Question Description
Direction: The question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.Principle:I. The right to be silent is an essential component of the right against self-incrimination which is a fundamental right of every citizen.II. During the trial, an accused person has the right not to testify by exercising his or her right to remain silent.III. When an accused person does decide to testify, his or her right to remain silent is waived and he can no longer take the defence of self-incrimination in the court.Facts: K R Kejriwal was a brilliant scientist and statistician who was arrested one fateful night by the Noida police department and brought in for questioning for his involvement in the mafia responsible for the smuggling of arms to Pakistan. In the police custody, the chief inspector Mr. Thakur beat up Mr. Kejriwal repeatedly and threatened to cause him serious bodily harm if he did not confess that he was guilty of the offence of abetment. However, Mr. Kejriwal did not admit to the offence despite numerous attacks and finally passed out in his custodian cell. In the court, the defence attorney for Mr. Kejriwal brought Mr. Thakur to the stand and questioned him for attacking his client. During one of the questions, Mr. Thakur stated that he is no longer interested in answering any further questions and wished to exercise his right to remain silent in court.Can Mr. Thakur exercise his right to remain silent?a)Yes, since Mr. Thakur is a citizen of the nation and has the fundamental right to remain silent.b)Yes, since Mr. Thakur has every right to protect himself from being incriminated in the act of harming the accused in police custody.c)No, since Mr. Thakur has waived his right to remain silent and must answer all the questions addressed to him in the court.d)No, since Mr. Thakur has waived his fundamental right of self-incrimination and could be held liable for perjury if he decides to remain silent in the court.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2025 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Direction: The question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.Principle:I. The right to be silent is an essential component of the right against self-incrimination which is a fundamental right of every citizen.II. During the trial, an accused person has the right not to testify by exercising his or her right to remain silent.III. When an accused person does decide to testify, his or her right to remain silent is waived and he can no longer take the defence of self-incrimination in the court.Facts: K R Kejriwal was a brilliant scientist and statistician who was arrested one fateful night by the Noida police department and brought in for questioning for his involvement in the mafia responsible for the smuggling of arms to Pakistan. In the police custody, the chief inspector Mr. Thakur beat up Mr. Kejriwal repeatedly and threatened to cause him serious bodily harm if he did not confess that he was guilty of the offence of abetment. However, Mr. Kejriwal did not admit to the offence despite numerous attacks and finally passed out in his custodian cell. In the court, the defence attorney for Mr. Kejriwal brought Mr. Thakur to the stand and questioned him for attacking his client. During one of the questions, Mr. Thakur stated that he is no longer interested in answering any further questions and wished to exercise his right to remain silent in court.Can Mr. Thakur exercise his right to remain silent?a)Yes, since Mr. Thakur is a citizen of the nation and has the fundamental right to remain silent.b)Yes, since Mr. Thakur has every right to protect himself from being incriminated in the act of harming the accused in police custody.c)No, since Mr. Thakur has waived his right to remain silent and must answer all the questions addressed to him in the court.d)No, since Mr. Thakur has waived his fundamental right of self-incrimination and could be held liable for perjury if he decides to remain silent in the court.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Direction: The question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.Principle:I. The right to be silent is an essential component of the right against self-incrimination which is a fundamental right of every citizen.II. During the trial, an accused person has the right not to testify by exercising his or her right to remain silent.III. When an accused person does decide to testify, his or her right to remain silent is waived and he can no longer take the defence of self-incrimination in the court.Facts: K R Kejriwal was a brilliant scientist and statistician who was arrested one fateful night by the Noida police department and brought in for questioning for his involvement in the mafia responsible for the smuggling of arms to Pakistan. In the police custody, the chief inspector Mr. Thakur beat up Mr. Kejriwal repeatedly and threatened to cause him serious bodily harm if he did not confess that he was guilty of the offence of abetment. However, Mr. Kejriwal did not admit to the offence despite numerous attacks and finally passed out in his custodian cell. In the court, the defence attorney for Mr. Kejriwal brought Mr. Thakur to the stand and questioned him for attacking his client. During one of the questions, Mr. Thakur stated that he is no longer interested in answering any further questions and wished to exercise his right to remain silent in court.Can Mr. Thakur exercise his right to remain silent?a)Yes, since Mr. Thakur is a citizen of the nation and has the fundamental right to remain silent.b)Yes, since Mr. Thakur has every right to protect himself from being incriminated in the act of harming the accused in police custody.c)No, since Mr. Thakur has waived his right to remain silent and must answer all the questions addressed to him in the court.d)No, since Mr. Thakur has waived his fundamental right of self-incrimination and could be held liable for perjury if he decides to remain silent in the court.