All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Questions  >   Directions: The question consists of two sta... Start Learning for Free
Directions: The question consists of two statements, one labelled as Principle(s) and the other as Facts. You are to examine the Principle(s) and apply it to the given Facts carefully and select the best option.
Principles:
1. Article 18 of the Constitution of India provides that no title, not being a military or academic distinction shall be conferred by the state.
2. The Constitution of India says that no citizen of India shall accept any title from any foreign state without the prior consent of President.
Facts: Ministry of information and broadcasting of China instituted international awards in various categories of cinemas which were given in a gala ceremony held in Beijing. Joseph Kumar, a leading Tollywood actor and citizen of India, was awarded with the Award of Best International Actor. XYZ, an NGO, filed a writ petition against Joseph Kumar claiming that he violated the provisions of Indian Constitution by receiving award from China without the prior consent of President.
Decide.
  • a)
    The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar is the citizen of India and he violated the Constitution of India.
  • b)
    The NGO will not succeed in the writ petition because there is no violation of constitutional provisions happened here.
  • c)
    The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar took the award without prior consent of the President of India.
  • d)
    The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar has violated the provisions of the Constitution of India.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Clear all your CLAT doubts with EduRev
Most Upvoted Answer
Directions: The question consists of two statements, one labelled as ...
A title is something which is used as a suffix or prefix to the name of the recipient, for example, Sir, Rai Bahadur, etc. National award winner does not become the suffix or prefix to the name of the recipient. Hence, it cannot be equated with the conferment of a title. Therefore, no question of constitutional validity arises here.
Free Test
FREE
Start Free Test
Start Free Test
Community Answer
Directions: The question consists of two statements, one labelled as ...
Understanding the Principle
The principles derived from Article 18 of the Constitution of India highlight two key aspects regarding titles:
- Prohibition of Titles: The state cannot confer any titles, except military or academic distinctions.
- Foreign Titles: Indian citizens must seek prior consent from the President before accepting any title from a foreign state.
Analysis of the Facts
In the given scenario:
- Joseph Kumar, an Indian citizen, was awarded the "Best International Actor" from a Chinese organization.
- The award was not conferred as a title by the state but rather as recognition in a cinema-related category.
Evaluation of the NGO's Claim
The NGO's argument rests on the assumption that receiving the award violates the constitutional provisions. However, the following points clarify why the claim does not hold water:
- Nature of the Award: The award given to Joseph Kumar is not a title in the constitutional sense. It recognizes his acting talent and does not bestow any formal distinction.
- Lack of State Conferment: The award does not come from the Indian state or government. Hence, the prohibition against titles does not apply.
- No Requirement for Consent: Since the award is not considered a "title" under Article 18, there is no requirement for prior consent from the President.
Conclusion
Given these considerations, the conclusion is that:
- The NGO will not succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar's acceptance of the award does not violate any provisions of the Constitution of India.
Thus, option B is correct: "The NGO will not succeed in the writ petition because there is no violation of constitutional provisions happened here."
