CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Questions  >   Directions: The following question consists ... Start Learning for Free
Directions: The following question consists of two statements, one labelled as Assertion (A) and the other as Reason (R). You are to examine these two statements carefully and select the correct option accordingly.
Assertion (A): It is the responsibility of the prosecution to prove a person guilty beyond any reasonable doubt.
Reason (R): Every man is to be regarded as legally innocent, until the contrary is proved.
  • a)
    Both (A) and (R) are individually true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A).
  • b)
    Both (A) and (R) are individually true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).
  • c)
    (A) is true, but (R) is false.
  • d)
    (A) is false, but (R) is true.
  • e)
    None of the above
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Most Upvoted Answer
Directions: The following question consists of two statements, one la...
Both (A) and (R) are true. However, (R) fails to explain the reason as to why prosecution has to prove a person guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

The state does not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Protection, prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. Prof. Dicey, explaining the concept of legal equality as it operated in England, said: “with us every official, from the prime minister down to a constable or a collector of taxes, is under the same responsibility for every act done without any legal justification as any other citizen.” The phrase “equality to the law” finds a place in all written constitutions that guarantees fundamental rights. “All individuals irrespective of birth, religion, sex, or race are equal before law; that is to say, there shall not be any arbitrary discrimination between one individual or class of individuals and another.” “All citizens shall, as human persons he held equal before law.” “All inhabitants of the republic are assured equality before the laws.” Patanjali Sastri, C.J., has expressed that the second expression is corollary of the first and it is difficult to imagine a situation in which the violation of laws will not be the violation of equality before laws thus, in substance the two expressions mean one and the same thing. According to Dr. Jennings said that: “Equality before the law means that equality among equals the law should be equal for all. And should be equally administered, that like should be treated alike. The right to sue and be sued, to prosecute and prosecuted for the same kind of action should be the same for all citizens of full age and understanding without distinctions of race, religion, wealth, social status or political influence.” To check if there is no violation of right to equality there exists a two stage test: a different set of people are being treated differently. There exists reasonable nexus in the differentiation.Q. Right to equality under article 14 is applicable on?

Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions.In common parlance, the word ‘abet‘ signifies help, co-activity and support and incorporates within its ambit, illegitimate reason to commit the crime. So as to bring an individual abetting the doing of a thing under any of the conditions specified under Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code, it isn’t just important to demonstrate that the individual who has abetted has participated in the means of the transactions yet additionally has been associated with those means of the transaction which are criminal. Abetment under the Indian Penal Code is caused by three things. Abetment is constituted by Instigating a person to commit an offence; or Engaging in a conspiracy to commit it; or Intentionally aiding a person to commit it. The offense of abetment by instigation relies on the intention of the individual who abets and not upon the act which is finished by the individual who has abetted. The abetment might be by instigation, connivance or purposeful aid as given under Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code However, the words articulated in an angry state or omission without any intention cannot be termed as instigation. For an individual to be called liable for Abetment, and so as to proceed against an individual for a criminal offense under Section 107, prosecution must claim the component of mens rea. Negligence or carelessness can’t be named to be abetment in order to punish the liable, according to the arrangement of penal laws. So as to establish abetment, the abettor must have appeared to “deliberately” support the commission of the wrongdoing. In such a case we need to just prove that the wrongdoing charged couldn’t have been done without the association as well as intervention of the supposed abettor isn’t sufficient with the prerequisites of Section 107. When we talk about a sting operation which is typically carried out in public interest, it must be noted that the same is done by instigating the accused and it is not granted any immunity under the Indian Penal Code.Q.According to the passage, is a sting operation carried out in public interest immune from prosecution under the Indian Penal Code?

