate obligation to ensure all children their right to full respect for their human dignity and physical integrity.

Harmful practices are often committed against very young children or infants, who are clearly lacking the capacity to consent or to refuse consent themselves. Assumptions of parental powers or rights over their children allow the perpetration of a wide range of these practices, either by parents directly, or by others with parents’ consent. Yet the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) favours the replacement of the concept of parental “rights” over children with parental “responsibilities,” ensuring that the child’s best interests are parents’ “basic concern”.

The CRC also upholds the child’s own independent right to religious freedom (Article 14). Children are not born into a religion. Every individual has the right to religious freedom. Thus, parents and others cannot quote their adult religious beliefs to justify perpetrating harmful practices on a child, before she or he has the capacity to provide informed consent.

Q. Which of these are not characteristics of the nature of harmful practices that violate children’s rights?

Each year, thousands of children die worldwide and the childhoods and development of millions more are scarred by harmful practices perpetrated by parents, relatives, religious and community leaders and other adults.

Violations of children’s rights can legitimately be described as harmful practices, but the common characteristic of the violations is that they are based on tradition, culture, religion or superstition and are perpetrated and actively condoned by the child’s parents or significant adults within the child’s community. Indeed, they often enjoy majority support within communities or whole states.

Many identified practices involve gross and unlawful discrimination against groups of children, including gender discrimination, and discrimination against children with disabilities. The practices are based on tradition and/or superstition, religious belief, false information or beliefs about child development and health. Many involve extreme physical violence and pain, leading in some cases intentionally, to death or serious injury. Others involve mental violence. All are an assault on the child’s human dignity and violate universally agreed international human rights standards.

The continued legality and social and cultural acceptance of a very wide range of these practices in many states illustrates a devastating failure of human rights mechanisms to provoke the necessary challenge, prohibition and elimination. Comprehensive, children’s rights-based analysis and action are needed now. Above all, there must be an assertion of every state’s immediate obligation to ensure all children their right to full respect for their human dignity and physical integrity.

Harmful practices are often committed against very young children or infants, who are clearly lacking the capacity to consent or to refuse consent themselves. Assumptions of parental powers or rights over their children allow the perpetration of a wide range of these practices, either by parents directly, or by others with parents’ consent. Yet the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) favours the replacement of the concept of parental “rights” over children with parental “responsibilities,” ensuring that the child’s best interests are parents’ “basic concern”.

The CRC also upholds the child’s own independent right to religious freedom (Article 14). Children are not born into a religion. Every individual has the right to religious freedom. Thus, parents and others cannot quote their adult religious beliefs to justify perpetrating harmful practices on a child, before she or he has the capacity to provide informed consent.

Q. Which of these is true with respect to the government and child rights?

Each year, thousands of children die worldwide and the childhoods and development of millions more are scarred by harmful practices perpetrated by parents, relatives, religious and community leaders and other adults.

Violations of children’s rights can legitimately be described as harmful practices, but the common characteristic of the violations is that they are based on tradition, culture, religion or superstition and are perpetrated and actively condoned by the child’s parents or significant adults within the child’s community. Indeed, they often enjoy majority support within communities or whole states.

Many identified practices involve gross and unlawful discrimination against groups of children, including gender discrimination, and discrimination against children with disabilities. The practices are based on tradition and/or superstition, religious belief, false information or beliefs about child development and health. Many involve extreme physical violence and pain, leading in some cases intentionally, to death or serious injury. Others involve mental violence. All are an assault on the child’s human dignity and violate universally agreed international human rights standards.

The continued legality and social and cultural acceptance of a very wide range of these practices in many states illustrates a devastating failure of human rights mechanisms to provoke the necessary challenge, prohibition and elimination. Comprehensive, children’s rights-based analysis and action are needed now. Above all, there must be an assertion of every state’s immediate obligation to ensure all children their right to full respect for their human dignity and physical integrity.

Harmful practices are often committed against very young children or infants, who are clearly lacking the capacity to consent or to refuse consent themselves. Assumptions of parental powers or rights over their children allow the perpetration of a wide range of these practices, either by parents directly, or by others with parents’ consent. Yet the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) favours the replacement of the concept of parental “rights” over children with parental “responsibilities,” ensuring that the child’s best interests are parents’ “basic concern”.

The CRC also upholds the child’s own independent right to religious freedom (Article 14). Children are not born into a religion. Every individual has the right to religious freedom. Thus, parents and others cannot quote their adult religious beliefs to justify perpetrating harmful practices on a child, before she or he has the capacity to provide informed consent.

Q. According to the passage, why are harmful practices easy to carry out against young children?

Each year, thousands of children die worldwide and the childhoods and development of millions more are scarred by harmful practices perpetrated by parents, relatives, religious and community leaders and other adults.

Violations of children’s rights can legitimately be described as harmful practices, but the common characteristic of the violations is that they are based on tradition, culture, religion or superstition and are perpetrated and actively condoned by the child’s parents or significant adults within the child’s community. Indeed, they often enjoy majority support within communities or whole states.

Many identified practices involve gross and unlawful discrimination against groups of children, including gender discrimination, and discrimination against children with disabilities. The practices are based on tradition and/or superstition, religious belief, false information or beliefs about child development and health. Many involve extreme physical violence and pain, leading in some cases intentionally, to death or serious injury. Others involve mental violence. All are an assault on the child’s human dignity and violate universally agreed international human rights standards.

The continued legality and social and cultural acceptance of a very wide range of these practices in many states illustrates a devastating failure of human rights mechanisms to provoke the necessary challenge, prohibition and elimination. Comprehensive, children’s rights-based analysis and action are needed now. Above all, there must be an assertion of every state’s immediate obligation to ensure all children their right to full respect for their human dignity and physical integrity.

Harmful practices are often committed against very young children or infants, who are clearly lacking the capacity to consent or to refuse consent themselves. Assumptions of parental powers or rights over their children allow the perpetration of a wide range of these practices, either by parents directly, or by others with parents’ consent. Yet the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) favours the replacement of the concept of parental “rights” over children with parental “responsibilities,” ensuring that the child’s best interests are parents’ “basic concern”.

The CRC also upholds the child’s own independent right to religious freedom (Article 14). Children are not born into a religion. Every individual has the right to religious freedom. Thus, parents and others cannot quote their adult religious beliefs to justify perpetrating harmful practices on a child, before she or he has the capacity to provide informed consent.

Q. Fill in the following blank correctly. Over the years, many unlawful practices _____ scarred children.

Each year, thousands of children die worldwide and the childhoods and development of millions more are scarred by harmful practices perpetrated by parents, relatives, religious and community leaders and other adults.

Violations of children’s rights can legitimately be described as harmful practices, but the common characteristic of the violations is that they are based on tradition, culture, religion or superstition and are perpetrated and actively condoned by the child’s parents or significant adults within the child’s community. Indeed, they often enjoy majority support within communities or whole states.

Many identified practices involve gross and unlawful discrimination against groups of children, including gender discrimination, and discrimination against children with disabilities. The practices are based on tradition and/or superstition, religious belief, false information or beliefs about child development and health. Many involve extreme physical violence and pain, leading in some cases intentionally, to death or serious injury. Others involve mental violence. All are an assault on the child’s human dignity and violate universally agreed international human rights standards.

The continued legality and social and cultural acceptance of a very wide range of these practices in many states illustrates a devastating failure of human rights mechanisms to provoke the necessary challenge, prohibition and elimination. Comprehensive, children’s rights-based analysis and action are needed now. Above all, there must be an assertion of every state’s immediate obligation to ensure all children their right to full respect for their human dignity and physical integrity.

Harmful practices are often committed against very young children or infants, who are clearly lacking the capacity to consent or to refuse consent themselves. Assumptions of parental powers or rights over their children allow the perpetration of a wide range of these practices, either by parents directly, or by others with parents’ consent. Yet the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) favours the replacement of the concept of parental “rights” over children with parental “responsibilities,” ensuring that the child’s best interests are parents’ “basic concern”.

The CRC also upholds the child’s own independent right to religious freedom (Article 14). Children are not born into a religion. Every individual has the right to religious freedom. Thus, parents and others cannot quote their adult religious beliefs to justify perpetrating harmful practices on a child, before she or he has the capacity to provide informed consent.

Q. Which set of words below contains the correct set of antonyms for all of the following words: perpetrate, condone, universal, devastating

Dieting and weight loss/management has long been a driver of failure more often due to the haze of less or half-knowledge of the subject than lack of motivation. The human brain, after years and years of practice with the social media feeds and in-a-day deliveries of Amazon couriers has, unfortunately but successfully become nonchalant to long-term goals and practices of patience in life. So much so, that now when a person x feels like losing weight and looks it up, this person's brain will automatically only want for him/her to look out for results and plans that don't take much time to achieve. Health related searches on Google and YouTube alone are enough to prove the point, where most searches that started with 'How To Lose Weight' almost mostly ended with the words 'in 1, 2 or 3 Weeks/Months'.

Dieting is one such misconception where a huge chunk of dieters and hopeful followers of a prospectively healthy lifestyle fail to be aware of the simplest of principles in their lives, which is, if you begin your journey towards health by putting your body in a constant position of negative struggle and make it crave what it should be getting in abundance, you can only prolong your agony and finally give up harder than you began.

A common misconception surrounding weight loss is to eat less, and I say 'misconception' for the reason that it's not the principle that's essentially flawed here, it's the false practice of it which makes things go south for most.

When we eat, we eat for taste and we eat for satiation. What we don't do is eat to just survive, that's too ancient for us to even consider at this point in time. So coming back to the first line, we eat for taste which satisfies us, but the important part to look out for here is 'satiation'. Being satiated essentially means to stay satisfied after you eat, till your next meal of course. Satisfaction occurs when we realise that we're full and won't need another round of serving on our plates, but food giants such as Domino's and McDonald's have made it their aspiration and drive in life to erase that line of satiation completely inside our heads, and re-wire, then hard-wire us to binge-eat. Clever marketing and enhanced imagery of food products and competitive pricing through the years have led people to sit and eat way over their point of satiation, which over-time does make their brains believe that their point of satiation lies post-binge rather than mid-binge.

Q. As per the author, humans have become nonchalant to long-term goals and practices of patience in life due to which of the following reasons?

Dieting and weight loss/management has long been a driver of failure more often due to the haze of less or half-knowledge of the subject than lack of motivation. The human brain, after years and years of practice with the social media feeds and in-a-day deliveries of Amazon couriers has, unfortunately but successfully become nonchalant to long-term goals and practices of patience in life. So much so, that now when a person x feels like losing weight and looks it up, this person's brain will automatically only want for him/her to look out for results and plans that don't take much time to achieve. Health related searches on Google and YouTube alone are enough to prove the point, where most searches that started with 'How To Lose Weight' almost mostly ended with the words 'in 1, 2 or 3 Weeks/Months'.

Dieting is one such misconception where a huge chunk of dieters and hopeful followers of a prospectively healthy lifestyle fail to be aware of the simplest of principles in their lives, which is, if you begin your journey towards health by putting your body in a constant position of negative struggle and make it crave what it should be getting in abundance, you can only prolong your agony and finally give up harder than you began.

A common misconception surrounding weight loss is to eat less, and I say 'misconception' for the reason that it's not the principle that's essentially flawed here, it's the false practice of it which makes things go south for most.

When we eat, we eat for taste and we eat for satiation. What we don't do is eat to just survive, that's too ancient for us to even consider at this point in time. So coming back to the first line, we eat for taste which satisfies us, but the important part to look out for here is 'satiation'. Being satiated essentially means to stay satisfied after you eat, till your next meal of course. Satisfaction occurs when we realise that we're full and won't need another round of serving on our plates, but food giants such as Domino's and McDonald's have made it their aspiration and drive in life to erase that line of satiation completely inside our heads, and re-wire, then hard-wire us to binge-eat. Clever marketing and enhanced imagery of food products and competitive pricing through the years have led people to sit and eat way over their point of satiation, which over-time does make their brains believe that their point of satiation lies post-binge rather than mid-binge.

Q. What is the misconception surrounding dieting as per the author?

Dieting and weight loss/management has long been a driver of failure more often due to the haze of less or half-knowledge of the subject than lack of motivation. The human brain, after years and years of practice with the social media feeds and in-a-day deliveries of Amazon couriers has, unfortunately but successfully become nonchalant to long-term goals and practices of patience in life. So much so, that now when a person x feels like losing weight and looks it up, this person's brain will automatically only want for him/her to look out for results and plans that don't take much time to achieve. Health related searches on Google and YouTube alone are enough to prove the point, where most searches that started with 'How To Lose Weight' almost mostly ended with the words 'in 1, 2 or 3 Weeks/Months'.

Dieting is one such misconception where a huge chunk of dieters and hopeful followers of a prospectively healthy lifestyle fail to be aware of the simplest of principles in their lives, which is, if you begin your journey towards health by putting your body in a constant position of negative struggle and make it crave what it should be getting in abundance, you can only prolong your agony and finally give up harder than you began.

A common misconception surrounding weight loss is to eat less, and I say 'misconception' for the reason that it's not the principle that's essentially flawed here, it's the false practice of it which makes things go south for most.

When we eat, we eat for taste and we eat for satiation. What we don't do is eat to just survive, that's too ancient for us to even consider at this point in time. So coming back to the first line, we eat for taste which satisfies us, but the important part to look out for here is 'satiation'. Being satiated essentially means to stay satisfied after you eat, till your next meal of course. Satisfaction occurs when we realise that we're full and won't need another round of serving on our plates, but food giants such as Domino's and McDonald's have made it their aspiration and drive in life to erase that line of satiation completely inside our heads, and re-wire, then hard-wire us to binge-eat. Clever marketing and enhanced imagery of food products and competitive pricing through the years have led people to sit and eat way over their point of satiation, which over-time does make their brains believe that their point of satiation lies post-binge rather than mid-binge.

Q. What does satiation mean as per the author above?

Dieting and weight loss/management has long been a driver of failure more often due to the haze of less or half-knowledge of the subject than lack of motivation. The human brain, after years and years of practice with the social media feeds and in-a-day deliveries of Amazon couriers has, unfortunately but successfully become nonchalant to long-term goals and practices of patience in life. So much so, that now when a person x feels like losing weight and looks it up, this person's brain will automatically only want for him/her to look out for results and plans that don't take much time to achieve. Health related searches on Google and YouTube alone are enough to prove the point, where most searches that started with 'How To Lose Weight' almost mostly ended with the words 'in 1, 2 or 3 Weeks/Months'.

Dieting is one such misconception where a huge chunk of dieters and hopeful followers of a prospectively healthy lifestyle fail to be aware of the simplest of principles in their lives, which is, if you begin your journey towards health by putting your body in a constant position of negative struggle and make it crave what it should be getting in abundance, you can only prolong your agony and finally give up harder than you began.

A common misconception surrounding weight loss is to eat less, and I say 'misconception' for the reason that it's not the principle that's essentially flawed here, it's the false practice of it which makes things go south for most.

When we eat, we eat for taste and we eat for satiation. What we don't do is eat to just survive, that's too ancient for us to even consider at this point in time. So coming back to the first line, we eat for taste which satisfies us, but the important part to look out for here is 'satiation'. Being satiated essentially means to stay satisfied after you eat, till your next meal of course. Satisfaction occurs when we realise that we're full and won't need another round of serving on our plates, but food giants such as Domino's and McDonald's have made it their aspiration and drive in life to erase that line of satiation completely inside our heads, and re-wire, then hard-wire us to binge-eat. Clever marketing and enhanced imagery of food products and competitive pricing through the years have led people to sit and eat way over their point of satiation, which over-time does make their brains believe that their point of satiation lies post-binge rather than mid-binge.

Q. According to the author, food giants such as Domino's and McDonald's have cast what effect on our satiation levels?

Dieting and weight loss/management has long been a driver of failure more often due to the haze of less or half-knowledge of the subject than lack of motivation. The human brain, after years and years of practice with the social media feeds and in-a-day deliveries of Amazon couriers has, unfortunately but successfully become nonchalant to long-term goals and practices of patience in life. So much so, that now when a person x feels like losing weight and looks it up, this person's brain will automatically only want for him/her to look out for results and plans that don't take much time to achieve. Health related searches on Google and YouTube alone are enough to prove the point, where most searches that started with 'How To Lose Weight' almost mostly ended with the words 'in 1, 2 or 3 Weeks/Months'.

Dieting is one such misconception where a huge chunk of dieters and hopeful followers of a prospectively healthy lifestyle fail to be aware of the simplest of principles in their lives, which is, if you begin your journey towards health by putting your body in a constant position of negative struggle and make it crave what it should be getting in abundance, you can only prolong your agony and finally give up harder than you began.

A common misconception surrounding weight loss is to eat less, and I say 'misconception' for the reason that it's not the principle that's essentially flawed here, it's the false practice of it which makes things go south for most.

When we eat, we eat for taste and we eat for satiation. What we don't do is eat to just survive, that's too ancient for us to even consider at this point in time. So coming back to the first line, we eat for taste which satisfies us, but the important part to look out for here is 'satiation'. Being satiated essentially means to stay satisfied after you eat, till your next meal of course. Satisfaction occurs when we realise that we're full and won't need another round of serving on our plates, but food giants such as Domino's and McDonald's have made it their aspiration and drive in life to erase that line of satiation completely inside our heads, and re-wire, then hard-wire us to binge-eat. Clever marketing and enhanced imagery of food products and competitive pricing through the years have led people to sit and eat way over their point of satiation, which over-time does make their brains believe that their point of satiation lies post-binge rather than mid-binge.