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

Read the information given below carefully and answer the following question.A murder case is fit for the death penalty where the crime is committed with a depraved motive, or where it is of a socially abhorrent nature. But what motive can be more depraved, and what crime can be of a more socially abhorrent nature, than a murder committed with the intent to punish the exercise by the victim of a fundamental right recognised by the Constitution?To be sure, every murder involves an interference with the fundamental right to live, but under the "rarest of rare" doctrine not every murder deserves the death penalty.Death penalty rather should apply for murders interfering with something more than the mere right to live - to murders motivated by a depraved desire to interfere with "fundamental" constitutional rights.The one who murders another for exercising a fundamental constitutional right deserves the strictest of punishment. After all, if constitutional rights are to have any meaning, they must not merely dictate the manner in which the State interacts with its citizens, but must also colour the standards that will be applied to interactions amongst private citizens. The law will not tolerate the motive of stifling "fundamental" constitutional rights contained in part III of the Constitution.To use a religious analogy, if the lengthy Constitution were the epic Mahabharata, the fundamental rights chapter would be its Bhagwad Gita. For the sacrosanct position fundamental rights occupy in Indian jurisprudence, it is perhaps justifiable in a system which permits the death penalty, to claim that a murderer who seeks to punish his victim for exercising a fundamental constitutional right deserves the death penalty. There is a chance of commuting death sentence. Commuting death sentences to life on account of the "death row phenomenon"-Prisoners who are under the spectre of the death sentence for an unduly long period of time after the final confirmation of the sentence, are entitled to have the death sentence commuted to life, on account of the dehumanising psycho logical effect of the prolonged wait.However, in essence, there can be no "hard and fast" rule with respect to commuting death sentences to life imprisonment on account of the delay. In such cases, it is also imperative for the Court to examine the root cause of the delay, in order to ensure that the delay was not caused by the accused himself. After all, reducing a death sentence to life imprisonment because of delays caused on account of frivolous proceedings filed by the accused himself would "defeat" death penalty law in India, reducing it to an "object of ridicule".Q.According to the paragraph, all the statements are correct except

The Constitution which lays down the basic structure of a nation's polity is built on the foundations of certain fundamental values. The vision of socio-economic change through the Constitution is reflected in its lofty Preamble.The Preamble expresses the ideals and aspirations of a renascent India. By the year 1949, the Constituent Assembly had completed the drafting of the Fundamental Rights Chapter. Fundamental Rights are constitutional guarantees for the human rights of our people. These rights were one of the persistent demands of our leaders throughout the freedom struggle. The founding fathers were conscious of the fact that mere political democracy, i.e., getting the right to vote once in five years or so was meaningless unless it was accompanied by social and economic democracy. Dr. Ambedkar had said:"We do not want merely to lay down a mechanism to enable people to come and capture power. The Constitution also wishes to lay down an ideal before those who would be forming the government. That ideal is of economic democracy."Our founding fathers, however, were far-sighted people therefore they consolidated the principles of good governance as Directive Principles contradistinguished from issues of rights, government and politics.That is how the vision of our founding fathers and the aims and objectives which they wanted to achieve through the Constitution are contained in the Preamble, the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles. These three may be described as the soul of the Constitution and the testament of the founding fathers to the succeeding generations together with the later Part on Fundamental Duties.Q. It is fundamental right of every citizen not to be discriminated on the ground of religion, race, sex, place of birth or any of them. However, nothing in the fundamental rights shall prevent the state from making any special provision for women, children or elderly. State of XYZ enacted a law granting reservation of 50% in National Law School XYZ - to the native students scoring more than 75% percent in XII Examination. Based on the essence of the passage, decide whether the move of reservation is constitutional or not

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Under the broad framework of judicial review under the Constitution, the Supreme Court and High Courts have the power to declare any law unconstitutional, either because it is ultra vires (or, contrary to any provision of the Constitution) or it violates any of the fundamental rights, invalid because it is repugnant to a central law on the same subject or has been enacted without legislative jurisdiction. However, interim orders staying or suspending laws enacted by the legislature are frowned upon by constitutional courts and legal scholars. The general argument is that unless there are compelling reasons such as flagrant lack of constitutional validity, or absence of legislative competence (that is, the legislative body concerned lacks the jurisdiction to enact the law in question), a law ought not to be stayed.Why is it considered unusual for a court to suspend a law or its operation?The main principle is that suspending a law made by the legislature goes against the concept of separation of powers. Courts are expected to defer to the legislature's wisdom at the threshold of a legal challenge to the validity of a law. The validity of a law ought to be considered normally only at the time of final adjudication, and not at the initial stage. The second principle is that there is a presumption that every law enacted by any legislature is constitutional and valid. The onus is on those challenging it to prove that it is not. Therefore, courts are circumspect when hearing petitions seeking suspension of a law pending a detailed adjudication.How did the SC justify its order on farm laws?This court cannot be said to be completely powerless to grant stay of any executive action under a statutory enactment, the Bench observed in its order. This means that it was apparently making a distinction between staying a law and staying its implementation or any action under it. Some may argue, however, that the effect remains the same, as the order operates as a stay on the government invoking its provisions.Q. A person approached the Supreme Court contending that a law passed by the Parliament takes away his fundamental right and prayed that the Court must stay the operation of law at first instance and then he would move forward to prove that law is unconstitutional as it violates fundamental rights of the petitioner. Decide.

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.President Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed summoned his secretary, K. Balachandran, at around 11:15 p.m. on 25 June 1975. Ten minutes later, Balachandran met the pyjama-clad president in the private sitting room of his official residence at Rashtrapati Bhavan. The president handed his secretary a one-page letter from Indira Gandhi marked 'Top Secret'. Referring to the prime minister's discussion with the president earlier that day, the letter said she was in receipt of information that internal disturbances posed an imminent threat to India's internal security. It requested a proclamation of Emergency under Article 352 (1) if the president was satisfied on this score. She would have preferred to have first consulted the cabinet, but there was no time to lose. Therefore, she was invoking a departure from the Transaction of Business Rules in exercise of her powers under Rule 12 thereof. The president asked for his aide's opinion on the letter, which did not have the proposed proclamation attached. Balachandran said that such a proclamation was constitutionally impermissible on more than one ground. At this, the president said that he wanted to consult the Indian Constitution. Balachandran retreated to his office to locate a copy. Meanwhile, the deputy secretary in the president's secretariat showed up. The two officials launched into a discussion about the constitutionality of the prime minister's proposal before they returned to President Ahmed with a copy of the Constitution. Balachandran explained that the president's personal satisfaction that internal disturbances posed a threat to internal security was constitutionally irrelevant. What the Constitution required was the advice of the council of ministers. Balachandran withdrew when the president said he wanted to speak to the prime minister. When he re-entered the room 10 minutes later, President Ahmed informed him that R. K. Dhawan had come over with a draft Emergency proclamation, which he had signed. Then the president swallowed a tranquilizer and went to bed.This late-night concern for constitutional propriety is revealing. What we see unfolding in the hunt for a copy of the Constitution, the leafing through of its pages to make sure that the draft proclamation met the letter of the law, is the meticulous process of the paradoxical suspension of the law by law. The substance of the discussion concerns the legality of the procedures to follow in issuing the Emergency proclamation. The political will behind the act goes unmentioned. This is because Article 352 (1) of the Constitution itself had left the judgement of the necessity for the Emergency proclamation outside the law. The doctrine of necessity regards the judgement of crisis conditions as something that the law itself cannot handle; it is a lacuna in the juridical order that the executive is obligated to remedy.Q. What can be inferred from the passage about the request for the Emergency proclamation?

The Constitution which lays down the basic structure of a nation's polity is built on the foundations of certain fundamental values. The vision of socio-economic change through the Constitution is reflected in its lofty Preamble. The Preamble expresses the ideals and aspirations of a renascent India. By the year 1949, the Constituent Assembly had completed the drafting of the Fundamental Rights Chapter. Fundamental Rights are constitutional guarantees for the human rights of our people. These rights were one of the persistent demands of our leaders throughout the freedom struggle. The founding fathers were conscious of the fact that mere political democracy, i.e., getting the right to vote once in five years or so was meaningless unless it was accompanied by social and economic democracy. Dr. Ambedkar had said:"We do not want merely to lay down a mechanism to enable people to come and capture power. The Constitution also wishes to lay down an ideal before those who would be forming the government. That ideal is of economic democracy.""Our founding fathers, however, were far-sighted people therefore they consolidated the principles of good governance as Directive Principles contradistinguished from issues of rights, government and politics.That is how the vision of our founding fathers and the aims and objectives which they wanted to achieve through the Constitution are contained in the Preamble, the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles. These three may be described as the soul of the Constitution and the testament of the founding fathers to the succeeding generations together with the later Part on Fundamental Duties.It is fundamental right of every citizen not to be discriminated on the ground of religion, race, sex, place of birth or any of them. However, nothing in the fundamental rights shall prevent the state from making any special provision for women, children or elderly. State of XYZ enacted a law granting reservation of 50% in National Law School XYZ - to the native students scoring more than 75% percent in XII Examination. Based on the essence of the passage, decide whether the move of reservation is constitutional or not

Top Courses for CLATView all

Top Courses for CLAT

Directions: The question consists of two statements, one labelled as Principle(s) and the other as Facts. You are to examine the Principle(s) and apply it to the given Facts carefully and select the best option.Principles:1. Article 18 of the Constitution of India provides that no title, not being a military or academic distinction shall be conferred by the state.2. The Constitution of India says that no citizen of India shall accept any title from any foreign state without the prior consent of President.Facts: Ministry of information and broadcasting of China instituted international awards in various categories of cinemas which were given in a gala ceremony held in Beijing. Joseph Kumar, a leading Tollywood actor and citizen of India, was awarded with the Award of Best International Actor. XYZ, an NGO, filed a writ petition against Joseph Kumar claiming that he violated the provisions of Indian Constitution by receiving award from China without the prior consent of President.Decide.a)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar is the citizen of India and he violated the Constitution of India.b)The NGO will not succeed in the writ petition because there is no violation of constitutional provisions happened here.c)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar took the award without prior consent of the President of India.d)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar has violated the provisions of the Constitution of India.