Sample Test: Legal Reasoning


11 Questions MCQ Test Mock Test Series for CLAT 2021 | Sample Test: Legal Reasoning


Description
This mock test of Sample Test: Legal Reasoning for CLAT helps you for every CLAT entrance exam. This contains 11 Multiple Choice Questions for CLAT Sample Test: Legal Reasoning (mcq) to study with solutions a complete question bank. The solved questions answers in this Sample Test: Legal Reasoning quiz give you a good mix of easy questions and tough questions. CLAT students definitely take this Sample Test: Legal Reasoning exercise for a better result in the exam. You can find other Sample Test: Legal Reasoning extra questions, long questions & short questions for CLAT on EduRev as well by searching above.
QUESTION: 1

Parliament has made into law the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Bill, 2019, which had been framed for the welfare of transgender persons. The community had organised protests across the country, urging changes to the Bill, claiming that in the form in which the Central government had conceived it, it showed a poor understanding of gender and sexual identity. Activists had problems right from the beginning, starting with the name. 'T ransgender' was restrictive, they argued, and it showed a lack of understanding of the complexities in people who do not conform to the gender binary, male/ female. Charging that the Bill had serious flaws, because of this basic lack of comprehension about gender, some activists also wrote an alternative wish Bill, outlining their demands.
Activists chastised the Union government for failing to live up to the opportunity to ensure that fundamental rights are guaranteed to all people regardless of their sex characteristics or gender identity. Rejecting 'Transgender' as the nomenclature, they suggested instead that the title should be a comprehensive "Gender Identity, Gender Expression and Sex Characteristics (Protection of Rights) Bill", and in definition, sought to introduce the distinction between transgenders and intersex persons upfront. Members of the community perceive transgender as different from intersex, and were insistent that the distinction be made in the Bill.
While the community is miffed that the Bill has become an Act without any effort to make valid or relevant changes to its original composition, it worries about how implementation will address the pressing needs of the community. It only hopes that the National Council for Transgender Persons will allow for a more favourable implementation of the law, and thus provide more elbow room for genuine representations of the community that the Bill itself failed to accommodate.

An Act is passed in the parliament amending the existing Transgender Act. The Amendment Act has the objective to confer the right to recognition as a person before the law. Act says Persons of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities shall enjoy legal capacity in all aspects of life. Right to each person to self-define sexual orientation and gender identity. In such a case, based on the author's reasoning, will the Amending Act allay the fear of the Activist and the transgender community:

Solution:

Rationale: This question asks you to identify the author reasoning and the option that align with that reasoning.
Correct Answer is (a) Children are immature and may take a decision thinking it to be correct when in reality it is not so. All options may be correct but note we have to always answer based on the passage. In the 2nd paragraph, the author mentions the reasons for special protection for children (.Children are becoming easy prey because of their tender age, physical vulnerabilities and inexperience of life and society).
Incorrect Answers None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above.Other options are therefore incorrect as they cannot be derived from the passage.

QUESTION: 2

Parliament has made into law the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Bill, 2019, which had been framed for the welfare of transgender persons. The community had organised protests across the country, urging changes to the Bill, claiming that in the form in which the Central government had conceived it, it showed a poor understanding of gender and sexual identity. Activists had problems right from the beginning, starting with the name. 'T ransgender' was restrictive, they argued, and it showed a lack of understanding of the complexities in people who do not conform to the gender binary, male/ female. Charging that the Bill had serious flaws, because of this basic lack of comprehension about gender, some activists also wrote an alternative wish Bill, outlining their demands.
Activists chastised the Union government for failing to live up to the opportunity to ensure that fundamental rights are guaranteed to all people regardless of their sex characteristics or gender identity. Rejecting 'Transgender' as the nomenclature, they suggested instead that the title should be a comprehensive "Gender Identity, Gender Expression and Sex Characteristics (Protection of Rights) Bill", and in definition, sought to introduce the distinction between transgenders and intersex persons upfront. Members of the community perceive transgender as different from intersex, and were insistent that the distinction be made in the Bill.
While the community is miffed that the Bill has become an Act without any effort to make valid or relevant changes to its original composition, it worries about how implementation will address the pressing needs of the community. It only hopes that the National Council for Transgender Persons will allow for a more favourable implementation of the law, and thus provide more elbow room for genuine representations of the community that the Bill itself failed to accommodate.

Based on the author's arguments in the passage above, which of the following would be most correct?

Solution:

Rationale: This question asks you to identify the author reasoning and the option that align with that reasoning. The harsher the punishment for a crime, the lesser is its commission. In the last paragraph, the author mentions this (...There is a strong need to take stringent measures to deter the rising trend of child sex abuse in the country, the proposed amendments to the said Act make provisions for enhancement of punishments for various offences so as to deter the perpetrators and ensure safety, security and dignified childhood for a child). Incorrect Answers None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above. 
Option (a) is incorrect as conviction rate is not discussed in the passage. 
Option (c) is incorrect as no relation between legal protection and age of a child is mentioned in the passage. 
Option (d) is a moral statement not based on information supplied in the passage.

QUESTION: 3

Parliament has made into law the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Bill, 2019, which had been framed for the welfare of transgender persons. The community had organised protests across the country, urging changes to the Bill, claiming that in the form in which the Central government had conceived it, it showed a poor understanding of gender and sexual identity. Activists had problems right from the beginning, starting with the name. 'T ransgender' was restrictive, they argued, and it showed a lack of understanding of the complexities in people who do not conform to the gender binary, male/ female. Charging that the Bill had serious flaws, because of this basic lack of comprehension about gender, some activists also wrote an alternative wish Bill, outlining their demands.
Activists chastised the Union government for failing to live up to the opportunity to ensure that fundamental rights are guaranteed to all people regardless of their sex characteristics or gender identity. Rejecting 'Transgender' as the nomenclature, they suggested instead that the title should be a comprehensive "Gender Identity, Gender Expression and Sex Characteristics (Protection of Rights) Bill", and in definition, sought to introduce the distinction between transgenders and intersex persons upfront. Members of the community perceive transgender as different from intersex, and were insistent that the distinction be made in the Bill.
While the community is miffed that the Bill has become an Act without any effort to make valid or relevant changes to its original composition, it worries about how implementation will address the pressing needs of the community. It only hopes that the National Council for Transgender Persons will allow for a more favourable implementation of the law, and thus provide more elbow room for genuine representations of the community that the Bill itself failed to accommodate.

Royappa got married to Srija. When the parties submitted a memorandum for registration of marriage, Registrar refused to register the same. Registrar had the opinion that a "Bride" can only refer to a "Woman".
In the case on hand, Srija is a transgender and not a woman. Questioning the said decision, Srija filed a writ petition in the High Court. Based on the author's reasoning in the passage above, what kind of interpretation should the High Court give:

Solution:

Rationale: The question asks you to apply the idea of the passage to a given situation. You will have to assimilate the inference and look at the facts of the case and evaluate the answer choices.
Correct Answer is (d) Only Abhilash is liable under the POCSO Act.
Sudipta is a child as she is below 18 years of age. As per the definition of 'child pornography' given in the 3rd paragraph (.The Act defines "child pornography" as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a child which include photograph, video, digital or computer-generated image indistinguishable from an actual child, and image created, adapted, or modified, but appear to depict a child), the pics come within this definition. Under Section 15, Abhilash is liable as he shared child pornographic material (.any person, who stores or possesses pornographic material in any form involving a child, but fails to delete or destroy or report the same to the designated authority, which is the police unless otherwise stated, with an intention to share or transmit child pornography, shall be liable to fine).
Incorrect Answers None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above.Options (a), (b) and (c) the therefore, incorrect.

QUESTION: 4

Parliament has made into law the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Bill, 2019, which had been framed for the welfare of transgender persons. The community had organised protests across the country, urging changes to the Bill, claiming that in the form in which the Central government had conceived it, it showed a poor understanding of gender and sexual identity. Activists had problems right from the beginning, starting with the name. 'T ransgender' was restrictive, they argued, and it showed a lack of understanding of the complexities in people who do not conform to the gender binary, male/ female. Charging that the Bill had serious flaws, because of this basic lack of comprehension about gender, some activists also wrote an alternative wish Bill, outlining their demands.
Activists chastised the Union government for failing to live up to the opportunity to ensure that fundamental rights are guaranteed to all people regardless of their sex characteristics or gender identity. Rejecting 'Transgender' as the nomenclature, they suggested instead that the title should be a comprehensive "Gender Identity, Gender Expression and Sex Characteristics (Protection of Rights) Bill", and in definition, sought to introduce the distinction between transgenders and intersex persons upfront. Members of the community perceive transgender as different from intersex, and were insistent that the distinction be made in the Bill.
While the community is miffed that the Bill has become an Act without any effort to make valid or relevant changes to its original composition, it worries about how implementation will address the pressing needs of the community. It only hopes that the National Council for Transgender Persons will allow for a more favourable implementation of the law, and thus provide more elbow room for genuine representations of the community that the Bill itself failed to accommodate.

A legal principle says that Penal laws should be provided a strict interpretation. Bala, a trangender, while returning from office encountered some goons. Goons subjected her to sexual assault, including molestation and rape.
Bala immediately reports the said incident to a nearest Police Station. Officer Incharge of the station refused to register the information as the crime of rape can only be committed against a woman. Bala files the writ. Based upon the principle of strict interpretation and author's argument which of the following represents the best recourse:

Solution:

Rationale: The question asks you to apply the idea of the passage to a given situation. You will have to assimilate the inference and look at the facts of the case and evaluate the answer choices. Correct Answer is (b) Only Divyang and Gourav. In the 3rd paragraph, transmission of child pornography is punishable (.The section goes further and makes any person, who stores or possesses pornographic material in any form involving a child for transmitting or propagating or displaying or distributing in any manner at any time except for the purpose of reporting, or for use as evidence in court, liable for imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.).
Divyang transmitted child porn clip to the group.
Gourav transmitted it to another friend. Ojaswee is not liable as he deleted the clip and left the group.
Refer exception to liability in the 3rd paragraph (.any person, who stores or possesses pornographic material in any form involving a child, but fails to delete or destroy.). Ojaswee destroyed it by deleting it from his mobile.
Incorrect Answers None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above.Options (a), (c) and (d) are therefore, incorrect.

QUESTION: 5

Parliament has made into law the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Bill, 2019, which had been framed for the welfare of transgender persons. The community had organised protests across the country, urging changes to the Bill, claiming that in the form in which the Central government had conceived it, it showed a poor understanding of gender and sexual identity. Activists had problems right from the beginning, starting with the name. 'T ransgender' was restrictive, they argued, and it showed a lack of understanding of the complexities in people who do not conform to the gender binary, male/ female. Charging that the Bill had serious flaws, because of this basic lack of comprehension about gender, some activists also wrote an alternative wish Bill, outlining their demands.
Activists chastised the Union government for failing to live up to the opportunity to ensure that fundamental rights are guaranteed to all people regardless of their sex characteristics or gender identity. Rejecting 'Transgender' as the nomenclature, they suggested instead that the title should be a comprehensive "Gender Identity, Gender Expression and Sex Characteristics (Protection of Rights) Bill", and in definition, sought to introduce the distinction between transgenders and intersex persons upfront. Members of the community perceive transgender as different from intersex, and were insistent that the distinction be made in the Bill.
While the community is miffed that the Bill has become an Act without any effort to make valid or relevant changes to its original composition, it worries about how implementation will address the pressing needs of the community. It only hopes that the National Council for Transgender Persons will allow for a more favourable implementation of the law, and thus provide more elbow room for genuine representations of the community that the Bill itself failed to accommodate.

Recently, there is a boom of Sex reassignment surgery (SRS). Intersex and transgender people are subjected to SRS during their infancy and childhood, to alter their bodies, particularly the sexual organs, to make them conform to gendered physical norms, including through repeated surgeries, hormonal interventions and other measures. Based on the author's reasoning should the consent of the Parents to conduct SRS over their children be considered as the consent of the child:

Solution:

Rationale: The question asks you to apply the idea of the passage to a given situation. You will have to assimilate the inference and look at the facts of the case and evaluate the answer choices. Correct Answer is (d) Neither Anees nor Gautam. Please note that we are concerned only with POCSO Act which deals with children i.e. persons below 18 years of age, as mentioned in the 1st paragraph (.The said Act has been enacted to protect children i.e. any person below 18 years of age, from offences of sexual assault, sexual harassment, and pornography.).
Since the concerned person in the porn clip is above 18 years of age, POCSO Act is not attracted. Though they may be liable under other laws but that is not mentioned in the passage and therefore not a concern for us. Hence, options (a), (b) and (c) are incorrect.
Incorrect Answers None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above.