Q. Which of the following results in failure of dieting?

The [X] Assembly has unanimously passed a resolution seeking the inclusion of Sarna as a separate religion in Census, 2021. Chief Minister Hemant Soren said the resolution, passed during a special one-day Assembly session on Wednesday, will now be sent to the Centre for approval.

The opposition parties gave a proposal demanding a discussion on the resolution, which Speaker Rabindra Nath Mahato accepted. BJP legislators proposed an amendment to the resolution seeking removal of the oblique from ‘tribal/Sarna’ word in it. Soren said his government is sensitive to people’s sentiments and accepted the amendment, after which all the parties supported the resolution.

Q. What is state [X] mentioned in the passage?

The [X] Assembly has unanimously passed a resolution seeking the inclusion of Sarna as a separate religion in Census, 2021. Chief Minister Hemant Soren said the resolution, passed during a special one-day Assembly session on Wednesday, will now be sent to the Centre for approval.

The opposition parties gave a proposal demanding a discussion on the resolution, which Speaker Rabindra Nath Mahato accepted. BJP legislators proposed an amendment to the resolution seeking removal of the oblique from ‘tribal/Sarna’ word in it. Soren said his government is sensitive to people’s sentiments and accepted the amendment, after which all the parties supported the resolution.

Q. Which of the following statement is true about Sarna Code?

The [X] Assembly has unanimously passed a resolution seeking the inclusion of Sarna as a separate religion in Census, 2021. Chief Minister Hemant Soren said the resolution, passed during a special one-day Assembly session on Wednesday, will now be sent to the Centre for approval.

The opposition parties gave a proposal demanding a discussion on the resolution, which Speaker Rabindra Nath Mahato accepted. BJP legislators proposed an amendment to the resolution seeking removal of the oblique from ‘tribal/Sarna’ word in it. Soren said his government is sensitive to people’s sentiments and accepted the amendment, after which all the parties supported the resolution.

Q. Name the e-newsletter on health and nutrition which was released by Tribal Affairs ministry.

The [X] Assembly has unanimously passed a resolution seeking the inclusion of Sarna as a separate religion in Census, 2021. Chief Minister Hemant Soren said the resolution, passed during a special one-day Assembly session on Wednesday, will now be sent to the Centre for approval.

The opposition parties gave a proposal demanding a discussion on the resolution, which Speaker Rabindra Nath Mahato accepted. BJP legislators proposed an amendment to the resolution seeking removal of the oblique from ‘tribal/Sarna’ word in it. Soren said his government is sensitive to people’s sentiments and accepted the amendment, after which all the parties supported the resolution.

Q. Which state has passed an Ordinance against forced religious conversions?

The [X] Assembly has unanimously passed a resolution seeking the inclusion of Sarna as a separate religion in Census, 2021. Chief Minister Hemant Soren said the resolution, passed during a special one-day Assembly session on Wednesday, will now be sent to the Centre for approval.

The opposition parties gave a proposal demanding a discussion on the resolution, which Speaker Rabindra Nath Mahato accepted. BJP legislators proposed an amendment to the resolution seeking removal of the oblique from ‘tribal/Sarna’ word in it. Soren said his government is sensitive to people’s sentiments and accepted the amendment, after which all the parties supported the resolution.

Q. Which article deals with the right to freedom of religion?

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) on Wednesday expanded the ambit of cases pertaining to pollution due to firecrackers beyond the [X] and issued notice to 18 States and Union Territories where the air quality is beyond permissible limits.

A Bench headed by NGT chairperson Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel observed that notices had already been issued to the State governments of Delhi, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh while Odisha and Rajasthan governments have already issued notices stating ban on firecrackers in the respective States.

The tribunal in its order said: “With respect to non attainment of cities, where air quality as per record maintained by the CPCB is generally beyond norms, which are 122 in number, the tribunal may have to consider direction to prohibit use of firecrackers during the period air quality is beyond a threshold to protect the health of vulnerable groups.

Q. What is [X] mentioned in the passage?

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) on Wednesday expanded the ambit of cases pertaining to pollution due to firecrackers beyond the [X] and issued notice to 18 States and Union Territories where the air quality is beyond permissible limits.

A Bench headed by NGT chairperson Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel observed that notices had already been issued to the State governments of Delhi, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh while Odisha and Rajasthan governments have already issued notices stating ban on firecrackers in the respective States.

The tribunal in its order said: “With respect to non attainment of cities, where air quality as per record maintained by the CPCB is generally beyond norms, which are 122 in number, the tribunal may have to consider direction to prohibit use of firecrackers during the period air quality is beyond a threshold to protect the health of vulnerable groups.

Q. Which city has been ranked as most polluted city in the world as per Air Pollution Data Released by US Air Quality Index?

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) on Wednesday expanded the ambit of cases pertaining to pollution due to firecrackers beyond the [X] and issued notice to 18 States and Union Territories where the air quality is beyond permissible limits.

A Bench headed by NGT chairperson Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel observed that notices had already been issued to the State governments of Delhi, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh while Odisha and Rajasthan governments have already issued notices stating ban on firecrackers in the respective States.

The tribunal in its order said: “With respect to non attainment of cities, where air quality as per record maintained by the CPCB is generally beyond norms, which are 122 in number, the tribunal may have to consider direction to prohibit use of firecrackers during the period air quality is beyond a threshold to protect the health of vulnerable groups.

Q. Which of the following is not true about the NGT order?

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) on Wednesday expanded the ambit of cases pertaining to pollution due to firecrackers beyond the [X] and issued notice to 18 States and Union Territories where the air quality is beyond permissible limits.

A Bench headed by NGT chairperson Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel observed that notices had already been issued to the State governments of Delhi, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh while Odisha and Rajasthan governments have already issued notices stating ban on firecrackers in the respective States.

The tribunal in its order said: “With respect to non attainment of cities, where air quality as per record maintained by the CPCB is generally beyond norms, which are 122 in number, the tribunal may have to consider direction to prohibit use of firecrackers during the period air quality is beyond a threshold to protect the health of vulnerable groups.

Q. How is the NGT different from the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB)?

1. The National Green Tribunal has been established by an Act whereas the CPCB has been created by an executive order of the Government

2. The National Green Tribunal provides environmental justice and helps reduce the burden of litigation in the higher courts where the CPCB promotes cleanliness of streams and wells, and aims to improve the quality of air in the country Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) on Wednesday expanded the ambit of cases pertaining to pollution due to firecrackers beyond the [X] and issued notice to 18 States and Union Territories where the air quality is beyond permissible limits.

A Bench headed by NGT chairperson Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel observed that notices had already been issued to the State governments of Delhi, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh while Odisha and Rajasthan governments have already issued notices stating ban on firecrackers in the respective States.

The tribunal in its order said: “With respect to non attainment of cities, where air quality as per record maintained by the CPCB is generally beyond norms, which are 122 in number, the tribunal may have to consider direction to prohibit use of firecrackers during the period air quality is beyond a threshold to protect the health of vulnerable groups.

Q. Which of the following statements is/are correct about National Green Tribunal (NGT)?

1. Establishment of NGT made National Environment Appellate Authority defunct.

2. Mumbai is one of the place of sitting of Tribunal.

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) on Wednesday expanded the ambit of cases pertaining to pollution due to firecrackers beyond the [X] and issued notice to 18 States and Union Territories where the air quality is beyond permissible limits.

A Bench headed by NGT chairperson Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel observed that notices had already been issued to the State governments of Delhi, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh while Odisha and Rajasthan governments have already issued notices stating ban on firecrackers in the respective States.

The tribunal in its order said: “With respect to non attainment of cities, where air quality as per record maintained by the CPCB is generally beyond norms, which are 122 in number, the tribunal may have to consider direction to prohibit use of firecrackers during the period air quality is beyond a threshold to protect the health of vulnerable groups.

Q. National Green Tribunal was established in the year____?

The government of [X], in order to give a major boost to the adoption of electric vehicles in the state, has passed an order that allows the 100% exemption of motor vehicle tax for battery-operated vehicles.

As per the order dated November 2, 2020, by the state government, all BOVs, both non-transport and transport have been exempted from the payment of Motor Vehicles Tax from November 3, 2020, to December 31, 2022.

Earlier, the state government had issued orders for the 50% concessional rate of lifetime tax in respect of battery-operated four-wheelers and two-wheelers of non-transport vehicles. However, the transport minister made a request for a 100% exemption.

Q. What is the state [X] mentioned in the passage?

The government of [X], in order to give a major boost to the adoption of electric vehicles in the state, has passed an order that allows the 100% exemption of motor vehicle tax for battery-operated vehicles.

As per the order dated November 2, 2020, by the state government, all BOVs, both non-transport and transport have been exempted from the payment of Motor Vehicles Tax from November 3, 2020, to December 31, 2022.

Earlier, the state government had issued orders for the 50% concessional rate of lifetime tax in respect of battery-operated four-wheelers and two-wheelers of non-transport vehicles. However, the transport minister made a request for a 100% exemption.

Q. Which of the following steps is not taken by state [X] an attractive centre for electric mobility?

The government of [X], in order to give a major boost to the adoption of electric vehicles in the state, has passed an order that allows the 100% exemption of motor vehicle tax for battery-operated vehicles.

As per the order dated November 2, 2020, by the state government, all BOVs, both non-transport and transport have been exempted from the payment of Motor Vehicles Tax from November 3, 2020, to December 31, 2022.

Earlier, the state government had issued orders for the 50% concessional rate of lifetime tax in respect of battery-operated four-wheelers and two-wheelers of non-transport vehicles. However, the transport minister made a request for a 100% exemption.

Q. Which state recently announced a new Electric Vehicle Policy, has offered a 100% exemption in road tax and registration fees for early adopters in EV segments.

The government of [X], in order to give a major boost to the adoption of electric vehicles in the state, has passed an order that allows the 100% exemption of motor vehicle tax for battery-operated vehicles.

As per the order dated November 2, 2020, by the state government, all BOVs, both non-transport and transport have been exempted from the payment of Motor Vehicles Tax from November 3, 2020, to December 31, 2022.

Earlier, the state government had issued orders for the 50% concessional rate of lifetime tax in respect of battery-operated four-wheelers and two-wheelers of non-transport vehicles. However, the transport minister made a request for a 100% exemption.

Q. Which Ministry has released a draft notification which proposed to waive registration charges for electric vehicles?

The government of [X], in order to give a major boost to the adoption of electric vehicles in the state, has passed an order that allows the 100% exemption of motor vehicle tax for battery-operated vehicles.

As per the order dated November 2, 2020, by the state government, all BOVs, both non-transport and transport have been exempted from the payment of Motor Vehicles Tax from November 3, 2020, to December 31, 2022.

Earlier, the state government had issued orders for the 50% concessional rate of lifetime tax in respect of battery-operated four-wheelers and two-wheelers of non-transport vehicles. However, the transport minister made a request for a 100% exemption.

Q. Which Indian PSU signed MoU with Energy Efficiency Service Limited (EESL) for installing 1000 public Electrical Vehicle charging stations?

The government of [X], in order to give a major boost to the adoption of electric vehicles in the state, has passed an order that allows the 100% exemption of motor vehicle tax for battery-operated vehicles.

As per the order dated November 2, 2020, by the state government, all BOVs, both non-transport and transport have been exempted from the payment of Motor Vehicles Tax from November 3, 2020, to December 31, 2022.

Earlier, the state government had issued orders for the 50% concessional rate of lifetime tax in respect of battery-operated four-wheelers and two-wheelers of non-transport vehicles. However, the transport minister made a request for a 100% exemption.

Q. Which of the following state/UT also launched its ambitious Electric Vehicle Policy?

In a first, [X] Indian beaches have been awarded the prestigious Blue Flag certification. Union Environment Minister Prakash Javadekar shared the news through a post on Twitter on October 11, 2020.

The Union Minister tweeted saying that it is a proud moment for India, as all 8 beaches recommended by the Indian government have been given the coveted International Blue Flag Certification.

The Union Minister further stated that the Blue Flag certification was accorded to India's [X] beaches, , spread across five states and two union territories, by an international jury comprising eminent members including the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), World Tourism Organization (UNWTO), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and Foundation for Environmental Education (FEE).

Q. How many beaches in India are awarded with Blue Flag certification?

In a first, [X] Indian beaches have been awarded the prestigious Blue Flag certification. Union Environment Minister Prakash Javadekar shared the news through a post on Twitter on October 11, 2020.

The Union Minister tweeted saying that it is a proud moment for India, as all 8 beaches recommended by the Indian government have been given the coveted International Blue Flag Certification.

The Union Minister further stated that the Blue Flag certification was accorded to India's [X] beaches, , spread across five states and two union territories, by an international jury comprising eminent members including the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), World Tourism Organization (UNWTO), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and Foundation for Environmental Education (FEE).

Q. What is not true about Blue Flag certification?

In a first, [X] Indian beaches have been awarded the prestigious Blue Flag certification. Union Environment Minister Prakash Javadekar shared the news through a post on Twitter on October 11, 2020.

The Union Minister tweeted saying that it is a proud moment for India, as all 8 beaches recommended by the Indian government have been given the coveted International Blue Flag Certification.

The Union Minister further stated that the Blue Flag certification was accorded to India's [X] beaches, , spread across five states and two union territories, by an international jury comprising eminent members including the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), World Tourism Organization (UNWTO), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and Foundation for Environmental Education (FEE).

Q. Which country has highest number of Blue flag beaches?

In a first, [X] Indian beaches have been awarded the prestigious Blue Flag certification. Union Environment Minister Prakash Javadekar shared the news through a post on Twitter on October 11, 2020.

The Union Minister tweeted saying that it is a proud moment for India, as all 8 beaches recommended by the Indian government have been given the coveted International Blue Flag Certification.

The Union Minister further stated that the Blue Flag certification was accorded to India's [X] beaches, , spread across five states and two union territories, by an international jury comprising eminent members including the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), World Tourism Organization (UNWTO), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and Foundation for Environmental Education (FEE).

Q. Which of the following is not part of criteria for blue flag certification?

In a first, [X] Indian beaches have been awarded the prestigious Blue Flag certification. Union Environment Minister Prakash Javadekar shared the news through a post on Twitter on October 11, 2020.

The Union Minister tweeted saying that it is a proud moment for India, as all 8 beaches recommended by the Indian government have been given the coveted International Blue Flag Certification.

The Union Minister further stated that the Blue Flag certification was accorded to India's [X] beaches, , spread across five states and two union territories, by an international jury comprising eminent members including the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), World Tourism Organization (UNWTO), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and Foundation for Environmental Education (FEE).

Q. Which of the following is not among 'X' beaches received blue flag certification?

Reliance Industries Ltd., controlled by Asia’s richest man, toppled ExxonMobil Corp. to become the world’s largest energy company after [X], as investors piled into the conglomerate lured by the Indian firm’s digital and retail forays.

Reliance, which manages the biggest refinery complex, gained 4.3% in Mumbai on Friday adding $8 billion to take its market value to $189 billion, while Exxon Mobil erased about $1 billion. Reliance’s shares have jumped 43% this year compared with a 39% drop in Exxon’s shares as refiners across the globe struggled with a plunge in fuel demand. Aramco with a market capitalization of $1.76 trillion is the world’s biggest energy company. Globally, [X] has the highest market cap of $1.75 trillion, followed by Apple ($1.6 trillion), Microsoft ($1.5 trillion), Amazon ($1.48 trillion), and Alphabet ($1.03 trillion).

Reliance is the 10th highest m-cap company in Asia. China's [Y] Group is ranked seventh globally. Ambani’s dealmaking has lured investments from Google to Facebook Inc. into his digital platform in recent months. The 63-year-old tycoon has identified technology and retail as future growth areas in a pivot away from the energy businesses he inherited from his father who died in 2002.

Q. What is the largest company in the world in terms of market capitalization? [X] as mentioned in the passage?

Reliance Industries Ltd., controlled by Asia’s richest man, toppled ExxonMobil Corp. to become the world’s largest energy company after [X], as investors piled into the conglomerate lured by the Indian firm’s digital and retail forays.

Reliance, which manages the biggest refinery complex, gained 4.3% in Mumbai on Friday adding $8 billion to take its market value to $189 billion, while Exxon Mobil erased about $1 billion. Reliance’s shares have jumped 43% this year compared with a 39% drop in Exxon’s shares as refiners across the globe struggled with a plunge in fuel demand. Aramco with a market capitalization of $1.76 trillion is the world’s biggest energy company. Globally, [X] has the highest market cap of $1.75 trillion, followed by Apple ($1.6 trillion), Microsoft ($1.5 trillion), Amazon ($1.48 trillion), and Alphabet ($1.03 trillion).

Reliance is the 10th highest m-cap company in Asia. China's [Y] Group is ranked seventh globally. Ambani’s dealmaking has lured investments from Google to Facebook Inc. into his digital platform in recent months. The 63-year-old tycoon has identified technology and retail as future growth areas in a pivot away from the energy businesses he inherited from his father who died in 2002.

Q. Which Company in Asia is the largest in terms of market capitalisation? [Y] as mentioned in the passage?

Reliance Industries Ltd., controlled by Asia’s richest man, toppled ExxonMobil Corp. to become the world’s largest energy company after [X], as investors piled into the conglomerate lured by the Indian firm’s digital and retail forays.