Top Courses for CLAT

Directions: The following question consists of two statements, one labelled as Assertion (A) and the other as Reason (R). You are to examine these two statements carefully and select the correct option accordingly.Assertion (A): It is the responsibility of the prosecution to prove a person guilty beyond any reasonable doubt.Reason (R): Every man is to be regarded as legally innocent, until the contrary is proved.a)Both (A) and (R) are individually true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A).b)Both (A) and (R) are individually true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).c)(A) is true, but (R) is false.d)(A) is false, but (R) is true.e)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Directions: The following question consists of two statements, one labelled as Assertion (A) and the other as Reason (R). You are to examine these two statements carefully and select the correct option accordingly.Assertion (A): It is the responsibility of the prosecution to prove a person guilty beyond any reasonable doubt.Reason (R): Every man is to be regarded as legally innocent, until the contrary is proved.a)Both (A) and (R) are individually true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A).b)Both (A) and (R) are individually true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).c)(A) is true, but (R) is false.d)(A) is false, but (R) is true.e)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'B'. 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 following question consists of two statements, one labelled as Assertion (A) and the other as Reason (R). You are to examine these two statements carefully and select the correct option accordingly.Assertion (A): It is the responsibility of the prosecution to prove a person guilty beyond any reasonable doubt.Reason (R): Every man is to be regarded as legally innocent, until the contrary is proved.a)Both (A) and (R) are individually true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A).b)Both (A) and (R) are individually true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).c)(A) is true, but (R) is false.d)(A) is false, but (R) is true.e)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'B'. 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 following question consists of two statements, one labelled as Assertion (A) and the other as Reason (R). You are to examine these two statements carefully and select the correct option accordingly.Assertion (A): It is the responsibility of the prosecution to prove a person guilty beyond any reasonable doubt.Reason (R): Every man is to be regarded as legally innocent, until the contrary is proved.a)Both (A) and (R) are individually true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A).b)Both (A) and (R) are individually true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).c)(A) is true, but (R) is false.d)(A) is false, but (R) is true.e)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Directions: The following question consists of two statements, one labelled as Assertion (A) and the other as Reason (R). You are to examine these two statements carefully and select the correct option accordingly.Assertion (A): It is the responsibility of the prosecution to prove a person guilty beyond any reasonable doubt.Reason (R): Every man is to be regarded as legally innocent, until the contrary is proved.a)Both (A) and (R) are individually true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A).b)Both (A) and (R) are individually true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).c)(A) is true, but (R) is false.d)(A) is false, but (R) is true.e)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'B'. 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 following question consists of two statements, one labelled as Assertion (A) and the other as Reason (R). You are to examine these two statements carefully and select the correct option accordingly.Assertion (A): It is the responsibility of the prosecution to prove a person guilty beyond any reasonable doubt.Reason (R): Every man is to be regarded as legally innocent, until the contrary is proved.a)Both (A) and (R) are individually true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A).b)Both (A) and (R) are individually true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).c)(A) is true, but (R) is false.d)(A) is false, but (R) is true.e)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: The following question consists of two statements, one labelled as Assertion (A) and the other as Reason (R). You are to examine these two statements carefully and select the correct option accordingly.Assertion (A): It is the responsibility of the prosecution to prove a person guilty beyond any reasonable doubt.Reason (R): Every man is to be regarded as legally innocent, until the contrary is proved.a)Both (A) and (R) are individually true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A).b)Both (A) and (R) are individually true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).c)(A) is true, but (R) is false.d)(A) is false, but (R) is true.e)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: The following question consists of two statements, one labelled as Assertion (A) and the other as Reason (R). You are to examine these two statements carefully and select the correct option accordingly.Assertion (A): It is the responsibility of the prosecution to prove a person guilty beyond any reasonable doubt.Reason (R): Every man is to be regarded as legally innocent, until the contrary is proved.a)Both (A) and (R) are individually true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A).b)Both (A) and (R) are individually true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).c)(A) is true, but (R) is false.d)(A) is false, but (R) is true.e)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: The following question consists of two statements, one labelled as Assertion (A) and the other as Reason (R). You are to examine these two statements carefully and select the correct option accordingly.Assertion (A): It is the responsibility of the prosecution to prove a person guilty beyond any reasonable doubt.Reason (R): Every man is to be regarded as legally innocent, until the contrary is proved.a)Both (A) and (R) are individually true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A).b)Both (A) and (R) are individually true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).c)(A) is true, but (R) is false.d)(A) is false, but (R) is true.e)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: The following question consists of two statements, one labelled as Assertion (A) and the other as Reason (R). You are to examine these two statements carefully and select the correct option accordingly.Assertion (A): It is the responsibility of the prosecution to prove a person guilty beyond any reasonable doubt.Reason (R): Every man is to be regarded as legally innocent, until the contrary is proved.a)Both (A) and (R) are individually true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A).b)Both (A) and (R) are individually true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).c)(A) is true, but (R) is false.d)(A) is false, but (R) is true.e)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Top Courses for CLAT

Explore Courses
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev