Question Description
The Chairman and CEO of Union Carbide, Warren Anderson, had been arrested and released on bail by the Madhya Pradesh Police in Bhopal on December 7, 1984. The arrest, which took place at the airport, assured Anderson would meet no harm by the Bhopal community. Anderson was taken to Union Carbides house after which he was released six hours later on $2,100 bail and flown outon a government plane. In 1987, the Indian government summoned Anderson, eight other executives and two company affiliates with homicide charges to appear in Indian court. Union Carbide balked, saying the company is not under Indian jurisdiction. Beginning in 1991, the local authorities from Bhopal charged Anderson, who had retired in 1986, with manslaughter, a crime that carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. Anderson has so far avoided an international arrest warrant and a US court summons. He was declared a fugitive from justice by the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Bhopal on February 1, 1992, for failing to appear at the court hearings in a culpable homicide case in which he was named the chief defendant. Orders were passed to the Government of India to press for an extradition from the United States, with whom India had an extradition treaty in place. The Bhopal Medical Appeal believes that "neither the American nor the Indian government seem interested in disturbing him with an extradition". A seemingly apathetic attitude from the US government, which has failed to pursue the case, has also led to strong protests in the past, most notably by Greenpeace. A plea by Indias Central Bureau of Investigation to dilute the charges from culpable homicide to criminal negligence has since been dismissed by the Indian courts. The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of the decision of the lower federal courts in October 1993, meaning that victims of the Bhopal disaster could not seek damages in a US court. On the anniversary of the tragedy, effigies of Anderson and politicians are burnt.Q. One of the following decisions could get Warren Anderson into deeper trouble. Which one is it?a)Lobbying with the Indian government for reduced sentence.b)Fleeing to a country that has an extradition treaty with the Indian government.c)Visiting the Indian sub-continent for a family tour.d)Showing up for a hearing scheduled in the American state court.e)Ensuring that compensation reaches the victims.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for CAT 2024 is part of CAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CAT exam syllabus. Information about The Chairman and CEO of Union Carbide, Warren Anderson, had been arrested and released on bail by the Madhya Pradesh Police in Bhopal on December 7, 1984. The arrest, which took place at the airport, assured Anderson would meet no harm by the Bhopal community. Anderson was taken to Union Carbides house after which he was released six hours later on $2,100 bail and flown outon a government plane. In 1987, the Indian government summoned Anderson, eight other executives and two company affiliates with homicide charges to appear in Indian court. Union Carbide balked, saying the company is not under Indian jurisdiction. Beginning in 1991, the local authorities from Bhopal charged Anderson, who had retired in 1986, with manslaughter, a crime that carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. Anderson has so far avoided an international arrest warrant and a US court summons. He was declared a fugitive from justice by the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Bhopal on February 1, 1992, for failing to appear at the court hearings in a culpable homicide case in which he was named the chief defendant. Orders were passed to the Government of India to press for an extradition from the United States, with whom India had an extradition treaty in place. The Bhopal Medical Appeal believes that "neither the American nor the Indian government seem interested in disturbing him with an extradition". A seemingly apathetic attitude from the US government, which has failed to pursue the case, has also led to strong protests in the past, most notably by Greenpeace. A plea by Indias Central Bureau of Investigation to dilute the charges from culpable homicide to criminal negligence has since been dismissed by the Indian courts. The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of the decision of the lower federal courts in October 1993, meaning that victims of the Bhopal disaster could not seek damages in a US court. On the anniversary of the tragedy, effigies of Anderson and politicians are burnt.Q. One of the following decisions could get Warren Anderson into deeper trouble. Which one is it?a)Lobbying with the Indian government for reduced sentence.b)Fleeing to a country that has an extradition treaty with the Indian government.c)Visiting the Indian sub-continent for a family tour.d)Showing up for a hearing scheduled in the American state court.e)Ensuring that compensation reaches the victims.