Reliance, which manages the biggest refinery complex, gained 4.3% in Mumbai on Friday adding $8 billion to take its market value to $189 billion, while Exxon Mobil erased about $1 billion. Reliance’s shares have jumped 43% this year compared with a 39% drop in Exxon’s shares as refiners across the globe struggled with a plunge in fuel demand. Aramco with a market capitalization of $1.76 trillion is the world’s biggest energy company. Globally, [X] has the highest market cap of $1.75 trillion, followed by Apple ($1.6 trillion), Microsoft ($1.5 trillion), Amazon ($1.48 trillion), and Alphabet ($1.03 trillion).

Reliance is the 10th highest m-cap company in Asia. China's [Y] Group is ranked seventh globally. Ambani’s dealmaking has lured investments from Google to Facebook Inc. into his digital platform in recent months. The 63-year-old tycoon has identified technology and retail as future growth areas in a pivot away from the energy businesses he inherited from his father who died in 2002.

Q. Exxon Mobil belongs to which country?

Reliance Industries Ltd., controlled by Asia’s richest man, toppled ExxonMobil Corp. to become the world’s largest energy company after [X], as investors piled into the conglomerate lured by the Indian firm’s digital and retail forays.

Reliance, which manages the biggest refinery complex, gained 4.3% in Mumbai on Friday adding $8 billion to take its market value to $189 billion, while Exxon Mobil erased about $1 billion. Reliance’s shares have jumped 43% this year compared with a 39% drop in Exxon’s shares as refiners across the globe struggled with a plunge in fuel demand. Aramco with a market capitalization of $1.76 trillion is the world’s biggest energy company. Globally, [X] has the highest market cap of $1.75 trillion, followed by Apple ($1.6 trillion), Microsoft ($1.5 trillion), Amazon ($1.48 trillion), and Alphabet ($1.03 trillion).

Reliance is the 10th highest m-cap company in Asia. China's [Y] Group is ranked seventh globally. Ambani’s dealmaking has lured investments from Google to Facebook Inc. into his digital platform in recent months. The 63-year-old tycoon has identified technology and retail as future growth areas in a pivot away from the energy businesses he inherited from his father who died in 2002.

Q. Who is the world's First centibillionaire?

Reliance Industries Ltd., controlled by Asia’s richest man, toppled ExxonMobil Corp. to become the world’s largest energy company after [X], as investors piled into the conglomerate lured by the Indian firm’s digital and retail forays.

Reliance, which manages the biggest refinery complex, gained 4.3% in Mumbai on Friday adding $8 billion to take its market value to $189 billion, while Exxon Mobil erased about $1 billion. Reliance’s shares have jumped 43% this year compared with a 39% drop in Exxon’s shares as refiners across the globe struggled with a plunge in fuel demand. Aramco with a market capitalization of $1.76 trillion is the world’s biggest energy company. Globally, [X] has the highest market cap of $1.75 trillion, followed by Apple ($1.6 trillion), Microsoft ($1.5 trillion), Amazon ($1.48 trillion), and Alphabet ($1.03 trillion).

Reliance is the 10th highest m-cap company in Asia. China's [Y] Group is ranked seventh globally. Ambani’s dealmaking has lured investments from Google to Facebook Inc. into his digital platform in recent months. The 63-year-old tycoon has identified technology and retail as future growth areas in a pivot away from the energy businesses he inherited from his father who died in 2002.

Q. Google and Facebook recently invested in which arm of Reliance Industries?

China has launched its first rover mission to Mars. The six-wheeled robot, encapsulated in a protective probe, was lifted off Earth by a Long March 5 rocket from the Wenchang spaceport on Hainan Island at 12:40 local time (04:40 GMT). It should arrive in orbit around the Red Planet in February. Called [X], or "Questions to Heaven", the rover won't actually try to land on the surface for a further two to three months.

This wait-and-see strategy was used successfully by the American Viking landers in the 1970s. It will allow engineers to assess the atmospheric conditions on Mars before attempting what will be a hazardous descent. [X] is one of three missions setting off to Mars in the space of 11 days. On Monday, The [Y] launched its Hope satellite towards the Red Planet. And in a week from now, the US space agency (Nasa) aims to despatch its next-generation rover, [Z].

This clumping of launches is dictated by orbital dynamics; Earth and Mars line up properly for interplanetary missions for just a few weeks once every 26 months. (The European-Russian ExoMars rover was supposed to join the launch party this summer, but it suffered technical issues and now must wait until 2022.)

Q. What is the name of the China's mission to Mars, [X] as mentioned in the passage?

China has launched its first rover mission to Mars. The six-wheeled robot, encapsulated in a protective probe, was lifted off Earth by a Long March 5 rocket from the Wenchang spaceport on Hainan Island at 12:40 local time (04:40 GMT). It should arrive in orbit around the Red Planet in February. Called [X], or "Questions to Heaven", the rover won't actually try to land on the surface for a further two to three months.

This wait-and-see strategy was used successfully by the American Viking landers in the 1970s. It will allow engineers to assess the atmospheric conditions on Mars before attempting what will be a hazardous descent. [X] is one of three missions setting off to Mars in the space of 11 days. On Monday, The [Y] launched its Hope satellite towards the Red Planet. And in a week from now, the US space agency (Nasa) aims to despatch its next-generation rover, [Z].

This clumping of launches is dictated by orbital dynamics; Earth and Mars line up properly for interplanetary missions for just a few weeks once every 26 months. (The European-Russian ExoMars rover was supposed to join the launch party this summer, but it suffered technical issues and now must wait until 2022.)

Q. Which country from the Arab region launched its first mission to Mars, [Y] as mentioned in the passage?

China has launched its first rover mission to Mars. The six-wheeled robot, encapsulated in a protective probe, was lifted off Earth by a Long March 5 rocket from the Wenchang spaceport on Hainan Island at 12:40 local time (04:40 GMT). It should arrive in orbit around the Red Planet in February. Called [X], or "Questions to Heaven", the rover won't actually try to land on the surface for a further two to three months.

This wait-and-see strategy was used successfully by the American Viking landers in the 1970s. It will allow engineers to assess the atmospheric conditions on Mars before attempting what will be a hazardous descent. [X] is one of three missions setting off to Mars in the space of 11 days. On Monday, The [Y] launched its Hope satellite towards the Red Planet. And in a week from now, the US space agency (Nasa) aims to despatch its next-generation rover, [Z].

This clumping of launches is dictated by orbital dynamics; Earth and Mars line up properly for interplanetary missions for just a few weeks once every 26 months. (The European-Russian ExoMars rover was supposed to join the launch party this summer, but it suffered technical issues and now must wait until 2022.)

Q. What is the name of the rover being launched by NASA to Mars?

China has launched its first rover mission to Mars. The six-wheeled robot, encapsulated in a protective probe, was lifted off Earth by a Long March 5 rocket from the Wenchang spaceport on Hainan Island at 12:40 local time (04:40 GMT). It should arrive in orbit around the Red Planet in February. Called [X], or "Questions to Heaven", the rover won't actually try to land on the surface for a further two to three months.

This wait-and-see strategy was used successfully by the American Viking landers in the 1970s. It will allow engineers to assess the atmospheric conditions on Mars before attempting what will be a hazardous descent. [X] is one of three missions setting off to Mars in the space of 11 days. On Monday, The [Y] launched its Hope satellite towards the Red Planet. And in a week from now, the US space agency (Nasa) aims to despatch its next-generation rover, [Z].

This clumping of launches is dictated by orbital dynamics; Earth and Mars line up properly for interplanetary missions for just a few weeks once every 26 months. (The European-Russian ExoMars rover was supposed to join the launch party this summer, but it suffered technical issues and now must wait until 2022.

Q. In which year did India launched its Mars Orbiter Mission?

China has launched its first rover mission to Mars. The six-wheeled robot, encapsulated in a protective probe, was lifted off Earth by a Long March 5 rocket from the Wenchang spaceport on Hainan Island at 12:40 local time (04:40 GMT). It should arrive in orbit around the Red Planet in February. Called [X], or "Questions to Heaven", the rover won't actually try to land on the surface for a further two to three months.

This wait-and-see strategy was used successfully by the American Viking landers in the 1970s. It will allow engineers to assess the atmospheric conditions on Mars before attempting what will be a hazardous descent. [X] is one of three missions setting off to Mars in the space of 11 days. On Monday, The [Y] launched its Hope satellite towards the Red Planet. And in a week from now, the US space agency (Nasa) aims to despatch its next-generation rover, [Z].

This clumping of launches is dictated by orbital dynamics; Earth and Mars line up properly for interplanetary missions for just a few weeks once every 26 months. (The European-Russian ExoMars rover was supposed to join the launch party this summer, but it suffered technical issues and now must wait until 2022.)

Q. How many moons does Mars have?

China has launched its first rover mission to Mars. The six-wheeled robot, encapsulated in a protective probe, was lifted off Earth by a Long March 5 rocket from the Wenchang spaceport on Hainan Island at 12:40 local time (04:40 GMT). It should arrive in orbit around the Red Planet in February. Called [X], or "Questions to Heaven", the rover won't actually try to land on the surface for a further two to three months.

This wait-and-see strategy was used successfully by the American Viking landers in the 1970s. It will allow engineers to assess the atmospheric conditions on Mars before attempting what will be a hazardous descent. [X] is one of three missions setting off to Mars in the space of 11 days. On Monday, The [Y] launched its Hope satellite towards the Red Planet. And in a week from now, the US space agency (Nasa) aims to despatch its next-generation rover, [Z].

This clumping of launches is dictated by orbital dynamics; Earth and Mars line up properly for interplanetary missions for just a few weeks once every 26 months. (The European-Russian ExoMars rover was supposed to join the launch party this summer, but it suffered technical issues and now must wait until 2022.)

Q. Which space agency has partnered with NASA to host a deep-space ground station to support human spaceflight missions to the Moon, Mars and beyond?

The All India Football Federation (AIFF) has recommended legendary former skipper [X] for Padma Shri, the country's fourth highest civilian award. The 51-year-old former India striker, who scored 40 goals in 79 matches for India since making his debut in early 90s, was bestowed the Arjuna award in 2003. He was also awarded the Indian 'Player of the Year' in 1993, 1997 and 1999.

I am happy that I have been recommended for the Padma Shri and I thank the AIFF for that. I will be happier if I get the award,"" [X] said from his home in Kerala. I have served Indian football to the best of my abilities and I have no regrets,"" he added. [X], who led the Indian team from 2000 to 2003, used to form a formidable pair with fellow striker Bhaichung Bhutia.

At the club level, he had memorable stints with Mohun Bagan, Kerala Police, the now-defunct FC Cochin and JCT Mills Phagwara. He is credited to have scored one of the fastest international goals, managing to find the back of the net in just 12 seconds in a match against Bhutan in the 1999 SAF Games. He had scored four goals to emerge as the top scorer in the Afro-Asian Games held in India in 2003. It was his last appearance for the country as he retired after the tournament.

Q. Who is the footballer ‘X’ mentioned in the passage?

The All India Football Federation (AIFF) has recommended legendary former skipper [X] for Padma Shri, the country's fourth highest civilian award. The 51-year-old former India striker, who scored 40 goals in 79 matches for India since making his debut in early 90s, was bestowed the Arjuna award in 2003. He was also awarded the Indian 'Player of the Year' in 1993, 1997 and 1999.

I am happy that I have been recommended for the Padma Shri and I thank the AIFF for that. I will be happier if I get the award,"" [X] said from his home in Kerala. I have served Indian football to the best of my abilities and I have no regrets,"" he added. [X], who led the Indian team from 2000 to 2003, used to form a formidable pair with fellow striker Bhaichung Bhutia.

At the club level, he had memorable stints with Mohun Bagan, Kerala Police, the now-defunct FC Cochin and JCT Mills Phagwara. He is credited to have scored one of the fastest international goals, managing to find the back of the net in just 12 seconds in a match against Bhutan in the 1999 SAF Games. He had scored four goals to emerge as the top scorer in the Afro-Asian Games held in India in 2003. It was his last appearance for the country as he retired after the tournament.

Q. Who gives Padma awards to the winners?

The All India Football Federation (AIFF) has recommended legendary former skipper [X] for Padma Shri, the country's fourth highest civilian award. The 51-year-old former India striker, who scored 40 goals in 79 matches for India since making his debut in early 90s, was bestowed the Arjuna award in 2003. He was also awarded the Indian 'Player of the Year' in 1993, 1997 and 1999.

I am happy that I have been recommended for the Padma Shri and I thank the AIFF for that. I will be happier if I get the award,"" [X] said from his home in Kerala. I have served Indian football to the best of my abilities and I have no regrets,"" he added. [X], who led the Indian team from 2000 to 2003, used to form a formidable pair with fellow striker Bhaichung Bhutia.

At the club level, he had memorable stints with Mohun Bagan, Kerala Police, the now-defunct FC Cochin and JCT Mills Phagwara. He is credited to have scored one of the fastest international goals, managing to find the back of the net in just 12 seconds in a match against Bhutan in the 1999 SAF Games. He had scored four goals to emerge as the top scorer in the Afro-Asian Games held in India in 2003. It was his last appearance for the country as he retired after the tournament.

Q. Which of the following statement is/are correct?

(i) There is a maximum of 3 persons who can be awarded Bharat Ratna Award in any particular year.

(ii) Padma Awards Committee is constituted by the President of India every year.

The All India Football Federation (AIFF) has recommended legendary former skipper [X] for Padma Shri, the country's fourth highest civilian award. The 51-year-old former India striker, who scored 40 goals in 79 matches for India since making his debut in early 90s, was bestowed the Arjuna award in 2003. He was also awarded the Indian 'Player of the Year' in 1993, 1997 and 1999.

I am happy that I have been recommended for the Padma Shri and I thank the AIFF for that. I will be happier if I get the award,"" [X] said from his home in Kerala. I have served Indian football to the best of my abilities and I have no regrets,"" he added. [X], who led the Indian team from 2000 to 2003, used to form a formidable pair with fellow striker Bhaichung Bhutia.

At the club level, he had memorable stints with Mohun Bagan, Kerala Police, the now-defunct FC Cochin and JCT Mills Phagwara. He is credited to have scored one of the fastest international goals, managing to find the back of the net in just 12 seconds in a match against Bhutan in the 1999 SAF Games. He had scored four goals to emerge as the top scorer in the Afro-Asian Games held in India in 2003. It was his last appearance for the country as he retired after the tournament.

Q. Which of the following countries are hosting the FIFA Womens World Cup 2023?

The All India Football Federation (AIFF) has recommended legendary former skipper [X] for Padma Shri, the country's fourth highest civilian award. The 51-year-old former India striker, who scored 40 goals in 79 matches for India since making his debut in early 90s, was bestowed the Arjuna award in 2003. He was also awarded the Indian 'Player of the Year' in 1993, 1997 and 1999.

I am happy that I have been recommended for the Padma Shri and I thank the AIFF for that. I will be happier if I get the award,"" [X] said from his home in Kerala. I have served Indian football to the best of my abilities and I have no regrets,"" he added. [X], who led the Indian team from 2000 to 2003, used to form a formidable pair with fellow striker Bhaichung Bhutia.

At the club level, he had memorable stints with Mohun Bagan, Kerala Police, the now-defunct FC Cochin and JCT Mills Phagwara. He is credited to have scored one of the fastest international goals, managing to find the back of the net in just 12 seconds in a match against Bhutan in the 1999 SAF Games. He had scored four goals to emerge as the top scorer in the Afro-Asian Games held in India in 2003. It was his last appearance for the country as he retired after the tournament.

Q. Who among the following is the only sportsperson to win both the Arjuna and Dronacharya Awards for football?

Indemnity and Guarantee are a type of contingent contracts, which are governed by Contract Law. Simply put, indemnity implies protection against loss, in terms of money to be paid for loss. Indemnity is when one party promises to compensate the loss occurred to the other party, due to the act of the promisor or any other party. On the other hand, the guarantee is when a person assures the other party that he/she will perform the promise or fulfill the obligation of the third party in case he/she defaults. When it is about securing one’s interest while entering into the contract, people mostly go for a contract of indemnity or guarantee. At first instance, these two will appear same, but there are some differences between them. Indemnity contract is a form of contingent contract, whereby one party promises to the other party that he will compensate the loss or damages occurred to him by the conduct of the first party or any other person, it is known as the contract of indemnity. In indemnity, there are two parties, indemnifier and indemnified. The purpose of indemnity contract is to compensate for the loss. A contract in which a party promises to another party that he will perform the contract or compensate the loss, in case of the default of a person, it is the contract of guarantee. In the contract of guarantee, there are three parties i.e. debtor, creditor, and surety. The purpose of contract of guarantee is to give assurance to the promise.

In Punjab National Bank v Vikram Cotton Mills case, it was held that under a contract of indemnity, liability of the promisor arises from loss caused to the promisee by the conduct of the promisor himself or by the conduct of other person. And in Gajanan Moreshwar v Moreshwar Madan it was held that every contract of insurance, other than life insurance, is a contract of indemnity. The definition is restricted to cases where loss has been caused by some human agency. In a contract of indemnity the liability of the indemnifier is primary and arises when the contingent event occurs. In case of contract of guarantee the liability of surety is secondary and arises when the principal debtor defaults. The indemnifier after performing his part of the promise has no rights against the third party and he can sue the third party only if there is an assignment in his favour. Whereas in a contract of guarantee, the surety steps into the shoes of the creditor on discharge of his liability, and may sue the principal debtor.