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Direction: The question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.Principle:I. The right to be silent is an essential component of the right against self-incrimination which is a fundamental right of every citizen.II. During the trial, an accused person has the right not to testify by exercising his or her right to remain silent.III. When an accused person does decide to testify, his or her right to remain silent is waived and he can no longer take the defence of self-incrimination in the court.Facts: K R Kejriwal was a brilliant scientist and statistician who was arrested one fateful night by the Noida police department and brought in for questioning for his involvement in the mafia responsible for the smuggling of arms to Pakistan. In the police custody, the chief inspector Mr. Thakur beat up Mr. Kejriwal repeatedly and threatened to cause him serious bodily harm if he did not confess that he was guilty of the offence of abetment. However, Mr. Kejriwal did not admit to the offence despite numerous attacks and finally passed out in his custodian cell. In the court, the defence attorney for Mr. Kejriwal brought Mr. Thakur to the stand and questioned him for attacking his client. During one of the questions, Mr. Thakur stated that he is no longer interested in answering any further questions and wished to exercise his right to remain silent in court.Can Mr. Thakur exercise his right to remain silent?a)Yes, since Mr. Thakur is a citizen of the nation and has the fundamental right to remain silent.b)Yes, since Mr. Thakur has every right to protect himself from being incriminated in the act of harming the accused in police custody.c)No, since Mr. Thakur has waived his right to remain silent and must answer all the questions addressed to him in the court.d)No, since Mr. Thakur has waived his fundamental right of self-incrimination and could be held liable for perjury if he decides to remain silent in the court.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Direction: The question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.Principle:I. The right to be silent is an essential component of the right against self-incrimination which is a fundamental right of every citizen.II. During the trial, an accused person has the right not to testify by exercising his or her right to remain silent.III. When an accused person does decide to testify, his or her right to remain silent is waived and he can no longer take the defence of self-incrimination in the court.Facts: K R Kejriwal was a brilliant scientist and statistician who was arrested one fateful night by the Noida police department and brought in for questioning for his involvement in the mafia responsible for the smuggling of arms to Pakistan. In the police custody, the chief inspector Mr. Thakur beat up Mr. Kejriwal repeatedly and threatened to cause him serious bodily harm if he did not confess that he was guilty of the offence of abetment. However, Mr. Kejriwal did not admit to the offence despite numerous attacks and finally passed out in his custodian cell. In the court, the defence attorney for Mr. Kejriwal brought Mr. Thakur to the stand and questioned him for attacking his client. During one of the questions, Mr. Thakur stated that he is no longer interested in answering any further questions and wished to exercise his right to remain silent in court.Can Mr. Thakur exercise his right to remain silent?a)Yes, since Mr. Thakur is a citizen of the nation and has the fundamental right to remain silent.b)Yes, since Mr. Thakur has every right to protect himself from being incriminated in the act of harming the accused in police custody.c)No, since Mr. Thakur has waived his right to remain silent and must answer all the questions addressed to him in the court.d)No, since Mr. Thakur has waived his fundamental right of self-incrimination and could be held liable for perjury if he decides to remain silent in the court.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Direction: The question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.Principle:I. The right to be silent is an essential component of the right against self-incrimination which is a fundamental right of every citizen.II. During the trial, an accused person has the right not to testify by exercising his or her right to remain silent.III. When an accused person does decide to testify, his or her right to remain silent is waived and he can no longer take the defence of self-incrimination in the court.Facts: K R Kejriwal was a brilliant scientist and statistician who was arrested one fateful night by the Noida police department and brought in for questioning for his involvement in the mafia responsible for the smuggling of arms to Pakistan. In the police custody, the chief inspector Mr. Thakur beat up Mr. Kejriwal repeatedly and threatened to cause him serious bodily harm if he did not confess that he was guilty of the offence of abetment. However, Mr. Kejriwal did not admit to the offence despite numerous attacks and finally passed out in his custodian cell. In the court, the defence attorney for Mr. Kejriwal brought Mr. Thakur to the stand and questioned him for attacking his client. During one of the questions, Mr. Thakur stated that he is no longer interested in answering any further questions and wished to exercise his right to remain silent in court.Can Mr. Thakur exercise his right to remain silent?a)Yes, since Mr. Thakur is a citizen of the nation and has the fundamental right to remain silent.b)Yes, since Mr. Thakur has every right to protect himself from being incriminated in the act of harming the accused in police custody.c)No, since Mr. Thakur has waived his right to remain silent and must answer all the questions addressed to him in the court.d)No, since Mr. Thakur has waived his fundamental right of self-incrimination and could be held liable for perjury if he decides to remain silent in the court.