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for The Chairman and CEO of Union Carbide, Warren Anderson, had been arrested and released on bail by the Madhya Pradesh Police in Bhopal on December 7, 1984. The arrest, which took place at the airport, assured Anderson would meet no harm by the Bhopal community. Anderson was taken to Union Carbides house after which he was released six hours later on $2,100 bail and flown outon a government plane. In 1987, the Indian government summoned Anderson, eight other executives and two company affiliates with homicide charges to appear in Indian court. Union Carbide balked, saying the company is not under Indian jurisdiction. Beginning in 1991, the local authorities from Bhopal charged Anderson, who had retired in 1986, with manslaughter, a crime that carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. Anderson has so far avoided an international arrest warrant and a US court summons. He was declared a fugitive from justice by the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Bhopal on February 1, 1992, for failing to appear at the court hearings in a culpable homicide case in which he was named the chief defendant. Orders were passed to the Government of India to press for an extradition from the United States, with whom India had an extradition treaty in place. The Bhopal Medical Appeal believes that "neither the American nor the Indian government seem interested in disturbing him with an extradition". A seemingly apathetic attitude from the US government, which has failed to pursue the case, has also led to strong protests in the past, most notably by Greenpeace. A plea by Indias Central Bureau of Investigation to dilute the charges from culpable homicide to criminal negligence has since been dismissed by the Indian courts. The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of the decision of the lower federal courts in October 1993, meaning that victims of the Bhopal disaster could not seek damages in a US court. On the anniversary of the tragedy, effigies of Anderson and politicians are burnt.Q. One of the following decisions could get Warren Anderson into deeper trouble. Which one is it?a)Lobbying with the Indian government for reduced sentence.b)Fleeing to a country that has an extradition treaty with the Indian government.c)Visiting the Indian sub-continent for a family tour.d)Showing up for a hearing scheduled in the American state court.e)Ensuring that compensation reaches the victims.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for The Chairman and CEO of Union Carbide, Warren Anderson, had been arrested and released on bail by the Madhya Pradesh Police in Bhopal on December 7, 1984. The arrest, which took place at the airport, assured Anderson would meet no harm by the Bhopal community. Anderson was taken to Union Carbides house after which he was released six hours later on $2,100 bail and flown outon a government plane. In 1987, the Indian government summoned Anderson, eight other executives and two company affiliates with homicide charges to appear in Indian court. Union Carbide balked, saying the company is not under Indian jurisdiction. Beginning in 1991, the local authorities from Bhopal charged Anderson, who had retired in 1986, with manslaughter, a crime that carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. Anderson has so far avoided an international arrest warrant and a US court summons. He was declared a fugitive from justice by the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Bhopal on February 1, 1992, for failing to appear at the court hearings in a culpable homicide case in which he was named the chief defendant. Orders were passed to the Government of India to press for an extradition from the United States, with whom India had an extradition treaty in place. The Bhopal Medical Appeal believes that "neither the American nor the Indian government seem interested in disturbing him with an extradition". A seemingly apathetic attitude from the US government, which has failed to pursue the case, has also led to strong protests in the past, most notably by Greenpeace. A plea by Indias Central Bureau of Investigation to dilute the charges from culpable homicide to criminal negligence has since been dismissed by the Indian courts. The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of the decision of the lower federal courts in October 1993, meaning that victims of the Bhopal disaster could not seek damages in a US court. On the anniversary of the tragedy, effigies of Anderson and politicians are burnt.Q. One of the following decisions could get Warren Anderson into deeper trouble. Which one is it?a)Lobbying with the Indian government for reduced sentence.b)Fleeing to a country that has an extradition treaty with the Indian government.c)Visiting the Indian sub-continent for a family tour.d)Showing up for a hearing scheduled in the American state court.e)Ensuring that compensation reaches the victims.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of The Chairman and CEO of Union Carbide, Warren Anderson, had been arrested and released on bail by the Madhya Pradesh Police in Bhopal on December 7, 1984. The arrest, which took place at the airport, assured Anderson would meet no harm by the Bhopal community. Anderson was taken to Union Carbides house after which he was released six hours later on $2,100 bail and flown outon a government plane. In 1987, the Indian government summoned Anderson, eight other executives and two company affiliates with homicide charges to appear in Indian court. Union Carbide balked, saying the company is not under Indian jurisdiction. Beginning in 1991, the local authorities from Bhopal charged Anderson, who had retired in 1986, with manslaughter, a crime that carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. Anderson has so far avoided an international arrest warrant and a US court summons. He was declared a fugitive from justice by the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Bhopal on February 1, 1992, for failing to appear at the court hearings in a culpable homicide case in which he was named the chief defendant. Orders were passed to the Government of India to