Q. Which of the following statements is relevant in relation to the above given passage?

Indemnity and Guarantee are a type of contingent contracts, which are governed by Contract Law. Simply put, indemnity implies protection against loss, in terms of money to be paid for loss. Indemnity is when one party promises to compensate the loss occurred to the other party, due to the act of the promisor or any other party. On the other hand, the guarantee is when a person assures the other party that he/she will perform the promise or fulfill the obligation of the third party in case he/she defaults. When it is about securing one’s interest while entering into the contract, people mostly go for a contract of indemnity or guarantee. At first instance, these two will appear same, but there are some differences between them. Indemnity contract is a form of contingent contract, whereby one party promises to the other party that he will compensate the loss or damages occurred to him by the conduct of the first party or any other person, it is known as the contract of indemnity. In indemnity, there are two parties, indemnifier and indemnified. The purpose of indemnity contract is to compensate for the loss. A contract in which a party promises to another party that he will perform the contract or compensate the loss, in case of the default of a person, it is the contract of guarantee. In the contract of guarantee, there are three parties i.e. debtor, creditor, and surety. The purpose of contract of guarantee is to give assurance to the promise.

In Punjab National Bank v Vikram Cotton Mills case, it was held that under a contract of indemnity, liability of the promisor arises from loss caused to the promisee by the conduct of the promisor himself or by the conduct of other person. And in Gajanan Moreshwar v Moreshwar Madan it was held that every contract of insurance, other than life insurance, is a contract of indemnity. The definition is restricted to cases where loss has been caused by some human agency. In a contract of indemnity the liability of the indemnifier is primary and arises when the contingent event occurs. In case of contract of guarantee the liability of surety is secondary and arises when the principal debtor defaults. The indemnifier after performing his part of the promise has no rights against the third party and he can sue the third party only if there is an assignment in his favour. Whereas in a contract of guarantee, the surety steps into the shoes of the creditor on discharge of his liability, and may sue the principal debtor.

Q. Mr. Harry takes a loan from the bank for which Mr. Joesph has given the guarantee that if Harry defaults in the payment of the said amount, he will discharge the liability. Here who plays the role of surety, principal debtor and the creditor?

Indemnity and Guarantee are a type of contingent contracts, which are governed by Contract Law. Simply put, indemnity implies protection against loss, in terms of money to be paid for loss. Indemnity is when one party promises to compensate the loss occurred to the other party, due to the act of the promisor or any other party. On the other hand, the guarantee is when a person assures the other party that he/she will perform the promise or fulfill the obligation of the third party in case he/she defaults. When it is about securing one’s interest while entering into the contract, people mostly go for a contract of indemnity or guarantee. At first instance, these two will appear same, but there are some differences between them. Indemnity contract is a form of contingent contract, whereby one party promises to the other party that he will compensate the loss or damages occurred to him by the conduct of the first party or any other person, it is known as the contract of indemnity. In indemnity, there are two parties, indemnifier and indemnified. The purpose of indemnity contract is to compensate for the loss. A contract in which a party promises to another party that he will perform the contract or compensate the loss, in case of the default of a person, it is the contract of guarantee. In the contract of guarantee, there are three parties i.e. debtor, creditor, and surety. The purpose of contract of guarantee is to give assurance to the promise.

In Punjab National Bank v Vikram Cotton Mills case, it was held that under a contract of indemnity, liability of the promisor arises from loss caused to the promisee by the conduct of the promisor himself or by the conduct of other person. And in Gajanan Moreshwar v Moreshwar Madan it was held that every contract of insurance, other than life insurance, is a contract of indemnity. The definition is restricted to cases where loss has been caused by some human agency. In a contract of indemnity the liability of the indemnifier is primary and arises when the contingent event occurs. In case of contract of guarantee the liability of surety is secondary and arises when the principal debtor defaults. The indemnifier after performing his part of the promise has no rights against the third party and he can sue the third party only if there is an assignment in his favour. Whereas in a contract of guarantee, the surety steps into the shoes of the creditor on discharge of his liability, and may sue the principal debtor.

Q. Chandu is liable to Bunty for Rs. 26,000, on default of Ajit. This is an example of

Indemnity and Guarantee are a type of contingent contracts, which are governed by Contract Law. Simply put, indemnity implies protection against loss, in terms of money to be paid for loss. Indemnity is when one party promises to compensate the loss occurred to the other party, due to the act of the promisor or any other party. On the other hand, the guarantee is when a person assures the other party that he/she will perform the promise or fulfill the obligation of the third party in case he/she defaults. When it is about securing one’s interest while entering into the contract, people mostly go for a contract of indemnity or guarantee. At first instance, these two will appear same, but there are some differences between them. Indemnity contract is a form of contingent contract, whereby one party promises to the other party that he will compensate the loss or damages occurred to him by the conduct of the first party or any other person, it is known as the contract of indemnity. In indemnity, there are two parties, indemnifier and indemnified. The purpose of indemnity contract is to compensate for the loss. A contract in which a party promises to another party that he will perform the contract or compensate the loss, in case of the default of a person, it is the contract of guarantee. In the contract of guarantee, there are three parties i.e. debtor, creditor, and surety. The purpose of contract of guarantee is to give assurance to the promise.

In Punjab National Bank v Vikram Cotton Mills case, it was held that under a contract of indemnity, liability of the promisor arises from loss caused to the promisee by the conduct of the promisor himself or by the conduct of other person. And in Gajanan Moreshwar v Moreshwar Madan it was held that every contract of insurance, other than life insurance, is a contract of indemnity. The definition is restricted to cases where loss has been caused by some human agency. In a contract of indemnity the liability of the indemnifier is primary and arises when the contingent event occurs. In case of contract of guarantee the liability of surety is secondary and arises when the principal debtor defaults. The indemnifier after performing his part of the promise has no rights against the third party and he can sue the third party only if there is an assignment in his favour. Whereas in a contract of guarantee, the surety steps into the shoes of the creditor on discharge of his liability, and may sue the principal debtor.

Q. A contract in which one party promises to another that he will compensate him for any loss suffered by him by the act of the promisor or the third party is called

Indemnity and Guarantee are a type of contingent contracts, which are governed by Contract Law. Simply put, indemnity implies protection against loss, in terms of money to be paid for loss. Indemnity is when one party promises to compensate the loss occurred to the other party, due to the act of the promisor or any other party. On the other hand, the guarantee is when a person assures the other party that he/she will perform the promise or fulfill the obligation of the third party in case he/she defaults. When it is about securing one’s interest while entering into the contract, people mostly go for a contract of indemnity or guarantee. At first instance, these two will appear same, but there are some differences between them. Indemnity contract is a form of contingent contract, whereby one party promises to the other party that he will compensate the loss or damages occurred to him by the conduct of the first party or any other person, it is known as the contract of indemnity. In indemnity, there are two parties, indemnifier and indemnified. The purpose of indemnity contract is to compensate for the loss. A contract in which a party promises to another party that he will perform the contract or compensate the loss, in case of the default of a person, it is the contract of guarantee. In the contract of guarantee, there are three parties i.e. debtor, creditor, and surety. The purpose of contract of guarantee is to give assurance to the promise.

In Punjab National Bank v Vikram Cotton Mills case, it was held that under a contract of indemnity, liability of the promisor arises from loss caused to the promisee by the conduct of the promisor himself or by the conduct of other person. And in Gajanan Moreshwar v Moreshwar Madan it was held that every contract of insurance, other than life insurance, is a contract of indemnity. The definition is restricted to cases where loss has been caused by some human agency. In a contract of indemnity the liability of the indemnifier is primary and arises when the contingent event occurs. In case of contract of guarantee the liability of surety is secondary and arises when the principal debtor defaults. The indemnifier after performing his part of the promise has no rights against the third party and he can sue the third party only if there is an assignment in his favour. Whereas in a contract of guarantee, the surety steps into the shoes of the creditor on discharge of his liability, and may sue the principal debtor.

Q. Joe is a shareholder of Alpha Ltd. who lost his share certificate. Joe applies for a duplicate one. The company agrees, but on the condition that Joe compensates for the loss or damage to the company if a third person brings the original certificate. The contract for the contingent compensation between Joe and Alpha Ltd. is

Circumstantial evidence is unrelated facts that, when considered together, can be used to infer a conclusion about something unknown. Information and testimony presented by a party in a civil or criminal action that permit conclusions that indirectly establish the existence or nonexistence of a fact or event that the party seeks to prove. Circumstantial evidence is not considered to be proof that something happened, but it is often useful as a guide for further investigation.

Circumstantial evidence is used in criminal courts to establish guilt or innocence through reasoning. They also play an important role in civil courts to establish or deny liability. Circumstantial evidence is also known as indirect evidence. Circumstantial evidence is usually a theory, supported by a significant quantity of corroborating evidence. The distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence is important because, with the obvious exceptions that nearly all criminals are careful to not generate direct evidence and try to avoid demonstrating criminal intent. Therefore, to prove the mens rea levels of ""purposely"" or ""knowingly,"" the prosecution must usually resort to circumstantial evidence.

Trimukh Maroti Kirkan v. State of Maharashtra, where the principle was held that, “in a case based on circumstantial evidence is that the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn must be cogently and firmly established; that those circumstances should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards the guilt of the accused; that the circumstances taken cumulatively should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was committed by the Accused and they should be incapable of explanation on any hypothesis other than that of the guilt of the Accused and inconsistent with their innocence.”

Q. If someone was charged with theft of money and was then seen in a shopping spree purchasing expensive items, the shopping spree might be regarded as circumstantial evidence of the individual's guilt. True or false?

Circumstantial evidence is unrelated facts that, when considered together, can be used to infer a conclusion about something unknown. Information and testimony presented by a party in a civil or criminal action that permit conclusions that indirectly establish the existence or nonexistence of a fact or event that the party seeks to prove. Circumstantial evidence is not considered to be proof that something happened, but it is often useful as a guide for further investigation.

Circumstantial evidence is used in criminal courts to establish guilt or innocence through reasoning. They also play an important role in civil courts to establish or deny liability. Circumstantial evidence is also known as indirect evidence. Circumstantial evidence is usually a theory, supported by a significant quantity of corroborating evidence. The distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence is important because, with the obvious exceptions that nearly all criminals are careful to not generate direct evidence and try to avoid demonstrating criminal intent. Therefore, to prove the mens rea levels of ""purposely"" or ""knowingly,"" the prosecution must usually resort to circumstantial evidence.

Trimukh Maroti Kirkan v. State of Maharashtra, where the principle was held that, “in a case based on circumstantial evidence is that the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn must be cogently and firmly established; that those circumstances should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards the guilt of the accused; that the circumstances taken cumulatively should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was committed by the Accused and they should be incapable of explanation on any hypothesis other than that of the guilt of the Accused and inconsistent with their innocence.”

Q. A witness arrives at a crime scene seconds after hearing a gunshot to find someone standing over a corpse and holding a smoking pistol. Can this be termed as circumstantial or direct evidence?

Circumstantial evidence is unrelated facts that, when considered together, can be used to infer a conclusion about something unknown. Information and testimony presented by a party in a civil or criminal action that permit conclusions that indirectly establish the existence or nonexistence of a fact or event that the party seeks to prove. Circumstantial evidence is not considered to be proof that something happened, but it is often useful as a guide for further investigation.

Circumstantial evidence is used in criminal courts to establish guilt or innocence through reasoning. They also play an important role in civil courts to establish or deny liability. Circumstantial evidence is also known as indirect evidence. Circumstantial evidence is usually a theory, supported by a significant quantity of corroborating evidence. The distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence is important because, with the obvious exceptions that nearly all criminals are careful to not generate direct evidence and try to avoid demonstrating criminal intent. Therefore, to prove the mens rea levels of ""purposely"" or ""knowingly,"" the prosecution must usually resort to circumstantial evidence.

Trimukh Maroti Kirkan v. State of Maharashtra, where the principle was held that, “in a case based on circumstantial evidence is that the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn must be cogently and firmly established; that those circumstances should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards the guilt of the accused; that the circumstances taken cumulatively should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was committed by the Accused and they should be incapable of explanation on any hypothesis other than that of the guilt of the Accused and inconsistent with their innocence.”

It is an established principle in law that if police retrieved stolen goods from the house of a suspect, although it establishes that the suspect is in possession of the stolen goods, it does not necessarily establish guilt or the fact that he must have stolen the goods.

Q. Recovery of goods from the house of a suspect is a direct or circumstantial evidence?

Circumstantial evidence is unrelated facts that, when considered together, can be used to infer a conclusion about something unknown. Information and testimony presented by a party in a civil or criminal action that permit conclusions that indirectly establish the existence or nonexistence of a fact or event that the party seeks to prove. Circumstantial evidence is not considered to be proof that something happened, but it is often useful as a guide for further investigation.

Circumstantial evidence is used in criminal courts to establish guilt or innocence through reasoning. They also play an important role in civil courts to establish or deny liability. Circumstantial evidence is also known as indirect evidence. Circumstantial evidence is usually a theory, supported by a significant quantity of corroborating evidence. The distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence is important because, with the obvious exceptions that nearly all criminals are careful to not generate direct evidence and try to avoid demonstrating criminal intent. Therefore, to prove the mens rea levels of ""purposely"" or ""knowingly,"" the prosecution must usually resort to circumstantial evidence.

Trimukh Maroti Kirkan v. State of Maharashtra, where the principle was held that, “in a case based on circumstantial evidence is that the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn must be cogently and firmly established; that those circumstances should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards the guilt of the accused; that the circumstances taken cumulatively should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was committed by the Accused and they should be incapable of explanation on any hypothesis other than that of the guilt of the Accused and inconsistent with their innocence.”

Q. A saw B shoot C in a park, subsequently C died. Since A saw the murder being committed, would his testimony amount to direct evidence or circumstantial evidence?

Circumstantial evidence is unrelated facts that, when considered together, can be used to infer a conclusion about something unknown. Information and testimony presented by a party in a civil or criminal action that permit conclusions that indirectly establish the existence or nonexistence of a fact or event that the party seeks to prove. Circumstantial evidence is not considered to be proof that something happened, but it is often useful as a guide for further investigation. Circumstantial evidence is used in criminal courts to establish guilt or innocence through reasoning. They also play an important role in civil courts to establish or deny liability.

Circumstantial evidence is also known as indirect evidence. Circumstantial evidence is usually a theory, supported by a significant quantity of corroborating evidence. The distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence is important because, with the obvious exceptions that nearly all criminals are careful to not generate direct evidence and try to avoid demonstrating criminal intent. Therefore, to prove the mens rea levels of ""purposely"" or ""knowingly,"" the prosecution must usually resort to circumstantial evidence.

Trimukh Maroti Kirkan v. State of Maharashtra, where the principle was held that, “in a case based on circumstantial evidence is that the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn must be cogently and firmly established; that those circumstances should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards the guilt of the accused; that the circumstances taken cumulatively should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was committed by the Accused and they should be incapable of explanation on any hypothesis other than that of the guilt of the Accused and inconsistent with their innocence.”

Q. Body of B was found in the house of A. The onus is upon A to establish that even though the body of the deceased was recovered from his house, his involvement in the crime is negligible. The inmates of the house are also required to provide an explanation. If the defendant fails to provide a viable explanation and fails to establish his innocence, this would form a chain of circumstantial evidence establishing the guilt of the accused. Is this true or false?

It was submitted to the Supreme Court that there is a need to link the social media profiles of users with their Aadhar numbers, and if required, have platforms like Facebook and WhatsApp share this number (which acts like a unique identity) with law enforcement agencies to help detect crimes. This is needed to check fake news, defamatory articles, anti-national content, etc.

To briefly characterize social media, it refers to any interactive technology mediated by a computer, which enables the creation and dissemination of ideas, information, opinions, career interests, and other kinds of expression through virtual communities and networks. The Supreme Court, declared the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution in the Puttaswamy judgment. The court noted that the right to bodily integrity, autonomy over personal decisions, and protection of personal information – all fall within the right to privacy. At the same time, the court also noted that this right was not absolute – it permitted exceptions, should there be a legitimate aim of the state, and the invasion of privacy was proportional to the object sought to be achieved.

When the constitutional validity of the Aadhar had to be ascertained the majority opinion held that the Act was legal and intra vires the Constitution in all but some respects. It was clarified that only those benefits and services that were in the nature of a ‘subsidy’ or a ‘government welfare scheme’ could require linking of Aadhar.

The curbing of fake news, defamatory content, etc. does come across as a legitimate goal of the State. However, the proportionality of this measure cannot easily be understood or justified, as the linking of social media accounts to Aadhar would necessarily involve a highly intrusive presence of the state in our daily lives, and make it difficult for people to express their opinions without concerns of incarceration. A notable point is the precarious situation that such a linking would create for the right to freedom of speech and expression, guaranteed under Article 19(1)Option A of the Constitution, making it illusory and cosmetic.

This move would bolster the already-rampant use of the unconstitutional section 66A of the Information Technology Act. Linking of social media accounts to Aadhar would increase the incidence of such use of section 66A as tracing content and information back to individuals would become easier and more persons could be charged with this section. It is essential that social media be a ‘free’ platform, where individuals can speak their minds without the fear.

Q. On the basis of the passage identify whether the author is supporting the linkage of social media account with Aadhar or not?