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Direction: The question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.Principle:I. The right to be silent is an essential component of the right against self-incrimination which is a fundamental right of every citizen.II. During the trial, an accused person has the right not to testify by exercising his or her right to remain silent.III. When an accused person does decide to testify, his or her right to remain silent is waived and he can no longer take the defence of self-incrimination in the court.Facts: K R Kejriwal was a brilliant scientist and statistician who was arrested one fateful night by the Noida police department and brought in for questioning for his involvement in the mafia responsible for the smuggling of arms to Pakistan. In the police custody, the chief inspector Mr. Thakur beat up Mr. Kejriwal repeatedly and threatened to cause him serious bodily harm if he did not confess that he was guilty of the offence of abetment. However, Mr. Kejriwal did not admit to the offence despite numerous attacks and finally passed out in his custodian cell. In the court, the defence attorney for Mr. Kejriwal brought Mr. Thakur to the stand and questioned him for attacking his client. During one of the questions, Mr. Thakur stated that he is no longer interested in answering any further questions and wished to exercise his right to remain silent in court.Can Mr. Thakur exercise his right to remain silent?a)Yes, since Mr. Thakur is a citizen of the nation and has the fundamental right to remain silent.b)Yes, since Mr. Thakur has every right to protect himself from being incriminated in the act of harming the accused in police custody.c)No, since Mr. Thakur has waived his right to remain silent and must answer all the questions addressed to him in the court.d)No, since Mr. Thakur has waived his fundamental right of self-incrimination and could be held liable for perjury if he decides to remain silent in the court.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Direction: The question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.Principle:I. The right to be silent is an essential component of the right against self-incrimination which is a fundamental right of every citizen.II. During the trial, an accused person has the right not to testify by exercising his or her right to remain silent.III. When an accused person does decide to testify, his or her right to remain silent is waived and he can no longer take the defence of self-incrimination in the court.Facts: K R Kejriwal was a brilliant scientist and statistician who was arrested one fateful night by the Noida police department and brought in for questioning for his involvement in the mafia responsible for the smuggling of arms to Pakistan. In the police custody, the chief inspector Mr. Thakur beat up Mr. Kejriwal repeatedly and threatened to cause him serious bodily harm if he did not confess that he was guilty of the offence of abetment. However, Mr. Kejriwal did not admit to the offence despite numerous attacks and finally passed out in his custodian cell. In the court, the defence attorney for Mr. Kejriwal brought Mr. Thakur to the stand and questioned him for attacking his client. During one of the questions, Mr. Thakur stated that he is no longer interested in answering any further questions and wished to exercise his right to remain silent in court.Can Mr. Thakur exercise his right to remain silent?a)Yes, since Mr. Thakur is a citizen of the nation and has the fundamental right to remain silent.b)Yes, since Mr. Thakur has every right to protect himself from being incriminated in the act of harming the accused in police custody.c)No, since Mr. Thakur has waived his right to remain silent and must answer all the questions addressed to him in the court.d)No, since Mr. Thakur has waived his fundamental right of self-incrimination and could be held liable for perjury if he decides to remain silent in the court.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Direction: The question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.Principle:I. The right to be silent is an essential component of the right against self-incrimination which is a fundamental right of every citizen.II. During the trial, an accused person has the right not to testify by exercising his or her right to remain silent.III. When an accused person does decide to testify, his or her right to remain silent is waived and he can no longer take the defence of self-incrimination in the court.Facts: K R Kejriwal was a brilliant scientist and statistician who was arrested one fateful night by the Noida police department and brought in for questioning for his involvement in the mafia responsible for the smuggling of arms to Pakistan. In the police custody, the chief inspector Mr. Thakur beat up Mr. Kejriwal repeatedly and threatened to cause him serious bodily harm if he did not confess that he was guilty of the offence of abetment. However, Mr. Kejriwal did not admit to the offence despite numerous attacks and finally passed out in his custodian cell. In the court, the defence attorney for Mr. Kejriwal brought Mr. Thakur to the stand and questioned him for attacking his client. During one of the questions, Mr. Thakur stated that he is no longer interested in answering any further questions and wished to exercise his right to remain silent in court.Can Mr. Thakur exercise his right to remain silent?a)Yes, since Mr. Thakur is a citizen of the nation and has the fundamental right to remain silent.b)Yes, since Mr. Thakur has every right to protect himself from being incriminated in the act of harming the accused in police custody.c)No, since Mr. Thakur has waived his right to remain silent and must answer all the questions addressed to him in the court.d)No, since Mr. Thakur has waived his fundamental right of self-incrimination and could be held liable for perjury if he decides to remain silent in the court.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.