QUESTION: 6

The weakness of the political process provides a propitious ground for judicial activism. In many instances the executive has almost invited the judiciary in; in many states, governments routinely seek judicial dispensation to give them political cover for unpopular decisions they might have to make. Judicial activism can mean many things: scrutiny of legislation to determine constitutionality, the creation of law, and the exercise of policy prerogatives normally reserved for the executive. But whatever its form, judicial activism raises two questions. Is it legitimate? Is it effective? The democrat in all of us is rightly suspicious of a few old (mostly) men assuming such broad powers over our destiny without much accountability. We may ruminate that we can throw the politicians out once in a while, but judges are shielded from accountability. On the other hand, our impatience with a debilitating political process whose usual results are inaction makes us thankful for an assertive judiciary. At least the judiciary can protect our rights, clean our air, call politicians to account and so forth. And it must be an unenviable task for judges to steer a middle course between usurping too much power on the one hand, and doing too little to sustain fundamental values on the other. But the prickly question remains: what justifies judicial activism? One possible answer is that judicial activism is justified to the extent that it helps preserve democratic institutions and values. After all, transient majorities in Parliament can barter away our democratic rights; representative institutions are too often burdened with the imperatives of money, power or inertia, that to call their decisions democratic and in the public interest is often something of a joke. If judges use their power to restore integrity to the democratic process, to make our rights, including social and economic ones more meaningful, if they advance the public interest, an assertive judiciary can be an instrument of democracy. This is the most plausible defence of an assertive judiciary.

Which of the following is the plausible inference, in support of Judicial Activism, can be attributed to the author of the above passage?

Solution:

Rationale: This question asks you to identify the author reasoning and the option that align with that reasoning.
Correct Answer is (a) The Bill has been passed only in one house of the Parliament. The 1st paragraph mentions this (.The Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill 2019, which seeks to ban commercial surrogacy, was passed by the Lok Sabha in the Monsoon Session and was moved for consideration and passage in the Rajya Sabha).
Incorrect Answers 
None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above.Options (a), (c) and (d) are therefore incorrect.

QUESTION: 7

The weakness of the political process provides a propitious ground for judicial activism. In many instances the executive has almost invited the judiciary in; in many states, governments routinely seek judicial dispensation to give them political cover for unpopular decisions they might have to make. Judicial activism can mean many things: scrutiny of legislation to determine constitutionality, the creation of law, and the exercise of policy prerogatives normally reserved for the executive. But whatever its form, judicial activism raises two questions. Is it legitimate? Is it effective? The democrat in all of us is rightly suspicious of a few old (mostly) men assuming such broad powers over our destiny without much accountability. We may ruminate that we can throw the politicians out once in a while, but judges are shielded from accountability. On the other hand, our impatience with a debilitating political process whose usual results are inaction makes us thankful for an assertive judiciary. At least the judiciary can protect our rights, clean our air, call politicians to account and so forth. And it must be an unenviable task for judges to steer a middle course between usurping too much power on the one hand, and doing too little to sustain fundamental values on the other. But the prickly question remains: what justifies judicial activism? One possible answer is that judicial activism is justified to the extent that it helps preserve democratic institutions and values. After all, transient majorities in Parliament can barter away our democratic rights; representative institutions are too often burdened with the imperatives of money, power or inertia, that to call their decisions democratic and in the public interest is often something of a joke. If judges use their power to restore integrity to the democratic process, to make our rights, including social and economic ones more meaningful, if they advance the public interest, an assertive judiciary can be an instrument of democracy. This is the most plausible defence of an assertive judiciary.

With reference to the passage, the author is concerned about the Judicial Activism because:
1. The age and gender of the members of the judiciary may affect their judicial decisions.
2. The accountability of the judiciary, even when judicial activism is not legitimate, is limited.
3. Author believes that policymaking is not within the remit and jurisdiction of the Judiciary.
4. Every decisions taken in the Parliament are against the public interest.
Which of the following assumptions is/are valid?

Solution:

Rationale: The question asks you to apply the idea of the passage to a given situation. You will have to assimilate the inference and look at the facts of the case and evaluate the answer choices. Correct Answer is (a) X is contracting for commercial surrogacy. Note that X is charging Rs.25 Lakhs which is besides the medical costs. Refer 2nd paragraph (...In commercial surrogacy, the woman who gives birth to a child for the intending couple is rewarded for it in cash or kind). Refer last paragraph ( . O n the other hand, after being born, the child is considered to be the biological child of the intending couple and the surrogate mother losses all rights to the child).
Incorrect Answers None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above. 
Option (b) is therefore incorrect. 
Option (c) is incorrect as the Bill is banning only commercial surrogacy and not 'any kind' of surrogacy. 
Option (d) is incorrect as X being a surrogate mother loses all rights to the child.

QUESTION: 8

The weakness of the political process provides a propitious ground for judicial activism. In many instances the executive has almost invited the judiciary in; in many states, governments routinely seek judicial dispensation to give them political cover for unpopular decisions they might have to make. Judicial activism can mean many things: scrutiny of legislation to determine constitutionality, the creation of law, and the exercise of policy prerogatives normally reserved for the executive. But whatever its form, judicial activism raises two questions. Is it legitimate? Is it effective? The democrat in all of us is rightly suspicious of a few old (mostly) men assuming such broad powers over our destiny without much accountability. We may ruminate that we can throw the politicians out once in a while, but judges are shielded from accountability. On the other hand, our impatience with a debilitating political process whose usual results are inaction makes us thankful for an assertive judiciary. At least the judiciary can protect our rights, clean our air, call politicians to account and so forth. And it must be an unenviable task for judges to steer a middle course between usurping too much power on the one hand, and doing too little to sustain fundamental values on the other. But the prickly question remains: what justifies judicial activism? One possible answer is that judicial activism is justified to the extent that it helps preserve democratic institutions and values. After all, transient majorities in Parliament can barter away our democratic rights; representative institutions are too often burdened with the imperatives of money, power or inertia, that to call their decisions democratic and in the public interest is often something of a joke. If judges use their power to restore integrity to the democratic process, to make our rights, including social and economic ones more meaningful, if they advance the public interest, an assertive judiciary can be an instrument of democracy. This is the most plausible defence of an assertive judiciary.

Which one of the following is the essential message implied by this passage?

Solution:

Rationale: The question asks you to apply the idea of the passage to a given situation. You will have to assimilate the inference and look at the facts of the case and evaluate the answer choices. Correct Answer is (c) Rama is liable for imprisonment and fine. We have to answer presuming that the Bill is now a law. In the 2nd paragraph, advertising of surrogacy is banned (.if an individual is found advertising or undertaking surrogacy. he/she can be imprisoned for up to 10 years and fined of up to Rs 10 lakh). Incorrect Answers None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above. 
Option (a) is therefore, incorrect. 
Option (b) is incorrect as whatever amount Rama is charging is irrelevant, as in whichever case, she cannot advertise surrogacy. 
Option (d) is incorrect for the same reason as it is irrelevant whether she is doing altruistic or commercial surrogacy as long as she is advertising, she is liable.

QUESTION: 9

The weakness of the political process provides a propitious ground for judicial activism. In many instances the executive has almost invited the judiciary in; in many states, governments routinely seek judicial dispensation to give them political cover for unpopular decisions they might have to make. Judicial activism can mean many things: scrutiny of legislation to determine constitutionality, the creation of law, and the exercise of policy prerogatives normally reserved for the executive. But whatever its form, judicial activism raises two questions. Is it legitimate? Is it effective? The democrat in all of us is rightly suspicious of a few old (mostly) men assuming such broad powers over our destiny without much accountability. We may ruminate that we can throw the politicians out once in a while, but judges are shielded from accountability. On the other hand, our impatience with a debilitating political process whose usual results are inaction makes us thankful for an assertive judiciary. At least the judiciary can protect our rights, clean our air, call politicians to account and so forth. And it must be an unenviable task for judges to steer a middle course between usurping too much power on the one hand, and doing too little to sustain fundamental values on the other. But the prickly question remains: what justifies judicial activism? One possible answer is that judicial activism is justified to the extent that it helps preserve democratic institutions and values. After all, transient majorities in Parliament can barter away our democratic rights; representative institutions are too often burdened with the imperatives of money, power or inertia, that to call their decisions democratic and in the public interest is often something of a joke. If judges use their power to restore integrity to the democratic process, to make our rights, including social and economic ones more meaningful, if they advance the public interest, an assertive judiciary can be an instrument of democracy. This is the most plausible defence of an assertive judiciary.

Public Interest Litigation (PILs) was conceived and created as a judicial tool by the courts in this country for helping the poor, weaker and oppressed sections of society, truth is that PILs are being entertained by many courts as a routine and the dockets of most of the superior courts are flooded with PILs, most of which are frivolous or for which the judiciary has no remedy. If this is true, then, based on the author's reasoning in the passage above:

Solution:

Rationale: The question asks you to apply the idea of the passage to a given situation. You will have to assimilate the inference and look at the facts of the case and evaluate the answer choices. Correct Answer is (c) 

QUESTION: 10

The weakness of the political process provides a propitious ground for judicial activism. In many instances the executive has almost invited the judiciary in; in many states, governments routinely seek judicial dispensation to give them political cover for unpopular decisions they might have to make. Judicial activism can mean many things: scrutiny of legislation to determine constitutionality, the creation of law, and the exercise of policy prerogatives normally reserved for the executive. But whatever its form, judicial activism raises two questions. Is it legitimate? Is it effective? The democrat in all of us is rightly suspicious of a few old (mostly) men assuming such broad powers over our destiny without much accountability. We may ruminate that we can throw the politicians out once in a while, but judges are shielded from accountability. On the other hand, our impatience with a debilitating political process whose usual results are inaction makes us thankful for an assertive judiciary. At least the judiciary can protect our rights, clean our air, call politicians to account and so forth. And it must be an unenviable task for judges to steer a middle course between usurping too much power on the one hand, and doing too little to sustain fundamental values on the other. But the prickly question remains: what justifies judicial activism? One possible answer is that judicial activism is justified to the extent that it helps preserve democratic institutions and values. After all, transient majorities in Parliament can barter away our democratic rights; representative institutions are too often burdened with the imperatives of money, power or inertia, that to call their decisions democratic and in the public interest is often something of a joke. If judges use their power to restore integrity to the democratic process, to make our rights, including social and economic ones more meaningful, if they advance the public interest, an assertive judiciary can be an instrument of democracy. This is the most plausible defence of an assertive judiciary.

Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is a judicial innovation. Recently, Apex Court recently remarked that "The problems facing the people of India have to be solved by the people themselves by using their creativity and by scientific thinking and not by using judicial crutches like PIL". Based on the Author's reasoning and considering the apex court statement regarding PIL, will the author become concerned?

Solution:

Rationale: The question asks you to apply the idea of the passage to a given situation. You will have to assimilate the inference and look at the facts of the case and evaluate the answer choices. Correct Answer is (d) Z cannot get the child back as X and Y are the child's legal parents now. In the last paragraph, it is mentioned that the couple become the surrogate child's parents and the surrogate mother loses all rights (.On the other hand, after being born, the child is considered to be the biological child of the intending couple and the surrogate mother losses all rights to the child).
Incorrect Answers None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above. 
Option (a) is therefore, incorrect. 
Option (b) is incorrect as nowhere in the passage such a condition is mentioned.
Option (c) is incorrect on the same reasoning.

QUESTION: 11

The weakness of the political process provides a propitious ground for judicial activism. In many instances the executive has almost invited the judiciary in; in many states, governments routinely seek judicial dispensation to give them political cover for unpopular decisions they might have to make. Judicial activism can mean many things: scrutiny of legislation to determine constitutionality, the creation of law, and the exercise of policy prerogatives normally reserved for the executive. But whatever its form, judicial activism raises two questions. Is it legitimate? Is it effective? The democrat in all of us is rightly suspicious of a few old (mostly) men assuming such broad powers over our destiny without much accountability. We may ruminate that we can throw the politicians out once in a while, but judges are shielded from accountability. On the other hand, our impatience with a debilitating political process whose usual results are inaction makes us thankful for an assertive judiciary. At least the judiciary can protect our rights, clean our air, call politicians to account and so forth. And it must be an unenviable task for judges to steer a middle course between usurping too much power on the one hand, and doing too little to sustain fundamental values on the other. But the prickly question remains: what justifies judicial activism? One possible answer is that judicial activism is justified to the extent that it helps preserve democratic institutions and values. After all, transient majorities in Parliament can barter away our democratic rights; representative institutions are too often burdened with the imperatives of money, power or inertia, that to call their decisions democratic and in the public interest is often something of a joke. If judges use their power to restore integrity to the democratic process, to make our rights, including social and economic ones more meaningful, if they advance the public interest, an assertive judiciary can be an instrument of democracy. This is the most plausible defence of an assertive judiciary.

Recently various matters came to light such as grievances relating to civil matters involving properties worth hundreds of millions of rupees, criminal cases in which persons sentenced to death facing gallows, persons are sentenced to life imprisonment and kept in incarceration for long years and detenus expecting their release from the detention orders. However these matters has witness Government's apathy. If this is true, then, based on the author's reasoning in the passage above:

Solution:

Rationale: This question asks you to identify the author reasoning and the option that align with that reasoning.
Correct Answer is (b) Celebrities, e-commerce and product liability. This is mentioned in the 2nd paragraph (.TheAct also seeks to bring in e-commerce under their jurisdiction and hold celebrities accountable.also provides for product liability action).
Incorrect Answers
None of the other options sets out views that are consistent with those of the author in the passage above.Options (a), (c) and (d) are therefore incorrect.

Related tests