It was submitted to the Supreme Court that there is a need to link the social media profiles of users with their Aadhar numbers, and if required, have platforms like Facebook and WhatsApp share this number (which acts like a unique identity) with law enforcement agencies to help detect crimes. This is needed to check fake news, defamatory articles, anti-national content, etc.

To briefly characterize social media, it refers to any interactive technology mediated by a computer, which enables the creation and dissemination of ideas, information, opinions, career interests, and other kinds of expression through virtual communities and networks. The Supreme Court, declared the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution in the Puttaswamy judgment. The court noted that the right to bodily integrity, autonomy over personal decisions, and protection of personal information – all fall within the right to privacy. At the same time, the court also noted that this right was not absolute – it permitted exceptions, should there be a legitimate aim of the state, and the invasion of privacy was proportional to the object sought to be achieved.

When the constitutional validity of the Aadhar had to be ascertained the majority opinion held that the Act was legal and intra vires the Constitution in all but some respects. It was clarified that only those benefits and services that were in the nature of a ‘subsidy’ or a ‘government welfare scheme’ could require linking of Aadhar.

The curbing of fake news, defamatory content, etc. does come across as a legitimate goal of the State. However, the proportionality of this measure cannot easily be understood or justified, as the linking of social media accounts to Aadhar would necessarily involve a highly intrusive presence of the state in our daily lives, and make it difficult for people to express their opinions without concerns of incarceration. A notable point is the precarious situation that such a linking would create for the right to freedom of speech and expression, guaranteed under Article 19(1)Option A of the Constitution, making it illusory and cosmetic.

This move would bolster the already-rampant use of the unconstitutional section 66A of the Information Technology Act. Linking of social media accounts to Aadhar would increase the incidence of such use of section 66A as tracing content and information back to individuals would become easier and more persons could be charged with this section. It is essential that social media be a ‘free’ platform, where individuals can speak their minds without the fear.

Q. Which of the following fundamental rights guaranteed by the constitution is violated by the State if such a law is passed, according to the author?

It was submitted to the Supreme Court that there is a need to link the social media profiles of users with their Aadhar numbers, and if required, have platforms like Facebook and WhatsApp share this number (which acts like a unique identity) with law enforcement agencies to help detect crimes. This is needed to check fake news, defamatory articles, anti-national content, etc.

To briefly characterize social media, it refers to any interactive technology mediated by a computer, which enables the creation and dissemination of ideas, information, opinions, career interests, and other kinds of expression through virtual communities and networks. The Supreme Court, declared the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution in the Puttaswamy judgment. The court noted that the right to bodily integrity, autonomy over personal decisions, and protection of personal information – all fall within the right to privacy. At the same time, the court also noted that this right was not absolute – it permitted exceptions, should there be a legitimate aim of the state, and the invasion of privacy was proportional to the object sought to be achieved.

When the constitutional validity of the Aadhar had to be ascertained the majority opinion held that the Act was legal and intra vires the Constitution in all but some respects. It was clarified that only those benefits and services that were in the nature of a ‘subsidy’ or a ‘government welfare scheme’ could require linking of Aadhar.

The curbing of fake news, defamatory content, etc. does come across as a legitimate goal of the State. However, the proportionality of this measure cannot easily be understood or justified, as the linking of social media accounts to Aadhar would necessarily involve a highly intrusive presence of the state in our daily lives, and make it difficult for people to express their opinions without concerns of incarceration. A notable point is the precarious situation that such a linking would create for the right to freedom of speech and expression, guaranteed under Article 19(1)Option A of the Constitution, making it illusory and cosmetic.

This move would bolster the already-rampant use of the unconstitutional section 66A of the Information Technology Act. Linking of social media accounts to Aadhar would increase the incidence of such use of section 66A as tracing content and information back to individuals would become easier and more persons could be charged with this section. It is essential that social media be a ‘free’ platform, where individuals can speak their minds without the fear.

There is an android application named “Ketomato”, which provides a platform to search for restaurants delivering food for individuals following Keto-diet specifically and also has a virtual chatroom provided for people to have conversation related to heathy food and lifestyle. The application also has a section where people can review the services of restaurants.

Q. Would this platform come under the ambit of Social Media according to the passage?

It was submitted to the Supreme Court that there is a need to link the social media profiles of users with their Aadhar numbers, and if required, have platforms like Facebook and WhatsApp share this number (which acts like a unique identity) with law enforcement agencies to help detect crimes. This is needed to check fake news, defamatory articles, anti-national content, etc.

To briefly characterize social media, it refers to any interactive technology mediated by a computer, which enables the creation and dissemination of ideas, information, opinions, career interests, and other kinds of expression through virtual communities and networks. The Supreme Court, declared the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution in the Puttaswamy judgment. The court noted that the right to bodily integrity, autonomy over personal decisions, and protection of personal information – all fall within the right to privacy. At the same time, the court also noted that this right was not absolute – it permitted exceptions, should there be a legitimate aim of the state, and the invasion of privacy was proportional to the object sought to be achieved.

When the constitutional validity of the Aadhar had to be ascertained the majority opinion held that the Act was legal and intra vires the Constitution in all but some respects. It was clarified that only those benefits and services that were in the nature of a ‘subsidy’ or a ‘government welfare scheme’ could require linking of Aadhar.

The curbing of fake news, defamatory content, etc. does come across as a legitimate goal of the State. However, the proportionality of this measure cannot easily be understood or justified, as the linking of social media accounts to Aadhar would necessarily involve a highly intrusive presence of the state in our daily lives, and make it difficult for people to express their opinions without concerns of incarceration. A notable point is the precarious situation that such a linking would create for the right to freedom of speech and expression, guaranteed under Article 19(1)Option A of the Constitution, making it illusory and cosmetic.

This move would bolster the already-rampant use of the unconstitutional section 66A of the Information Technology Act. Linking of social media accounts to Aadhar would increase the incidence of such use of section 66A as tracing content and information back to individuals would become easier and more persons could be charged with this section. It is essential that social media be a ‘free’ platform, where individuals can speak their minds without the fear.

Q. According to the passage, assess whether or not the linkage of social media accounts with Aadhar will be permitted?

It was submitted to the Supreme Court that there is a need to link the social media profiles of users with their Aadhar numbers, and if required, have platforms like Facebook and WhatsApp share this number (which acts like a unique identity) with law enforcement agencies to help detect crimes. This is needed to check fake news, defamatory articles, anti-national content, etc.

To briefly characterize social media, it refers to any interactive technology mediated by a computer, which enables the creation and dissemination of ideas, information, opinions, career interests, and other kinds of expression through virtual communities and networks. The Supreme Court, declared the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution in the Puttaswamy judgment. The court noted that the right to bodily integrity, autonomy over personal decisions, and protection of personal information – all fall within the right to privacy. At the same time, the court also noted that this right was not absolute – it permitted exceptions, should there be a legitimate aim of the state, and the invasion of privacy was proportional to the object sought to be achieved.

When the constitutional validity of the Aadhar had to be ascertained the majority opinion held that the Act was legal and intra vires the Constitution in all but some respects. It was clarified that only those benefits and services that were in the nature of a ‘subsidy’ or a ‘government welfare scheme’ could require linking of Aadhar.

The curbing of fake news, defamatory content, etc. does come across as a legitimate goal of the State. However, the proportionality of this measure cannot easily be understood or justified, as the linking of social media accounts to Aadhar would necessarily involve a highly intrusive presence of the state in our daily lives, and make it difficult for people to express their opinions without concerns of incarceration. A notable point is the precarious situation that such a linking would create for the right to freedom of speech and expression, guaranteed under Article 19(1)Option A of the Constitution, making it illusory and cosmetic.

This move would bolster the already-rampant use of the unconstitutional section 66A of the Information Technology Act. Linking of social media accounts to Aadhar would increase the incidence of such use of section 66A as tracing content and information back to individuals would become easier and more persons could be charged with this section. It is essential that social media be a ‘free’ platform, where individuals can speak their minds without the fear.

Legislation is passed by the government the mandate of which prohibits smoking at public spaces. The object of the legislation is to save people from the injurious effect of smoking and to regulate the circulation of tobacco products.

Q. Would this be termed as legitimate on the basis of the given passage?

Section 10 of Civil Procedure Code deals with Doctrine of Res Sub-Judice. ‘Res’ means matter or litigation and Sub-Judice means pending (under judgment). Conjoining the two, it implies that the rule of Res Sub-Judice relates to a matter which is pending judicial enquiry. In other words, this rule applies where a matter is already pending before a competent court for the purpose of adjudication.

Section 10 of CPC deals with the stay of civil suits. Section 10 of Civil Procedure Code defines “ Stay of Suit: as- No Court shall proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is also directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties, or between parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title where such suit is pending in the same or any other Court in India having jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed, or in any Court beyond the limits of India established or continued by the Central Government and having like jurisdiction, or before the Supreme Court. In simple words Section 10 declares that no Court should proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties and the Court before which the previously instituted suit is pending is competent to grant the relief sought.

The Rule applies to trial of a suit and not the institution thereof. It also does not preclude a Court from passing interim orders, such as, grant of injunction or stay, appointment of receiver. It, however, applies to appeals and revisions. The object of the rule contained in Section 10 is to prevent courts of concurrent jurisdiction from simultaneously entertaining and adjudicating upon two parallel litigations in respect of the same cause of action, the same subject-matter and the same relief. The provisions of Section 10 of the code do not strictly apply, a civil court has inherent power under Section 151 of the code to stay a suit to achieve the ends of justice. Similarly, a Court has inherent power to consolidate different suits between the same parties in which the matter in issue is substantially the same. Section 10 also provides that there is no bar on the power of an Indian Court to try a subsequently instituted suit if the previously instituted suit is pending in a foreign Court.

Q. In relation to the above passage which of the following statements is correct in the context of the doctrine of Res Sub-Judice?

Section 10 of Civil Procedure Code deals with Doctrine of Res Sub-Judice. ‘Res’ means matter or litigation and Sub-Judice means pending (under judgment). Conjoining the two, it implies that the rule of Res Sub-Judice relates to a matter which is pending judicial enquiry. In other words, this rule applies where a matter is already pending before a competent court for the purpose of adjudication.

Section 10 of CPC deals with the stay of civil suits. Section 10 of Civil Procedure Code defines “ Stay of Suit: as- No Court shall proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is also directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties, or between parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title where such suit is pending in the same or any other Court in India having jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed, or in any Court beyond the limits of India established or continued by the Central Government and having like jurisdiction, or before the Supreme Court. In simple words Section 10 declares that no Court should proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties and the Court before which the previously instituted suit is pending is competent to grant the relief sought.

The Rule applies to trial of a suit and not the institution thereof. It also does not preclude a Court from passing interim orders, such as, grant of injunction or stay, appointment of receiver. It, however, applies to appeals and revisions. The object of the rule contained in Section 10 is to prevent courts of concurrent jurisdiction from simultaneously entertaining and adjudicating upon two parallel litigations in respect of the same cause of action, the same subject-matter and the same relief. The provisions of Section 10 of the code do not strictly apply, a civil court has inherent power under Section 151 of the code to stay a suit to achieve the ends of justice. Similarly, a Court has inherent power to consolidate different suits between the same parties in which the matter in issue is substantially the same. Section 10 also provides that there is no bar on the power of an Indian Court to try a subsequently instituted suit if the previously instituted suit is pending in a foreign Court.

Q. ‘Adieshwar’ an agent of ‘Sandeep’ at Jaipur agreed to sell Sandeep’s goods in Bangalore. ‘Adieshwar’ the agent files suit for balance of accounts in Bangalore. ‘Sandeep’ sues the agent ‘Adieshwar’ for accounts and his negligence in Jaipur; while case is pending in Bangalore. In this case, stay of suit is applicable to the case in which court?

Section 10 of Civil Procedure Code deals with Doctrine of Res Sub-Judice. ‘Res’ means matter or litigation and Sub-Judice means pending (under judgment). Conjoining the two, it implies that the rule of Res Sub-Judice relates to a matter which is pending judicial enquiry. In other words, this rule applies where a matter is already pending before a competent court for the purpose of adjudication.

Section 10 of CPC deals with the stay of civil suits. Section 10 of Civil Procedure Code defines “ Stay of Suit: as- No Court shall proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is also directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties, or between parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title where such suit is pending in the same or any other Court in India having jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed, or in any Court beyond the limits of India established or continued by the Central Government and having like jurisdiction, or before the Supreme Court. In simple words Section 10 declares that no Court should proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties and the Court before which the previously instituted suit is pending is competent to grant the relief sought.

The Rule applies to trial of a suit and not the institution thereof. It also does not preclude a Court from passing interim orders, such as, grant of injunction or stay, appointment of receiver. It, however, applies to appeals and revisions. The object of the rule contained in Section 10 is to prevent courts of concurrent jurisdiction from simultaneously entertaining and adjudicating upon two parallel litigations in respect of the same cause of action, the same subject-matter and the same relief. The provisions of Section 10 of the code do not strictly apply, a civil court has inherent power under Section 151 of the code to stay a suit to achieve the ends of justice. Similarly, a Court has inherent power to consolidate different suits between the same parties in which the matter in issue is substantially the same. Section 10 also provides that there is no bar on the power of an Indian Court to try a subsequently instituted suit if the previously instituted suit is pending in a foreign Court.

Q. Which of the following statements is false in relation to the above passage in order to apply doctrine of Res Sub-Judice?

Section 10 of Civil Procedure Code deals with Doctrine of Res Sub-Judice. ‘Res’ means matter or litigation and Sub-Judice means pending (under judgment). Conjoining the two, it implies that the rule of Res Sub-Judice relates to a matter which is pending judicial enquiry. In other words, this rule applies where a matter is already pending before a competent court for the purpose of adjudication.

Section 10 of CPC deals with the stay of civil suits. Section 10 of Civil Procedure Code defines “ Stay of Suit: as- No Court shall proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is also directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties, or between parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title where such suit is pending in the same or any other Court in India having jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed, or in any Court beyond the limits of India established or continued by the Central Government and having like jurisdiction, or before the Supreme Court. In simple words Section 10 declares that no Court should proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties and the Court before which the previously instituted suit is pending is competent to grant the relief sought.

The Rule applies to trial of a suit and not the institution thereof. It also does not preclude a Court from passing interim orders, such as, grant of injunction or stay, appointment of receiver. It, however, applies to appeals and revisions. The object of the rule contained in Section 10 is to prevent courts of concurrent jurisdiction from simultaneously entertaining and adjudicating upon two parallel litigations in respect of the same cause of action, the same subject-matter and the same relief. The provisions of Section 10 of the code do not strictly apply, a civil court has inherent power under Section 151 of the code to stay a suit to achieve the ends of justice. Similarly, a Court has inherent power to consolidate different suits between the same parties in which the matter in issue is substantially the same. Section 10 also provides that there is no bar on the power of an Indian Court to try a subsequently instituted suit if the previously instituted suit is pending in a foreign Court.

Q. ‘Druva’ and ‘Bhanu’ entered into contract for the sale of machine. ‘Druva’ first filed a suit against ‘Bhanu’ at court in Bombay, demanding recovery of the entire amount paid. Subsequently, ‘Bhanu’ filed a suit against ‘Druva’ at court in Delhi demanding Rs.18, 000 as outstanding balance. In Druva’s suit, ‘Bhanu’ took the defence that since both the suits are on similar issues, Druva’s suit should be stayed. Can Druva succeed in his defence plea?

Section 10 of Civil Procedure Code deals with Doctrine of Res Sub-Judice. ‘Res’ means matter or litigation and Sub-Judice means pending (under judgment). Conjoining the two, it implies that the rule of Res Sub-Judice relates to a matter which is pending judicial enquiry. In other words, this rule applies where a matter is already pending before a competent court for the purpose of adjudication.

Section 10 of CPC deals with the stay of civil suits. Section 10 of Civil Procedure Code defines “ Stay of Suit: as- No Court shall proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is also directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties, or between parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title where such suit is pending in the same or any other Court in India having jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed, or in any Court beyond the limits of India established or continued by the Central Government and having like jurisdiction, or before the Supreme Court. In simple words Section 10 declares that no Court should proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties and the Court before which the previously instituted suit is pending is competent to grant the relief sought.

The Rule applies to trial of a suit and not the institution thereof. It also does not preclude a Court from passing interim orders, such as, grant of injunction or stay, appointment of receiver. It, however, applies to appeals and revisions. The object of the rule contained in Section 10 is to prevent courts of concurrent jurisdiction from simultaneously entertaining and adjudicating upon two parallel litigations in respect of the same cause of action, the same subject-matter and the same relief. The provisions of Section 10 of the code do not strictly apply, a civil court has inherent power under Section 151 of the code to stay a suit to achieve the ends of justice. Similarly, a Court has inherent power to consolidate different suits between the same parties in which the matter in issue is substantially the same. Section 10 also provides that there is no bar on the power of an Indian Court to try a subsequently instituted suit if the previously instituted suit is pending in a foreign Court.

Q. In the absence of Res Sub-Judice what will be the situation in relation to the above passage. Opt the relevant statement given below?

The golden rule that runs through the web of civilised criminal jurisprudence is that an accused is presumed to be innocent unless he is found guilty of the charged offence. As stated in V. D. Jhingan Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1966 SC 1762, it is also the cardinal rule of our criminal jurisprudence that the burden in the web of proof of an offence would always lie upon the prosecution to prove all the facts constituting the ingredients beyond reasonable doubt.

But in Veeraswamy Case [(1991) 3 SCC 655] the Constitution Bench held that “a statute placing burden on the accused cannot be regarded as unreasonable, unjust or unfair. Nor it can be regarded as contrary to Art.21 of the Constitution as contended for the appellant. The principle is applied only in the absence of statutory provision to the contrary”. As observed in State of West Bengal v. Mir Mohammad Omar and Others, [2000 (8) SCC 382] that “the pristine rule that the burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused should not be taken as a fossilised doctrine as though it admits no process of intelligent reasoning. The Concept of “reverse burden” has been adopted in many statutes like Negotiable Instruments Act, Prevention of Corruption Act, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act etc. In Indian Evidence Act, Section 113A (for S.306 IPC) and Section 113B (for 304B IPC) places a reverse burden on the accused.

For instance Section 113B in the Evidence Act which provides for raising a presumption as to dowry death in case of an unnatural death within seven years of marriage when it is shown that a woman was subjected to harassment for dowry soon before her death. Presumption under Section 113B of Indian Evidence Act is a presumption of law. On proof of the essentials mentioned therein, it becomes obligatory on the court to raise a presumption that the accused caused the dowry death.

The presumption shall be raised only on proof of the following essentials (1) The question before the court must be whether the accused has committed the dowry death of a woman. (2) The woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or his relatives. (3) Such cruelty or harassment was for, or in connection with any demand for dowry. (4) Such cruelty or harassment was soon before her death.

Usually the prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused can be charged with that certain crime. In the reverse burden of proof the question now arises whether the accused has to discharge his burden beyond reasonable doubt the answer to which lies in preponderance of probabilities where the accused does not have to go as far as proving it beyond reasonable doubt; it is lesser in degree.

Q. In case A is alleged to have caused dowry death of his wife B, 5 years after their marriage, the burden of proof lies on which party if the essentials for Section 113B have been met ?

The golden rule that runs through the web of civilised criminal jurisprudence is that an accused is presumed to be innocent unless he is found guilty of the charged offence. As stated in V. D. Jhingan Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1966 SC 1762, it is also the cardinal rule of our criminal jurisprudence that the burden in the web of proof of an offence would always lie upon the prosecution to prove all the facts constituting the ingredients beyond reasonable doubt.

But in Veeraswamy Case [(1991) 3 SCC 655] the Constitution Bench held that “a statute placing burden on the accused cannot be regarded as unreasonable, unjust or unfair. Nor it can be regarded as contrary to Art.21 of the Constitution as contended for the appellant. The principle is applied only in the absence of statutory provision to the contrary”. As observed in State of West Bengal v. Mir Mohammad Omar and Others, [2000 (8) SCC 382] that “the pristine rule that the burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused should not be taken as a fossilised doctrine as though it admits no process of intelligent reasoning. The Concept of “reverse burden” has been adopted in many statutes like Negotiable Instruments Act, Prevention of Corruption Act, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act etc. In Indian Evidence Act, Section 113A (for S.306 IPC) and Section 113B (for 304B IPC) places a reverse burden on the accused.

For instance Section 113B in the Evidence Act which provides for raising a presumption as to dowry death in case of an unnatural death within seven years of marriage when it is shown that a woman was subjected to harassment for dowry soon before her death. Presumption under Section 113B of Indian Evidence Act is a presumption of law. On proof of the essentials mentioned therein, it becomes obligatory on the court to raise a presumption that the accused caused the dowry death.

The presumption shall be raised only on proof of the following essentials (1) The question before the court must be whether the accused has committed the dowry death of a woman. (2) The woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or his relatives. (3) Such cruelty or harassment was for, or in connection with any demand for dowry. (4) Such cruelty or harassment was soon before her death.

Usually the prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused can be charged with that certain crime. In the reverse burden of proof the question now arises whether the accused has to discharge his burden beyond reasonable doubt the answer to which lies in preponderance of probabilities where the accused does not have to go as far as proving it beyond reasonable doubt; it is lesser in degree.

Q. In the scenario that B is murdered and A is accused based on the prima facie evidence, the burden of proof lies on which party?

The golden rule that runs through the web of civilised criminal jurisprudence is that an accused is presumed to be innocent unless he is found guilty of the charged offence. As stated in V. D. Jhingan Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1966 SC 1762, it is also the cardinal rule of our criminal jurisprudence that the burden in the web of proof of an offence would always lie upon the prosecution to prove all the facts constituting the ingredients beyond reasonable doubt.

But in Veeraswamy Case [(1991) 3 SCC 655] the Constitution Bench held that “a statute placing burden on the accused cannot be regarded as unreasonable, unjust or unfair. Nor it can be regarded as contrary to Art.21 of the Constitution as contended for the appellant. The principle is applied only in the absence of statutory provision to the contrary”. As observed in State of West Bengal v. Mir Mohammad Omar and Others, [2000 (8) SCC 382] that “the pristine rule that the burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused should not be taken as a fossilised doctrine as though it admits no process of intelligent reasoning. The Concept of “reverse burden” has been adopted in many statutes like Negotiable Instruments Act, Prevention of Corruption Act, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act etc. In Indian Evidence Act, Section 113A (for S.306 IPC) and Section 113B (for 304B IPC) places a reverse burden on the accused.

For instance Section 113B in the Evidence Act which provides for raising a presumption as to dowry death in case of an unnatural death within seven years of marriage when it is shown that a woman was subjected to harassment for dowry soon before her death. Presumption under Section 113B of Indian Evidence Act is a presumption of law. On proof of the essentials mentioned therein, it becomes obligatory on the court to raise a presumption that the accused caused the dowry death.

The presumption shall be raised only on proof of the following essentials (1) The question before the court must be whether the accused has committed the dowry death of a woman. (2) The woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or his relatives. (3) Such cruelty or harassment was for, or in connection with any demand for dowry. (4) Such cruelty or harassment was soon before her death.

Usually the prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused can be charged with that certain crime. In the reverse burden of proof the question now arises whether the accused has to discharge his burden beyond reasonable doubt the answer to which lies in preponderance of probabilities where the accused does not have to go as far as proving it beyond reasonable doubt; it is lesser in degree.

Q. In the case that the police found narcotics in the possession of Ram Singh, which are illegal, based on information given in the passage, who do you infer has the burden of proof as per the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act?

The golden rule that runs through the web of civilised criminal jurisprudence is that an accused is presumed to be innocent unless he is found guilty of the charged offence. As stated in V. D. Jhingan Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1966 SC 1762, it is also the cardinal rule of our criminal jurisprudence that the burden in the web of proof of an offence would always lie upon the prosecution to prove all the facts constituting the ingredients beyond reasonable doubt.

But in Veeraswamy Case [(1991) 3 SCC 655] the Constitution Bench held that “a statute placing burden on the accused cannot be regarded as unreasonable, unjust or unfair. Nor it can be regarded as contrary to Art.21 of the Constitution as contended for the appellant. The principle is applied only in the absence of statutory provision to the contrary”. As observed in State of West Bengal v. Mir Mohammad Omar and Others, [2000 (8) SCC 382] that “the pristine rule that the burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused should not be taken as a fossilised doctrine as though it admits no process of intelligent reasoning. The Concept of “reverse burden” has been adopted in many statutes like Negotiable Instruments Act, Prevention of Corruption Act, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act etc. In Indian Evidence Act, Section 113A (for S.306 IPC) and Section 113B (for 304B IPC) places a reverse burden on the accused.

For instance Section 113B in the Evidence Act which provides for raising a presumption as to dowry death in case of an unnatural death within seven years of marriage when it is shown that a woman was subjected to harassment for dowry soon before her death. Presumption under Section 113B of Indian Evidence Act is a presumption of law. On proof of the essentials mentioned therein, it becomes obligatory on the court to raise a presumption that the accused caused the dowry death.

The presumption shall be raised only on proof of the following essentials (1) The question before the court must be whether the accused has committed the dowry death of a woman. (2) The woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or his relatives. (3) Such cruelty or harassment was for, or in connection with any demand for dowry. (4) Such cruelty or harassment was soon before her death.

Usually the prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused can be charged with that certain crime. In the reverse burden of proof the question now arises whether the accused has to discharge his burden beyond reasonable doubt the answer to which lies in preponderance of probabilities where the accused does not have to go as far as proving it beyond reasonable doubt; it is lesser in degree.

Q. The burden of proof is higher in intensity in which of the following situations?

The golden rule that runs through the web of civilised criminal jurisprudence is that an accused is presumed to be innocent unless he is found guilty of the charged offence. As stated in V. D. Jhingan Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1966 SC 1762, it is also the cardinal rule of our criminal jurisprudence that the burden in the web of proof of an offence would always lie upon the prosecution to prove all the facts constituting the ingredients beyond reasonable doubt.

But in Veeraswamy Case [(1991) 3 SCC 655] the Constitution Bench held that “a statute placing burden on the accused cannot be regarded as unreasonable, unjust or unfair. Nor it can be regarded as contrary to Art.21 of the Constitution as contended for the appellant. The principle is applied only in the absence of statutory provision to the contrary”. As observed in State of West Bengal v. Mir Mohammad Omar and Others, [2000 (8) SCC 382] that “the pristine rule that the burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused should not be taken as a fossilised doctrine as though it admits no process of intelligent reasoning. The Concept of “reverse burden” has been adopted in many statutes like Negotiable Instruments Act, Prevention of Corruption Act, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act etc. In Indian Evidence Act, Section 113A (for S.306 IPC) and Section 113B (for 304B IPC) places a reverse burden on the accused.

For instance Section 113B in the Evidence Act which provides for raising a presumption as to dowry death in case of an unnatural death within seven years of marriage when it is shown that a woman was subjected to harassment for dowry soon before her death. Presumption under Section 113B of Indian Evidence Act is a presumption of law. On proof of the essentials mentioned therein, it becomes obligatory on the court to raise a presumption that the accused caused the dowry death.

The presumption shall be raised only on proof of the following essentials (1) The question before the court must be whether the accused has committed the dowry death of a woman. (2) The woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or his relatives. (3) Such cruelty or harassment was for, or in connection with any demand for dowry. (4) Such cruelty or harassment was soon before her death.

Usually the prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused can be charged with that certain crime. In the reverse burden of proof the question now arises whether the accused has to discharge his burden beyond reasonable doubt the answer to which lies in preponderance of probabilities where the accused does not have to go as far as proving it beyond reasonable doubt; it is lesser in degree.

Q. As per the paragraph, what is the reverse burden of proof?

The fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19(1) are not absolute. They are subject to restrictions placed in the subsequent clauses of Article19 according to the procedure established by law. No restrictions can be placed by mere executive or departmental instructions. However, these restrictions must be reasonable and not arbitrary. Each of these rights is liable to be controlled, curtailed and regulated to some extent by laws made by Parliament.

Restrictions may be enacted “in the interests of” public order of the general public. A restriction can be said to be in the interest of public order only if the connection between the restriction and the public order is direct and proximate. Hence a restriction to be constitutionally valid must satisfy the following two tests:

A legislation arbitrarily invading the right of a person cannot be regarded as reasonable. A restriction to be valid must have a direct and proximate nexus with the object which the legislation seeks to achieve and the restriction must not be in excess of that object i.e., a balance between the freedoms guaranteed under Art. 19(1)(a) to (g) and the social control permitted by clauses (2) to (6) of Art. 19. It is the substance of legislation and not its appearance or form which is to be taken into consideration while assessing its validity. This introduces the principle of ‘proportionality’. This means the court would consider whether the restriction imposed by legislation on the Fundamental Rights are disproportionate to the situation and are “not the least restrictive of the choices”.

Retrospectivity of a law does not make it automatically unreasonable. A statute imposing a restriction with retrospective effect is not prima facie unreasonable, but retrospectivity is an element to be taken into consideration in determining whether the restriction is reasonable or not.

A law may be reasonable, but the restriction imposed by it on the exercise of freedom may not be reasonable. A prohibition on the fundamental right to carry on occupation, trade or business is not regarded as reasonable if is it imposed not in the interests of the general public but keeping in view the susceptibilities and sentiments of a section of a community whose way of life, belief or thought is not the same as that of the claimant.

Q. There are 6 freedoms in total guaranteed by Art. 19 of the constitution and none of them are absolute. All the freedoms come with a restriction. What is the reason behind such restrictions given by our forefathers?

The fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19(1) are not absolute. They are subject to restrictions placed in the subsequent clauses of Article19 according to the procedure established by law. No restrictions can be placed by mere executive or departmental instructions. However, these restrictions must be reasonable and not arbitrary. Each of these rights is liable to be controlled, curtailed and regulated to some extent by laws made by Parliament.

Restrictions may be enacted “in the interests of” public order of the general public. A restriction can be said to be in the interest of public order only if the connection between the restriction and the public order is direct and proximate. Hence a restriction to be constitutionally valid must satisfy the following two tests:

A legislation arbitrarily invading the right of a person cannot be regarded as reasonable. A restriction to be valid must have a direct and proximate nexus with the object which the legislation seeks to achieve and the restriction must not be in excess of that object i.e., a balance between the freedoms guaranteed under Art. 19(1)(a) to (g) and the social control permitted by clauses (2) to (6) of Art. 19. It is the substance of legislation and not its appearance or form which is to be taken into consideration while assessing its validity. This introduces the principle of ‘proportionality’. This means the court would consider whether the restriction imposed by legislation on the Fundamental Rights are disproportionate to the situation and are “not the least restrictive of the choices”.

Retrospectivity of a law does not make it automatically unreasonable. A statute imposing a restriction with retrospective effect is not prima facie unreasonable, but retrospectivity is an element to be taken into consideration in determining whether the restriction is reasonable or not.

A law may be reasonable, but the restriction imposed by it on the exercise of freedom may not be reasonable. A prohibition on the fundamental right to carry on occupation, trade or business is not regarded as reasonable if is it imposed not in the interests of the general public but keeping in view the susceptibilities and sentiments of a section of a community whose way of life, belief or thought is not the same as that of the claimant.

Q. A case was filed by one Mr. Ranjit Kumar in the state of Maharashtra against a rule made by the state which says, no person will be allowed to drive any vehicle on road without wearing a helmet. Violating this rule was considered an offence and punitive measures were taken by the state. He filed a petition alleging that the imposed rule was unreasonable and curtailing his free movement in the state. Decide.

The fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19(1) are not absolute. They are subject to restrictions placed in the subsequent clauses of Article19 according to the procedure established by law. No restrictions can be placed by mere executive or departmental instructions. However, these restrictions must be reasonable and not arbitrary. Each of these rights is liable to be controlled, curtailed and regulated to some extent by laws made by Parliament.

Restrictions may be enacted “in the interests of” public order of the general public. A restriction can be said to be in the interest of public order only if the connection between the restriction and the public order is direct and proximate. Hence a restriction to be constitutionally valid must satisfy the following two tests:

A legislation arbitrarily invading the right of a person cannot be regarded as reasonable. A restriction to be valid must have a direct and proximate nexus with the object which the legislation seeks to achieve and the restriction must not be in excess of that object i.e., a balance between the freedoms guaranteed under Art. 19(1)(a) to (g) and the social control permitted by clauses (2) to (6) of Art. 19. It is the substance of legislation and not its appearance or form which is to be taken into consideration while assessing its validity. This introduces the principle of ‘proportionality’. This means the court would consider whether the restriction imposed by legislation on the Fundamental Rights are disproportionate to the situation and are “not the least restrictive of the choices”.

Retrospectivity of a law does not make it automatically unreasonable. A statute imposing a restriction with retrospective effect is not prima facie unreasonable, but retrospectivity is an element to be taken into consideration in determining whether the restriction is reasonable or not.

A law may be reasonable, but the restriction imposed by it on the exercise of freedom may not be reasonable. A prohibition on the fundamental right to carry on occupation, trade or business is not regarded as reasonable if is it imposed not in the interests of the general public but keeping in view the susceptibilities and sentiments of a section of a community whose way of life, belief or thought is not the same as that of the claimant.

Q. In the state of Madhya Pradesh, an Act was passed to the extent that during the agricultural season, no one should engage in the manufacture of beedies. The object and intent of the legislature was that as there was dearth of labour in the agriculture sector, it was required to divert labour to the agriculture sector. This restriction of the freedom of occupation was questioned. Is this a reasonable restriction and is the state justified in doing so?

The fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19(1) are not absolute. They are subject to restrictions placed in the subsequent clauses of Article19 according to the procedure established by law. No restrictions can be placed by mere executive or departmental instructions. However, these restrictions must be reasonable and not arbitrary. Each of these rights is liable to be controlled, curtailed and regulated to some extent by laws made by Parliament.

Restrictions may be enacted “in the interests of” public order of the general public. A restriction can be said to be in the interest of public order only if the connection between the restriction and the public order is direct and proximate. Hence a restriction to be constitutionally valid must satisfy the following two tests:

A legislation arbitrarily invading the right of a person cannot be regarded as reasonable. A restriction to be valid must have a direct and proximate nexus with the object which the legislation seeks to achieve and the restriction must not be in excess of that object i.e., a balance between the freedoms guaranteed under Art. 19(1)(a) to (g) and the social control permitted by clauses (2) to (6) of Art. 19. It is the substance of legislation and not its appearance or form which is to be taken into consideration while assessing its validity. This introduces the principle of ‘proportionality’. This means the court would consider whether the restriction imposed by legislation on the Fundamental Rights are disproportionate to the situation and are “not the least restrictive of the choices”.

Retrospectivity of a law does not make it automatically unreasonable. A statute imposing a restriction with retrospective effect is not prima facie unreasonable, but retrospectivity is an element to be taken into consideration in determining whether the restriction is reasonable or not.

A law may be reasonable, but the restriction imposed by it on the exercise of freedom may not be reasonable. A prohibition on the fundamental right to carry on occupation, trade or business is not regarded as reasonable if is it imposed not in the interests of the general public but keeping in view the susceptibilities and sentiments of a section of a community whose way of life, belief or thought is not the same as that of the claimant.

Q. For a restriction on the freedoms guaranteed under art 19 of the constitution, to gain constitutional validity must:

The fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19(1) are not absolute. They are subject to restrictions placed in the subsequent clauses of Article19 according to the procedure established by law. No restrictions can be placed by mere executive or departmental instructions. However, these restrictions must be reasonable and not arbitrary. Each of these rights is liable to be controlled, curtailed and regulated to some extent by laws made by Parliament.

Restrictions may be enacted “in the interests of” public order of the general public. A restriction can be said to be in the interest of public order only if the connection between the restriction and the public order is direct and proximate. Hence a restriction to be constitutionally valid must satisfy the following two tests:

A legislation arbitrarily invading the right of a person cannot be regarded as reasonable. A restriction to be valid must have a direct and proximate nexus with the object which the legislation seeks to achieve and the restriction must not be in excess of that object i.e., a balance between the freedoms guaranteed under Art. 19(1)(a) to (g) and the social control permitted by clauses (2) to (6) of Art. 19. It is the substance of legislation and not its appearance or form which is to be taken into consideration while assessing its validity. This introduces the principle of ‘proportionality’. This means the court would consider whether the restriction imposed by legislation on the Fundamental Rights are disproportionate to the situation and are “not the least restrictive of the choices”.

Retrospectivity of a law does not make it automatically unreasonable. A statute imposing a restriction with retrospective effect is not prima facie unreasonable, but retrospectivity is an element to be taken into consideration in determining whether the restriction is reasonable or not.

A law may be reasonable, but the restriction imposed by it on the exercise of freedom may not be reasonable. A prohibition on the fundamental right to carry on occupation, trade or business is not regarded as reasonable if is it imposed not in the interests of the general public but keeping in view the susceptibilities and sentiments of a section of a community whose way of life, belief or thought is not the same as that of the claimant.

Q. A group of people were denied permission and license was also rejected by the magistrate to assemble and carry out a procession on the road in front of the parliament. This power of granting or refusing a permission to the magistrate was questioned and alleged to be unreasonable by the group. Is the power granted to the magistrate unreasonable?

In the Landmark case of Vishaka and others versus State of Rajasthan (AIR 1997 Supreme Court 3011), The Supreme Court has issued extensive guidelines to ensure prevention of sexual harassment of women at workplace. These directions were issued in a writ petition arising out of an incident of alleged brutal gang rape of a social worker in a village of Rajasthan.

This petition was filed for the enforcement of fundamental rights of working women under article 14, 19 and 21 of the constitution of India in view of the prevailing climate in which the violation of these rights is not uncommon. With the increasing awareness and emphasis on gender justice, there is an increase in the effort to guard against such social violations; and the resentment towards incidents of sexual harassment is also increasing. This petition was in public interest and was brought as a class action by certain social activist and NGOs.

It has been held by the Supreme Court that it shall be the duty of the employer to prevent the commission of sexual harassment and to provide the procedures for the resolution and prosecution of acts of sexual harassment by taking all the steps required.

Sexual harassment has been described as including such unwelcome sexually determined behavior (whether directly or by implication) as: (a) physical contact and advances; (b) a demand or request for sexual favors; (c) sexually coloured remarks; (d) showing pornography; (e) any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of sexual nature.

It has been held that all employers should take appropriate step to prevent sexual harassment: (a) The prohibition of sexual harassment should be notified, published and circulated in appropriate ways. (b) The rules/regulation of government of public sector bodies should include rules prohibiting sexual harassment and provide for appropriate penalties. (c) As regard private employees, steps should be taken to include the prohibition in standing orders under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946.

The employer has been directed to initiate criminal action by making a complaint in cases where specific offence of sexual harassment has taken place. He is also required to initiate disciplinary action. The above guidelines are in addition to rights available to women under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.

Q. Guidelines for the prevention of sexual harassment in the workplace

In the Landmark case of Vishaka and others versus State of Rajasthan (AIR 1997 Supreme Court 3011), The Supreme Court has issued extensive guidelines to ensure prevention of sexual harassment of women at workplace. These directions were issued in a writ petition arising out of an incident of alleged brutal gang rape of a social worker in a village of Rajasthan.

This petition was filed for the enforcement of fundamental rights of working women under article 14, 19 and 21 of the constitution of India in view of the prevailing climate in which the violation of these rights is not uncommon. With the increasing awareness and emphasis on gender justice, there is an increase in the effort to guard against such social violations; and the resentment towards incidents of sexual harassment is also increasing. This petition was in public interest and was brought as a class action by certain social activist and NGOs.

It has been held by the Supreme Court that it shall be the duty of the employer to prevent the commission of sexual harassment and to provide the procedures for the resolution and prosecution of acts of sexual harassment by taking all the steps required.

Sexual harassment has been described as including such unwelcome sexually determined behavior (whether directly or by implication) as: (a) physical contact and advances; (b) a demand or request for sexual favors; (c) sexually coloured remarks; (d) showing pornography; (e) any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of sexual nature.

It has been held that all employers should take appropriate step to prevent sexual harassment: (a) The prohibition of sexual harassment should be notified, published and circulated in appropriate ways. (b) The rules/regulation of government of public sector bodies should include rules prohibiting sexual harassment and provide for appropriate penalties. (c) As regard private employees, steps should be taken to include the prohibition in standing orders under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946.

The employer has been directed to initiate criminal action by making a complaint in cases where specific offence of sexual harassment has taken place. He is also required to initiate disciplinary action. The above guidelines are in addition to rights available to women under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.

Q. Which of the following does not come under Sexual Harassment in the workplace?

In the Landmark case of Vishaka and others versus State of Rajasthan (AIR 1997 Supreme Court 3011), The Supreme Court has issued extensive guidelines to ensure prevention of sexual harassment of women at workplace. These directions were issued in a writ petition arising out of an incident of alleged brutal gang rape of a social worker in a village of Rajasthan.

This petition was filed for the enforcement of fundamental rights of working women under article 14, 19 and 21 of the constitution of India in view of the prevailing climate in which the violation of these rights is not uncommon. With the increasing awareness and emphasis on gender justice, there is an increase in the effort to guard against such social violations; and the resentment towards incidents of sexual harassment is also increasing. This petition was in public interest and was brought as a class action by certain social activist and NGOs.

It has been held by the Supreme Court that it shall be the duty of the employer to prevent the commission of sexual harassment and to provide the procedures for the resolution and prosecution of acts of sexual harassment by taking all the steps required.

Sexual harassment has been described as including such unwelcome sexually determined behavior (whether directly or by implication) as: (a) physical contact and advances; (b) a demand or request for sexual favors; (c) sexually coloured remarks; (d) showing pornography; (e) any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of sexual nature.

It has been held that all employers should take appropriate step to prevent sexual harassment: (a) The prohibition of sexual harassment should be notified, published and circulated in appropriate ways. (b) The rules/regulation of government of public sector bodies should include rules prohibiting sexual harassment and provide for appropriate penalties. (c) As regard private employees, steps should be taken to include the prohibition in standing orders under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946.

The employer has been directed to initiate criminal action by making a complaint in cases where specific offence of sexual harassment has taken place. He is also required to initiate disciplinary action. The above guidelines are in addition to rights available to women under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.

Q. Haritha, an employee in Navbharath Technologies has been sexually harassed by her colleague, Sawant. She complained to the HR of the company. What is the action that the management of Navbharath Technologies needs to take?

In the Landmark case of Vishaka and others versus State of Rajasthan (AIR 1997 Supreme Court 3011), The Supreme Court has issued extensive guidelines to ensure prevention of sexual harassment of women at workplace. These directions were issued in a writ petition arising out of an incident of alleged brutal gang rape of a social worker in a village of Rajasthan.

This petition was filed for the enforcement of fundamental rights of working women under article 14, 19 and 21 of the constitution of India in view of the prevailing climate in which the violation of these rights is not uncommon. With the increasing awareness and emphasis on gender justice, there is an increase in the effort to guard against such social violations; and the resentment towards incidents of sexual harassment is also increasing. This petition was in public interest and was brought as a class action by certain social activist and NGOs.

It has been held by the Supreme Court that it shall be the duty of the employer to prevent the commission of sexual harassment and to provide the procedures for the resolution and prosecution of acts of sexual harassment by taking all the steps required.

Sexual harassment has been described as including such unwelcome sexually determined behavior (whether directly or by implication) as: (a) physical contact and advances; (b) a demand or request for sexual favors; (c) sexually coloured remarks; (d) showing pornography; (e) any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of sexual nature.

It has been held that all employers should take appropriate step to prevent sexual harassment: (a) The prohibition of sexual harassment should be notified, published and circulated in appropriate ways. (b) The rules/regulation of government of public sector bodies should include rules prohibiting sexual harassment and provide for appropriate penalties. (c) As regard private employees, steps should be taken to include the prohibition in standing orders under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946.

The employer has been directed to initiate criminal action by making a complaint in cases where specific offence of sexual harassment has taken place. He is also required to initiate disciplinary action. The above guidelines are in addition to rights available to women under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.

Q. When Sheila was newly hired, Ram asked her out for coffee after work. Sheila went with him once to be friendly, but she quickly saw that he was interested in him as more than a friend, so she declined all invitations since. After a couple of months, Ram meets Sheila in the cafeteria during the lunch break and compliments her that she is looking smart. Does this amount to sexual harassment?

In the Landmark case of Vishaka and others versus State of Rajasthan (AIR 1997 Supreme Court 3011), The Supreme Court has issued extensive guidelines to ensure prevention of sexual harassment of women at workplace. These directions were issued in a writ petition arising out of an incident of alleged brutal gang rape of a social worker in a village of Rajasthan.

This petition was filed for the enforcement of fundamental rights of working women under article 14, 19 and 21 of the constitution of India in view of the prevailing climate in which the violation of these rights is not uncommon. With the increasing awareness and emphasis on gender justice, there is an increase in the effort to guard against such social violations; and the resentment towards incidents of sexual harassment is also increasing. This petition was in public interest and was brought as a class action by certain social activist and NGOs.

It has been held by the Supreme Court that it shall be the duty of the employer to prevent the commission of sexual harassment and to provide the procedures for the resolution and prosecution of acts of sexual harassment by taking all the steps required.

Sexual harassment has been described as including such unwelcome sexually determined behavior (whether directly or by implication) as: (a) physical contact and advances; (b) a demand or request for sexual favors; (c) sexually coloured remarks; (d) showing pornography; (e) any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of sexual nature.

It has been held that all employers should take appropriate step to prevent sexual harassment: (a) The prohibition of sexual harassment should be notified, published and circulated in appropriate ways. (b) The rules/regulation of government of public sector bodies should include rules prohibiting sexual harassment and provide for appropriate penalties. (c) As regard private employees, steps should be taken to include the prohibition in standing orders under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946.

The employer has been directed to initiate criminal action by making a complaint in cases where specific offence of sexual harassment has taken place. He is also required to initiate disciplinary action. The above guidelines are in addition to rights available to women under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.

Q. The responsibility of prevention of sexual harassment at the workplace and procedures for complaints and resolution of such incidents primarily lies with

Is it possible to be too honest? Is honesty really the best policy? The answer to both questions is … a definite maybe. And that’s because along with the obvious advantages, there are also disadvantages of being honest all the time. If you were to say, “Birds have feathers,” you would be stating a truthful fact. If you were to answer the question, “Did you do that?” with the truth about your actions, you would also be stating a fact. But honesty gets to be tricky when you talk about opinions. Imagine that your best friend has just gotten a new haircut that she absolutely loves. You think the cut is very unflattering. Are you honest with her about what you think or do you tell a “white lie” and spare her feelings? Most people would choose to lie no matter how horrible they think their friend looks. That’s because it’s part of our social code. As a society, we prefer to lie about our opinions rather than say something that would hurt another’s feelings.

Yet, if you choose to be honest in situations like the one described above, you’ll experience the few disadvantages of being honest. You’ll feel annoyed when others aren’t as honest with you. When you truthfully express your opinions instead of sugar-coating things the way others expect you to, they’ll judge you to be rude. Others will respond to you negatively, when you honestly state your opinions without regard for their feelings. When you make a habit of being honest all the time, you will have fewer friends. That’s because most people feel safest when they know that you’ll follow the social norms.

Q. Infer from the passage above and choose from the following the least likely feature of a truthful fact.

Is it possible to be too honest? Is honesty really the best policy? The answer to both questions is … a definite maybe. And that’s because along with the obvious advantages, there are also disadvantages of being honest all the time. If you were to say, “Birds have feathers,” you would be stating a truthful fact. If you were to answer the question, “Did you do that?” with the truth about your actions, you would also be stating a fact. But honesty gets to be tricky when you talk about opinions. Imagine that your best friend has just gotten a new haircut that she absolutely loves. You think the cut is very unflattering. Are you honest with her about what you think or do you tell a “white lie” and spare her feelings? Most people would choose to lie no matter how horrible they think their friend looks. That’s because it’s part of our social code. As a society, we prefer to lie about our opinions rather than say something that would hurt another’s feelings.

Yet, if you choose to be honest in situations like the one described above, you’ll experience the few disadvantages of being honest. You’ll feel annoyed when others aren’t as honest with you. When you truthfully express your opinions instead of sugar-coating things the way others expect you to, they’ll judge you to be rude. Others will respond to you negatively, when you honestly state your opinions without regard for their feelings. When you make a habit of being honest all the time, you will have fewer friends. That’s because most people feel safest when they know that you’ll follow the social norms.

Q. Which amongst the following, is the question that will not make you talk about your opinions?

Is it possible to be too honest? Is honesty really the best policy? The answer to both questions is … a definite maybe. And that’s because along with the obvious advantages, there are also disadvantages of being honest all the time. If you were to say, “Birds have feathers,” you would be stating a truthful fact. If you were to answer the question, “Did you do that?” with the truth about your actions, you would also be stating a fact. But honesty gets to be tricky when you talk about opinions. Imagine that your best friend has just gotten a new haircut that she absolutely loves. You think the cut is very unflattering. Are you honest with her about what you think or do you tell a “white lie” and spare her feelings? Most people would choose to lie no matter how horrible they think their friend looks. That’s because it’s part of our social code. As a society, we prefer to lie about our opinions rather than say something that would hurt another’s feelings.

Yet, if you choose to be honest in situations like the one described above, you’ll experience the few disadvantages of being honest. You’ll feel annoyed when others aren’t as honest with you. When you truthfully express your opinions instead of sugar-coating things the way others expect you to, they’ll judge you to be rude. Others will respond to you negatively, when you honestly state your opinions without regard for their feelings. When you make a habit of being honest all the time, you will have fewer friends. That’s because most people feel safest when they know that you’ll follow the social norms.

Q. Which of the following, if true, strengthens the author’s assertion about the disadvantages of speaking truth?

Is it possible to be too honest? Is honesty really the best policy? The answer to both questions is … a definite maybe. And that’s because along with the obvious advantages, there are also disadvantages of being honest all the time. If you were to say, “Birds have feathers,” you would be stating a truthful fact. If you were to answer the question, “Did you do that?” with the truth about your actions, you would also be stating a fact. But honesty gets to be tricky when you talk about opinions. Imagine that your best friend has just gotten a new haircut that she absolutely loves. You think the cut is very unflattering. Are you honest with her about what you think or do you tell a “white lie” and spare her feelings? Most people would choose to lie no matter how horrible they think their friend looks. That’s because it’s part of our social code. As a society, we prefer to lie about our opinions rather than say something that would hurt another’s feelings.

Yet, if you choose to be honest in situations like the one described above, you’ll experience the few disadvantages of being honest. You’ll feel annoyed when others aren’t as honest with you. When you truthfully express your opinions instead of sugar-coating things the way others expect you to, they’ll judge you to be rude. Others will respond to you negatively, when you honestly state your opinions without regard for their feelings. When you make a habit of being honest all the time, you will have fewer friends. That’s because most people feel safest when they know that you’ll follow the social norms.

Q. What could be concluded from the author’s description of the social code?

Is it possible to be too honest? Is honesty really the best policy? The answer to both questions is … a definite maybe. And that’s because along with the obvious advantages, there are also disadvantages of being honest all the time. If you were to say, “Birds have feathers,” you would be stating a truthful fact. If you were to answer the question, “Did you do that?” with the truth about your actions, you would also be stating a fact. But honesty gets to be tricky when you talk about opinions. Imagine that your best friend has just gotten a new haircut that she absolutely loves. You think the cut is very unflattering. Are you honest with her about what you think or do you tell a “white lie” and spare her feelings? Most people would choose to lie no matter how horrible they think their friend looks. That’s because it’s part of our social code. As a society, we prefer to lie about our opinions rather than say something that would hurt another’s feelings.

Yet, if you choose to be honest in situations like the one described above, you’ll experience the few disadvantages of being honest. You’ll feel annoyed when others aren’t as honest with you. When you truthfully express your opinions instead of sugar-coating things the way others expect you to, they’ll judge you to be rude. Others will respond to you negatively, when you honestly state your opinions without regard for their feelings. When you make a habit of being honest all the time, you will have fewer friends. That’s because most people feel safest when they know that you’ll follow the social norms.

Q. If the author’s arguments in the given passage are true, which of the following must also be true?

US treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin dismissed climate activist Greta Thunberg’s call at Davos for the world to divest from fossil fuel by joking “Who’s she?” and then suggesting that she should only be heard after she “goes and studies economics in college”. If Mnuchin and co. have not, so far, been able to acquaint themselves with the existing scientific research on climate change and its impact, including that involving sophisticated economic modelling, they would do well to pay heed to the McKinsey’s Climate risk and response: Physical hazards and socioeconomic impacts report, released recently.

Q. Which of the following is the right inference that the author is trying to draw?

US treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin dismissed climate activist Greta Thunberg’s call at Davos for the world to divest from fossil fuel by joking “Who’s she?” and then suggesting that she should only be heard after she “goes and studies economics in college”. If Mnuchin and co. have not, so far, been able to acquaint themselves with the existing scientific research on climate change and its impact, including that involving sophisticated economic modelling, they would do well to pay heed to the McKinsey’s Climate risk and response: Physical hazards and socioeconomic impacts report, released recently.

Q. Which of the following would strengthen the author’s argument in support of paying attention to the issue of climate change?

US treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin dismissed climate activist Greta Thunberg’s call at Davos for the world to divest from fossil fuel by joking “Who’s she?” and then suggesting that she should only be heard after she “goes and studies economics in college”. If Mnuchin and co. have not, so far, been able to acquaint themselves with the existing scientific research on climate change and its impact, including that involving sophisticated economic modelling, they would do well to pay heed to the McKinsey’s Climate risk and response: Physical hazards and socioeconomic impacts report, released recently.

Q. Given nearly 75% of India’s labour force is employed in heat–exposed work, if India does not undertake urgent reforms and skilling initiatives, it will face a future of rampant unemployment/under–employment. Which of the following conclusions can be made if it is true that India has yet to undertake any reformative measures and skill initiatives for its labour?

US treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin dismissed climate activist Greta Thunberg’s call at Davos for the world to divest from fossil fuel by joking “Who’s she?” and then suggesting that she should only be heard after she “goes and studies economics in college”. If Mnuchin and co. have not, so far, been able to acquaint themselves with the existing scientific research on climate change and its impact, including that involving sophisticated economic modelling, they would do well to pay heed to the McKinsey’s Climate risk and response: Physical hazards and socioeconomic impacts report, released recently.

Q. Which of the following would incentivise corporates to look into the issue of climate change?

US treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin dismissed climate activist Greta Thunberg’s call at Davos for the world to divest from fossil fuel by joking “Who’s she?” and then suggesting that she should only be heard after she “goes and studies economics in college”. If Mnuchin and co. have not, so far, been able to acquaint themselves with the existing scientific research on climate change and its impact, including that involving sophisticated economic modelling, they would do well to pay heed to the McKinsey’s Climate risk and response: Physical hazards and socioeconomic impacts report, released recently.

Q. Which of the following could perhaps help Mnuchin take Thunberg more seriously?

Chances are, when the government submits its final ‘intermediary guidelines’ to the Supreme Court later this month—meant for social media firms like Facebook and messaging services like WhatsApp—it will further tighten and reiterate some of the existing ones, like the tracing/origin of messages such as those on WhatsApp. The government needing such information in certain cases is understandable. Theoretically, for instance, WhatsApp forwards talking of a group of Muslims planning to slaughter cows can result in communal violence; so the government needs to know from where the messages originated. And, it would help the Delhi Police immensely if the originators of several WhatsApp messages in the recent JNU attacks can be traced. Logically speaking, if the government can trace/tap phone calls today, there is no reason why this should not extend to newer forms of messaging/communications.

Indeed, in October last year, the US Attorney General, the UK secretary of state, and the Australian home minister, among others, wrote to Facebook, asking it to ensure that the police get lawful access to its content for precisely the same reason of maintaining law and order; firms like Apple and Facebook have also been petitioned by the US not to encrypt certain type of data—Apple has just dropped a plan to allow iPhone users to fully encrypt their data backup on the iCloud—as this could hurt their investigations. The problem, however, is what this does to the privacy of individuals, which, the Supreme Court has ruled, is a fundamental right.

Q. Premise: If the government can trace/tap phone calls today, then there is no reason why this should not extend to newer forms of messaging/communications.

It is true that the Government can tap calls. Which of the following is also true?

Chances are, when the government submits its final ‘intermediary guidelines’ to the Supreme Court later this month—meant for social media firms like Facebook and messaging services like WhatsApp—it will further tighten and reiterate some of the existing ones, like the tracing/origin of messages such as those on WhatsApp. The government needing such information in certain cases is understandable. Theoretically, for instance, WhatsApp forwards talking of a group of Muslims planning to slaughter cows can result in communal violence; so the government needs to know from where the messages originated. And, it would help the Delhi Police immensely if the originators of several WhatsApp messages in the recent JNU attacks can be traced. Logically speaking, if the government can trace/tap phone calls today, there is no reason why this should not extend to newer forms of messaging/communications.

Indeed, in October last year, the US Attorney General, the UK secretary of state, and the Australian home minister, among others, wrote to Facebook, asking it to ensure that the police get lawful access to its content for precisely the same reason of maintaining law and order; firms like Apple and Facebook have also been petitioned by the US not to encrypt certain type of data—Apple has just dropped a plan to allow iPhone users to fully encrypt their data backup on the iCloud—as this could hurt their investigations. The problem, however, is what this does to the privacy of individuals, which, the Supreme Court has ruled, is a fundamental right.

Q. Which of the following would weaken the argument in favour of privacy and against surveillance?

Chances are, when the government submits its final ‘intermediary guidelines’ to the Supreme Court later this month—meant for social media firms like Facebook and messaging services like WhatsApp—it will further tighten and reiterate some of the existing ones, like the tracing/origin of messages such as those on WhatsApp. The government needing such information in certain cases is understandable. Theoretically, for instance, WhatsApp forwards talking of a group of Muslims planning to slaughter cows can result in communal violence; so the government needs to know from where the messages originated. And, it would help the Delhi Police immensely if the originators of several WhatsApp messages in the recent JNU attacks can be traced. Logically speaking, if the government can trace/tap phone calls today, there is no reason why this should not extend to newer forms of messaging/communications.

Indeed, in October last year, the US Attorney General, the UK secretary of state, and the Australian home minister, among others, wrote to Facebook, asking it to ensure that the police get lawful access to its content for precisely the same reason of maintaining law and order; firms like Apple and Facebook have also been petitioned by the US not to encrypt certain type of data—Apple has just dropped a plan to allow iPhone users to fully encrypt their data backup on the iCloud—as this could hurt their investigations. The problem, however, is what this does to the privacy of individuals, which, the Supreme Court has ruled, is a fundamental right.

Q. Which of the following, if true, would strengthen the argument in favour of privacy and against indiscriminate surveillance?

Chances are, when the government submits its final ‘intermediary guidelines’ to the Supreme Court later this month—meant for social media firms like Facebook and messaging services like WhatsApp—it will further tighten and reiterate some of the existing ones, like the tracing/origin of messages such as those on WhatsApp. The government needing such information in certain cases is understandable. Theoretically, for instance, WhatsApp forwards talking of a group of Muslims planning to slaughter cows can result in communal violence; so the government needs to know from where the messages originated. And, it would help the Delhi Police immensely if the originators of several WhatsApp messages in the recent JNU attacks can be traced. Logically speaking, if the government can trace/tap phone calls today, there is no reason why this should not extend to newer forms of messaging/communications.

Indeed, in October last year, the US Attorney General, the UK secretary of state, and the Australian home minister, among others, wrote to Facebook, asking it to ensure that the police get lawful access to its content for precisely the same reason of maintaining law and order; firms like Apple and Facebook have also been petitioned by the US not to encrypt certain type of data—Apple has just dropped a plan to allow iPhone users to fully encrypt their data backup on the iCloud—as this could hurt their investigations. The problem, however, is what this does to the privacy of individuals, which, the Supreme Court has ruled, is a fundamental right.

Q. Which of the following options would support the act of surveillance by state?

I. WhatsApp has consistently claimed it cannot trace messages.

II. The existing intermediary guidelines suggest that the Government may ask WhatsApp to decrypt WhatsApp messages and proactively identify and remove unlawful information and content.

III. Telegram app is being asked to monitor the encrypted content that impact ‘public order’, ‘security of the state’, ‘sovereignty and integrity of India’.

Chances are, when the government submits its final ‘intermediary guidelines’ to the Supreme Court later this month—meant for social media firms like Facebook and messaging services like WhatsApp—it will further tighten and reiterate some of the existing ones, like the tracing/origin of messages such as those on WhatsApp. The government needing such information in certain cases is understandable. Theoretically, for instance, WhatsApp forwards talking of a group of Muslims planning to slaughter cows can result in communal violence; so the government needs to know from where the messages originated. And, it would help the Delhi Police immensely if the originators of several WhatsApp messages in the recent JNU attacks can be traced. Logically speaking, if the government can trace/tap phone calls today, there is no reason why this should not extend to newer forms of messaging/communications.

Indeed, in October last year, the US Attorney General, the UK secretary of state, and the Australian home minister, among others, wrote to Facebook, asking it to ensure that the police get lawful access to its content for precisely the same reason of maintaining law and order; firms like Apple and Facebook have also been petitioned by the US not to encrypt certain type of data—Apple has just dropped a plan to allow iPhone users to fully encrypt their data backup on the iCloud—as this could hurt their investigations. The problem, however, is what this does to the privacy of individuals, which, the Supreme Court has ruled, is a fundamental right.

Q. All the following supports the argument that if phones are permitted to be tapped, then messages should also be allowed, EXCEPT:

Billed as a clash between the treble-chasers, the coming team of England were up against the most recent non- English serial conquerors of Europe, whose coach, Udo Lattek, was freshly reinstalled to recreate the mid-1970s glory days of three consecutive European Cups. Bayern's disruption tactics were apparent, hot tempered one-on-one confrontations were soon ablaze all over the pitch.

My clearest first-half memory is giving a time-wasting Pfaff evil stare every time he feigned to mis-control my perfectly weighted passes. Acting on Kendall's advice to ""let the Gwladys Street suck the ball in the net"", Everton bombarded Bayern. I played my part, skittling the ball quickly to Southall to maintain the attacking intensity. I was carrying a few pounds extra - in the pockets, the result of scouring the turf at half-time for coins readily donated to the Ball Boy Appreciation Fund.

The European Cup final disaster at Heysel - just 14 days after Rotterdam, where they were crowned Champions - meant this turned out to be the end of an era for Everton, rather than the start. Denied the chance to fully emerge from Liverpool's shadow and contest the European Cup (twice) during the ban on English clubs, Kendall departed for Spain in 1987 and Everton's 1985 triumph proved the final hurrah for English football's golden era.

When the ban ended in the early 90s, Everton's (and England's) dominance was consigned to a different age along with goalkeepers picking up back passes and optional use of shin pads.

Q. How would you describe the atmosphere of the match?

Billed as a clash between the treble-chasers, the coming team of England were up against the most recent non- English serial conquerors of Europe, whose coach, Udo Lattek, was freshly reinstalled to recreate the mid-1970s glory days of three consecutive European Cups. Bayern's disruption tactics were apparent, hot tempered one-on-one confrontations were soon ablaze all over the pitch.

My clearest first-half memory is giving a time-wasting Pfaff evil stare every time he feigned to mis-control my perfectly weighted passes. Acting on Kendall's advice to ""let the Gwladys Street suck the ball in the net"", Everton bombarded Bayern. I played my part, skittling the ball quickly to Southall to maintain the attacking intensity. I was carrying a few pounds extra - in the pockets, the result of scouring the turf at half-time for coins readily donated to the Ball Boy Appreciation Fund.

The European Cup final disaster at Heysel - just 14 days after Rotterdam, where they were crowned Champions - meant this turned out to be the end of an era for Everton, rather than the start. Denied the chance to fully emerge from Liverpool's shadow and contest the European Cup (twice) during the ban on English clubs, Kendall departed for Spain in 1987 and Everton's 1985 triumph proved the final hurrah for English football's golden era.

When the ban ended in the early 90s, Everton's (and England's) dominance was consigned to a different age along with goalkeepers picking up back passes and optional use of shin pads.

Q. Which of the following do you think was the author's profession at the time of the match?

Billed as a clash between the treble-chasers, the coming team of England were up against the most recent non- English serial conquerors of Europe, whose coach, Udo Lattek, was freshly reinstalled to recreate the mid-1970s glory days of three consecutive European Cups. Bayern's disruption tactics were apparent, hot tempered one-on-one confrontations were soon ablaze all over the pitch.

My clearest first-half memory is giving a time-wasting Pfaff evil stare every time he feigned to mis-control my perfectly weighted passes. Acting on Kendall's advice to ""let the Gwladys Street suck the ball in the net"", Everton bombarded Bayern. I played my part, skittling the ball quickly to Southall to maintain the attacking intensity. I was carrying a few pounds extra - in the pockets, the result of scouring the turf at half-time for coins readily donated to the Ball Boy Appreciation Fund.

The European Cup final disaster at Heysel - just 14 days after Rotterdam, where they were crowned Champions - meant this turned out to be the end of an era for Everton, rather than the start. Denied the chance to fully emerge from Liverpool's shadow and contest the European Cup (twice) during the ban on English clubs, Kendall departed for Spain in 1987 and Everton's 1985 triumph proved the final hurrah for English football's golden era.

When the ban ended in the early 90s, Everton's (and England's) dominance was consigned to a different age along with goalkeepers picking up back passes and optional use of shin pads.

Q. Which of the following descriptions parallels the fate of Everton?

Billed as a clash between the treble-chasers, the coming team of England were up against the most recent non- English serial conquerors of Europe, whose coach, Udo Lattek, was freshly reinstalled to recreate the mid-1970s glory days of three consecutive European Cups. Bayern's disruption tactics were apparent, hot tempered one-on-one confrontations were soon ablaze all over the pitch.

My clearest first-half memory is giving a time-wasting Pfaff evil stare every time he feigned to mis-control my perfectly weighted passes. Acting on Kendall's advice to ""let the Gwladys Street suck the ball in the net"", Everton bombarded Bayern. I played my part, skittling the ball quickly to Southall to maintain the attacking intensity. I was carrying a few pounds extra - in the pockets, the result of scouring the turf at half-time for coins readily donated to the Ball Boy Appreciation Fund.

The European Cup final disaster at Heysel - just 14 days after Rotterdam, where they were crowned Champions - meant this turned out to be the end of an era for Everton, rather than the start. Denied the chance to fully emerge from Liverpool's shadow and contest the European Cup (twice) during the ban on English clubs, Kendall departed for Spain in 1987 and Everton's 1985 triumph proved the final hurrah for English football's golden era.

When the ban ended in the early 90s, Everton's (and England's) dominance was consigned to a different age along with goalkeepers picking up back passes and optional use of shin pads.

Q. The author remembers Bayern as:

Billed as a clash between the treble-chasers, the coming team of England were up against the most recent non- English serial conquerors of Europe, whose coach, Udo Lattek, was freshly reinstalled to recreate the mid-1970s glory days of three consecutive European Cups. Bayern's disruption tactics were apparent, hot tempered one-on-one confrontations were soon ablaze all over the pitch.

My clearest first-half memory is giving a time-wasting Pfaff evil stare every time he feigned to mis-control my perfectly weighted passes. Acting on Kendall's advice to ""let the Gwladys Street suck the ball in the net"", Everton bombarded Bayern. I played my part, skittling the ball quickly to Southall to maintain the attacking intensity. I was carrying a few pounds extra - in the pockets, the result of scouring the turf at half-time for coins readily donated to the Ball Boy Appreciation Fund.

The European Cup final disaster at Heysel - just 14 days after Rotterdam, where they were crowned Champions - meant this turned out to be the end of an era for Everton, rather than the start. Denied the chance to fully emerge from Liverpool's shadow and contest the European Cup (twice) during the ban on English clubs, Kendall departed for Spain in 1987 and Everton's 1985 triumph proved the final hurrah for English football's golden era.

When the ban ended in the early 90s, Everton's (and England's) dominance was consigned to a different age along with goalkeepers picking up back passes and optional use of shin pads.

Q. The author uses the example of goalkeeper picking up passes to showcase:

The question has six statements followed by four options. Choose the option in which the third statement can be logically derived from previous two statements.

i. All red is black.

ii. All red is white.

iii. All red is blue.

iv. All blue is white.

v. All black is red.

vi. All black is white.

The question has six statements followed by four options. Choose the option in which the third statement can be logically derived from previous two statements.

i. Avinash is a child.

ii. Some children are naughty.

iii. Naughty children are respectful.

iv. Avinash is naughty.

v. All children are respectful.

vi. Avinash is respectful.

The question consists of six statements followed by four sets of combinations of three. Choose the alternative where the third statement can be logically deduced from the preceding two.

Statements:

i. Some traveling is fun.

ii. Some fun is expensive.

iii. Some fun is hazardous.

iv. Some traveling is hazardous.

v. Traveling is expensive.

vi. Hazardous is always fun.