Question Description
Directions: The question consists of two statements, one labelled as Principle and the other as Facts. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.Principle: The word 'offence' denotes a thing made punishable by the Indian Penal Code. A prevents B from proceeding in any direction and keeps him/her confined to a place. A has committed an offence of criminal confinement. According to the Indian Penal Code, whoever instigates a person to do a thing, is said to abet such a thing.Facts: L, in an interview to a magazine, articulated her views in favour of living together without a nuptial knot. Aggrieved by the same, X filed a criminal complaint against L, for abetting criminal confinement. Can L be prosecuted and convicted for the same?a)Yes, because the comments of L could have encouraged people to live together without entering into a nuptial bond.b)Yes, because the comments of L in fact encouraged certain individuals to live together without entering into a nuptial bond.c)No, because two adult people wanting to live together is not an offence.d)No, because the comments of L were not directed towards any particular person and anybody acting on them did so at his/her own risk.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 Directions: The question consists of two statements, one labelled as Principle and the other as Facts. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.Principle: The word 'offence' denotes a thing made punishable by the Indian Penal Code. A prevents B from proceeding in any direction and keeps him/her confined to a place. A has committed an offence of criminal confinement. According to the Indian Penal Code, whoever instigates a person to do a thing, is said to abet such a thing.Facts: L, in an interview to a magazine, articulated her views in favour of living together without a nuptial knot. Aggrieved by the same, X filed a criminal complaint against L, for abetting criminal confinement. Can L be prosecuted and convicted for the same?a)Yes, because the comments of L could have encouraged people to live together without entering into a nuptial bond.b)Yes, because the comments of L in fact encouraged certain individuals to live together without entering into a nuptial bond.c)No, because two adult people wanting to live together is not an offence.d)No, because the comments of L were not directed towards any particular person and anybody acting on them did so at his/her own risk.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 Directions: The question consists of two statements, one labelled as Principle and the other as Facts. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.Principle: The word 'offence' denotes a thing made punishable by the Indian Penal Code. A prevents B from proceeding in any direction and keeps him/her confined to a place. A has committed an offence of criminal confinement. According to the Indian Penal Code, whoever instigates a person to do a thing, is said to abet such a thing.Facts: L, in an interview to a magazine, articulated her views in favour of living together without a nuptial knot. Aggrieved by the same, X filed a criminal complaint against L, for abetting criminal confinement. Can L be prosecuted and convicted for the same?a)Yes, because the comments of L could have encouraged people to live together without entering into a nuptial bond.b)Yes, because the comments of L in fact encouraged certain individuals to live together without entering into a nuptial bond.c)No, because two adult people wanting to live together is not an offence.d)No, because the comments of L were not directed towards any particular person and anybody acting on them did so at his/her own risk.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Directions: The question consists of two statements, one labelled as Principle and the other as Facts. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.Principle: The word 'offence' denotes a thing made punishable by the Indian Penal Code. A prevents B from proceeding in any direction and keeps him/her confined to a place. A has committed an offence of criminal confinement. According to the Indian Penal Code, whoever instigates a person to do a thing, is said to abet such a thing.Facts: L, in an interview to a magazine, articulated her views in favour of living together without a nuptial knot. Aggrieved by the same, X filed a criminal complaint against L, for abetting criminal confinement. Can L be prosecuted and convicted for the same?a)Yes, because the comments of L could have encouraged people to live together without entering into a nuptial bond.b)Yes, because the comments of L in fact encouraged certain individuals to live together without entering into a nuptial bond.c)No, because two adult people wanting to live together is not an offence.d)No, because the comments of L were not directed towards any particular person and anybody acting on them did so at his/her own risk.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 Directions: The question consists of two statements, one labelled as Principle and the other as Facts. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.Principle: The word 'offence' denotes a thing made punishable by the Indian Penal Code. A prevents B from proceeding in any direction and keeps him/her confined to a place. A has committed an offence of criminal confinement. According to the Indian Penal Code, whoever instigates a person to do a thing, is said to abet such a thing.Facts: L, in an interview to a magazine, articulated her views in favour of living together without a nuptial knot. Aggrieved by the same, X filed a criminal complaint against L, for abetting criminal confinement. Can L be prosecuted and convicted for the same?a)Yes, because the comments of L could have encouraged people to live together without entering into a nuptial bond.b)Yes, because the comments of L in fact encouraged certain individuals to live together without entering into a nuptial bond.c)No, because two adult people wanting to live together is not an offence.d)No, because the comments of L were not directed towards any particular person and anybody acting on them did so at his/her own risk.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: The question consists of two statements, one labelled as Principle and the other as Facts. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.Principle: The word 'offence' denotes a thing made punishable by the Indian Penal Code. A prevents B from proceeding in any direction and keeps him/her confined to a place. A has committed an offence of criminal confinement. According to the Indian Penal Code, whoever instigates a person to do a thing, is said to abet such a thing.Facts: L, in an interview to a magazine, articulated her views in favour of living together without a nuptial knot. Aggrieved by the same, X filed a criminal complaint against L, for abetting criminal confinement. Can L be prosecuted and convicted for the same?a)Yes, because the comments of L could have encouraged people to live together without entering into a nuptial bond.b)Yes, because the comments of L in fact encouraged certain individuals to live together without entering into a nuptial bond.c)No, because two adult people wanting to live together is not an offence.d)No, because the comments of L were not directed towards any particular person and anybody acting on them did so at his/her own risk.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: The question consists of two statements, one labelled as Principle and the other as Facts. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.Principle: The word 'offence' denotes a thing made punishable by the Indian Penal Code. A prevents B from proceeding in any direction and keeps him/her confined to a place. A has committed an offence of criminal confinement. According to the Indian Penal Code, whoever instigates a person to do a thing, is said to abet such a thing.Facts: L, in an interview to a magazine, articulated her views in favour of living together without a nuptial knot. Aggrieved by the same, X filed a criminal complaint against L, for abetting criminal confinement. Can L be prosecuted and convicted for the same?a)Yes, because the comments of L could have encouraged people to live together without entering into a nuptial bond.b)Yes, because the comments of L in fact encouraged certain individuals to live together without entering into a nuptial bond.c)No, because two adult people wanting to live together is not an offence.d)No, because the comments of L were not directed towards any particular person and anybody acting on them did so at his/her own risk.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: The question consists of two statements, one labelled as Principle and the other as Facts. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.Principle: The word 'offence' denotes a thing made punishable by the Indian Penal Code. A prevents B from proceeding in any direction and keeps him/her confined to a place. A has committed an offence of criminal confinement. According to the Indian Penal Code, whoever instigates a person to do a thing, is said to abet such a thing.Facts: L, in an interview to a magazine, articulated her views in favour of living together without a nuptial knot. Aggrieved by the same, X filed a criminal complaint against L, for abetting criminal confinement. Can L be prosecuted and convicted for the same?a)Yes, because the comments of L could have encouraged people to live together without entering into a nuptial bond.b)Yes, because the comments of L in fact encouraged certain individuals to live together without entering into a nuptial bond.c)No, because two adult people wanting to live together is not an offence.d)No, because the comments of L were not directed towards any particular person and anybody acting on them did so at his/her own risk.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: The question consists of two statements, one labelled as Principle and the other as Facts. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.Principle: The word 'offence' denotes a thing made punishable by the Indian Penal Code. A prevents B from proceeding in any direction and keeps him/her confined to a place. A has committed an offence of criminal confinement. According to the Indian Penal Code, whoever instigates a person to do a thing, is said to abet such a thing.Facts: L, in an interview to a magazine, articulated her views in favour of living together without a nuptial knot. Aggrieved by the same, X filed a criminal complaint against L, for abetting criminal confinement. Can L be prosecuted and convicted for the same?a)Yes, because the comments of L could have encouraged people to live together without entering into a nuptial bond.b)Yes, because the comments of L in fact encouraged certain individuals to live together without entering into a nuptial bond.c)No, because two adult people wanting to live together is not an offence.d)No, because the comments of L were not directed towards any particular person and anybody acting on them did so at his/her own risk.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.