press for an extradition from the United States, with whom India had an extradition treaty in place. The Bhopal Medical Appeal believes that "neither the American nor the Indian government seem interested in disturbing him with an extradition". A seemingly apathetic attitude from the US government, which has failed to pursue the case, has also led to strong protests in the past, most notably by Greenpeace. A plea by Indias Central Bureau of Investigation to dilute the charges from culpable homicide to criminal negligence has since been dismissed by the Indian courts. The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of the decision of the lower federal courts in October 1993, meaning that victims of the Bhopal disaster could not seek damages in a US court. On the anniversary of the tragedy, effigies of Anderson and politicians are burnt.Q. One of the following decisions could get Warren Anderson into deeper trouble. Which one is it?a)Lobbying with the Indian government for reduced sentence.b)Fleeing to a country that has an extradition treaty with the Indian government.c)Visiting the Indian sub-continent for a family tour.d)Showing up for a hearing scheduled in the American state court.e)Ensuring that compensation reaches the victims.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of The Chairman and CEO of Union Carbide, Warren Anderson, had been arrested and released on bail by the Madhya Pradesh Police in Bhopal on December 7, 1984. The arrest, which took place at the airport, assured Anderson would meet no harm by the Bhopal community. Anderson was taken to Union Carbides house after which he was released six hours later on $2,100 bail and flown outon a government plane. In 1987, the Indian government summoned Anderson, eight other executives and two company affiliates with homicide charges to appear in Indian court. Union Carbide balked, saying the company is not under Indian jurisdiction. Beginning in 1991, the local authorities from Bhopal charged Anderson, who had retired in 1986, with manslaughter, a crime that carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. Anderson has so far avoided an international arrest warrant and a US court summons. He was declared a fugitive from justice by the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Bhopal on February 1, 1992, for failing to appear at the court hearings in a culpable homicide case in which he was named the chief defendant. Orders were passed to the Government of India to press for an extradition from the United States, with whom India had an extradition treaty in place. The Bhopal Medical Appeal believes that "neither the American nor the Indian government seem interested in disturbing him with an extradition". A seemingly apathetic attitude from the US government, which has failed to pursue the case, has also led to strong protests in the past, most notably by Greenpeace. A plea by Indias Central Bureau of Investigation to dilute the charges from culpable homicide to criminal negligence has since been dismissed by the Indian courts. The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of the decision of the lower federal courts in October 1993, meaning that victims of the Bhopal disaster could not seek damages in a US court. On the anniversary of the tragedy, effigies of Anderson and politicians are burnt.Q. One of the following decisions could get Warren Anderson into deeper trouble. Which one is it?a)Lobbying with the Indian government for reduced sentence.b)Fleeing to a country that has an extradition treaty with the Indian government.c)Visiting the Indian sub-continent for a family tour.d)Showing up for a hearing scheduled in the American state court.e)Ensuring that compensation reaches the victims.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for The Chairman and CEO of Union Carbide, Warren Anderson, had been arrested and released on bail by the Madhya Pradesh Police in Bhopal on December 7, 1984. The arrest, which took place at the airport, assured Anderson would meet no harm by the Bhopal community. Anderson was taken to Union Carbides house after which he was released six hours later on $2,100 bail and flown outon a government plane. In 1987, the Indian government summoned Anderson, eight other executives and two company affiliates with homicide charges to appear in Indian court. Union Carbide balked, saying the company is not under Indian jurisdiction. Beginning in 1991, the local authorities from Bhopal charged Anderson, who had retired in 1986, with manslaughter, a crime that carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. Anderson has so far avoided an international arrest warrant and a US court summons. He was declared a fugitive from justice by the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Bhopal on February 1, 1992, for failing to appear at the court hearings in a culpable homicide case in which he was named the chief defendant. Orders were passed to the Government of India to press for an extradition from the United States, with whom India had an extradition treaty in place. The Bhopal Medical Appeal believes that "neither the American nor the Indian government seem interested in disturbing him with an extradition". A seemingly apathetic attitude from the US government, which has failed to pursue the case, has also led to strong protests in the past, most notably by Greenpeace. A plea by Indias Central Bureau of Investigation to dilute the charges from culpable homicide to criminal negligence has since been dismissed by the Indian courts. The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of the decision of the lower federal courts in October 1993, meaning that victims of the Bhopal disaster could not seek damages in a US court. On the anniversary of the tragedy, effigies of Anderson and politicians are burnt.Q. One of the following decisions could get Warren Anderson into deeper trouble. Which one is it?a)Lobbying with the Indian government for reduced sentence.b)Fleeing to a country that has an extradition treaty with the Indian government.c)Visiting the Indian sub-continent for a family tour.d)Showing up for a hearing scheduled in the American state court.e)Ensuring that compensation reaches the victims.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of The Chairman and CEO of Union Carbide, Warren Anderson, had been arrested and released on bail by the Madhya Pradesh Police in Bhopal on December 7, 1984. The arrest, which took place at the airport, assured Anderson would meet no harm by the Bhopal community. Anderson was taken to Union Carbides house after which he was released six hours later on $2,100 bail and flown outon a government plane. In 1987, the Indian government summoned Anderson, eight other executives and two company affiliates with homicide charges to appear in Indian court. Union Carbide balked, saying the company is not under Indian jurisdiction. Beginning in 1991, the local authorities from Bhopal charged Anderson, who had retired in 1986, with manslaughter, a crime that carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. Anderson has so far avoided an international arrest warrant and a US court summons. He was declared a fugitive from justice by the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Bhopal on February 1, 1992, for failing to appear at the court hearings in a culpable homicide case in which he was named the chief defendant. Orders were passed to the Government of India to press for an extradition from the United States, with whom India had an extradition treaty in place. The Bhopal Medical Appeal believes that "neither the American nor the Indian government seem interested in disturbing him with an extradition". A seemingly apathetic attitude from the US government, which has failed to pursue the case, has also led to strong protests in the past, most notably by Greenpeace. A plea by Indias Central Bureau of Investigation to dilute the charges from culpable homicide to criminal negligence has since been dismissed by the Indian courts. The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of the decision of the lower federal courts in October 1993, meaning that victims of the Bhopal disaster could not seek damages in a US court. On the anniversary of the tragedy, effigies of Anderson and politicians are burnt.Q. One of the following decisions could get Warren Anderson into deeper trouble. Which one is it?a)Lobbying with the Indian government for reduced sentence.b)Fleeing to a country that has an extradition treaty with the Indian government.c)Visiting the Indian sub-continent for a family tour.d)Showing up for a hearing scheduled in the American state court.e)Ensuring that compensation reaches the victims.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice The Chairman and CEO of Union Carbide, Warren Anderson, had been arrested and released on bail by the Madhya Pradesh Police in Bhopal on December 7, 1984. The arrest, which took place at the airport, assured Anderson would meet no harm by the Bhopal community. Anderson was taken to Union Carbides house after which he was released six hours later on $2,100 bail and flown outon a government plane. In 1987, the Indian government summoned Anderson, eight other executives and two company affiliates with homicide charges to appear in Indian court. Union Carbide balked, saying the company is not under Indian jurisdiction. Beginning in 1991, the local authorities from Bhopal charged Anderson, who had retired in 1986, with manslaughter, a crime that carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. Anderson has so far avoided an international arrest warrant and a US court summons. He was declared a fugitive from justice by the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Bhopal on February 1, 1992, for failing to appear at the court hearings in a culpable homicide case in which he was named the chief defendant. Orders were passed to the Government of India to press for an extradition from the United States, with whom India had an extradition treaty in place. The Bhopal Medical Appeal believes that "neither the American nor the Indian government seem interested in disturbing him with an extradition". A seemingly apathetic attitude from the US government, which has failed to pursue the case, has also led to strong protests in the past, most notably by Greenpeace. A plea by Indias Central Bureau of Investigation to dilute the charges from culpable homicide to criminal negligence has since been dismissed by the Indian courts. The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of the decision of the lower federal courts in October 1993, meaning that victims of the Bhopal disaster could not seek damages in a US court. On the anniversary of the tragedy, effigies of Anderson and politicians are burnt.Q. One of the following decisions could get Warren Anderson into deeper trouble. Which one is it?a)Lobbying with the Indian government for reduced sentence.b)Fleeing to a country that has an extradition treaty with the Indian government.c)Visiting the Indian sub-continent for a family tour.d)Showing up for a hearing scheduled in the American state court.e)Ensuring that compensation reaches the victims.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CAT tests.