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Directions: The question consists of two statements, one labelled as Principle(s) and the other as Facts. You are to examine the Principle(s) and apply it to the given Facts carefully and select the best option.Principles:1. Article 18 of the Constitution of India provides that no title, not being a military or academic distinction shall be conferred by the state.2. The Constitution of India says that no citizen of India shall accept any title from any foreign state without the prior consent of President.Facts: Ministry of information and broadcasting of China instituted international awards in various categories of cinemas which were given in a gala ceremony held in Beijing. Joseph Kumar, a leading Tollywood actor and citizen of India, was awarded with the Award of Best International Actor. XYZ, an NGO, filed a writ petition against Joseph Kumar claiming that he violated the provisions of Indian Constitution by receiving award from China without the prior consent of President.Decide.a)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar is the citizen of India and he violated the Constitution of India.b)The NGO will not succeed in the writ petition because there is no violation of constitutional provisions happened here.c)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar took the award without prior consent of the President of India.d)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar has violated the provisions of the Constitution of India.Correct 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 question consists of two statements, one labelled as Principle(s) and the other as Facts. You are to examine the Principle(s) and apply it to the given Facts carefully and select the best option.Principles:1. Article 18 of the Constitution of India provides that no title, not being a military or academic distinction shall be conferred by the state.2. The Constitution of India says that no citizen of India shall accept any title from any foreign state without the prior consent of President.Facts: Ministry of information and broadcasting of China instituted international awards in various categories of cinemas which were given in a gala ceremony held in Beijing. Joseph Kumar, a leading Tollywood actor and citizen of India, was awarded with the Award of Best International Actor. XYZ, an NGO, filed a writ petition against Joseph Kumar claiming that he violated the provisions of Indian Constitution by receiving award from China without the prior consent of President.Decide.a)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar is the citizen of India and he violated the Constitution of India.b)The NGO will not succeed in the writ petition because there is no violation of constitutional provisions happened here.c)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar took the award without prior consent of the President of India.d)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar has violated the provisions of the Constitution of India.Correct 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 question consists of two statements, one labelled as Principle(s) and the other as Facts. You are to examine the Principle(s) and apply it to the given Facts carefully and select the best option.Principles:1. Article 18 of the Constitution of India provides that no title, not being a military or academic distinction shall be conferred by the state.2. The Constitution of India says that no citizen of India shall accept any title from any foreign state without the prior consent of President.Facts: Ministry of information and broadcasting of China instituted international awards in various categories of cinemas which were given in a gala ceremony held in Beijing. Joseph Kumar, a leading Tollywood actor and citizen of India, was awarded with the Award of Best International Actor. XYZ, an NGO, filed a writ petition against Joseph Kumar claiming that he violated the provisions of Indian Constitution by receiving award from China without the prior consent of President.Decide.a)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar is the citizen of India and he violated the Constitution of India.b)The NGO will not succeed in the writ petition because there is no violation of constitutional provisions happened here.c)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar took the award without prior consent of the President of India.d)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar has violated the provisions of the Constitution of India.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Directions: The question consists of two statements, one labelled as Principle(s) and the other as Facts. You are to examine the Principle(s) and apply it to the given Facts carefully and select the best option.Principles:1. Article 18 of the Constitution of India provides that no title, not being a military or academic distinction shall be conferred by the state.2. The Constitution of India says that no citizen of India shall accept any title from any foreign state without the prior consent of President.Facts: Ministry of information and broadcasting of China instituted international awards in various categories of cinemas which were given in a gala ceremony held in Beijing. Joseph Kumar, a leading Tollywood actor and citizen of India, was awarded with the Award of Best International Actor. XYZ, an NGO, filed a writ petition against Joseph Kumar claiming that he violated the provisions of Indian Constitution by receiving award from China without the prior consent of President.Decide.a)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar is the citizen of India and he violated the Constitution of India.b)The NGO will not succeed in the writ petition because there is no violation of constitutional provisions happened here.c)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar took the award without prior consent of the President of India.d)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar has violated the provisions of the Constitution of India.Correct 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 question consists of two statements, one labelled as Principle(s) and the other as Facts. You are to examine the Principle(s) and apply it to the given Facts carefully and select the best option.Principles:1. Article 18 of the Constitution of India provides that no title, not being a military or academic distinction shall be conferred by the state.2. The Constitution of India says that no citizen of India shall accept any title from any foreign state without the prior consent of President.Facts: Ministry of information and broadcasting of China instituted international awards in various categories of cinemas which were given in a gala ceremony held in Beijing. Joseph Kumar, a leading Tollywood actor and citizen of India, was awarded with the Award of Best International Actor. XYZ, an NGO, filed a writ petition against Joseph Kumar claiming that he violated the provisions of Indian Constitution by receiving award from China without the prior consent of President.Decide.a)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar is the citizen of India and he violated the Constitution of India.b)The NGO will not succeed in the writ petition because there is no violation of constitutional provisions happened here.c)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar took the award without prior consent of the President of India.d)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar has violated the provisions of the Constitution of India.Correct answer is option 'B'. 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(s) and the other as Facts. You are to examine the Principle(s) and apply it to the given Facts carefully and select the best option.Principles:1. Article 18 of the Constitution of India provides that no title, not being a military or academic distinction shall be conferred by the state.2. The Constitution of India says that no citizen of India shall accept any title from any foreign state without the prior consent of President.Facts: Ministry of information and broadcasting of China instituted international awards in various categories of cinemas which were given in a gala ceremony held in Beijing. Joseph Kumar, a leading Tollywood actor and citizen of India, was awarded with the Award of Best International Actor. XYZ, an NGO, filed a writ petition against Joseph Kumar claiming that he violated the provisions of Indian Constitution by receiving award from China without the prior consent of President.Decide.a)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar is the citizen of India and he violated the Constitution of India.b)The NGO will not succeed in the writ petition because there is no violation of constitutional provisions happened here.c)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar took the award without prior consent of the President of India.d)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar has violated the provisions of the Constitution of India.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: The question consists of two statements, one labelled as Principle(s) and the other as Facts. You are to examine the Principle(s) and apply it to the given Facts carefully and select the best option.Principles:1. Article 18 of the Constitution of India provides that no title, not being a military or academic distinction shall be conferred by the state.2. The Constitution of India says that no citizen of India shall accept any title from any foreign state without the prior consent of President.Facts: Ministry of information and broadcasting of China instituted international awards in various categories of cinemas which were given in a gala ceremony held in Beijing. Joseph Kumar, a leading Tollywood actor and citizen of India, was awarded with the Award of Best International Actor. XYZ, an NGO, filed a writ petition against Joseph Kumar claiming that he violated the provisions of Indian Constitution by receiving award from China without the prior consent of President.Decide.a)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar is the citizen of India and he violated the Constitution of India.b)The NGO will not succeed in the writ petition because there is no violation of constitutional provisions happened here.c)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar took the award without prior consent of the President of India.d)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar has violated the provisions of the Constitution of India.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: The question consists of two statements, one labelled as Principle(s) and the other as Facts. You are to examine the Principle(s) and apply it to the given Facts carefully and select the best option.Principles:1. Article 18 of the Constitution of India provides that no title, not being a military or academic distinction shall be conferred by the state.2. The Constitution of India says that no citizen of India shall accept any title from any foreign state without the prior consent of President.Facts: Ministry of information and broadcasting of China instituted international awards in various categories of cinemas which were given in a gala ceremony held in Beijing. Joseph Kumar, a leading Tollywood actor and citizen of India, was awarded with the Award of Best International Actor. XYZ, an NGO, filed a writ petition against Joseph Kumar claiming that he violated the provisions of Indian Constitution by receiving award from China without the prior consent of President.Decide.a)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar is the citizen of India and he violated the Constitution of India.b)The NGO will not succeed in the writ petition because there is no violation of constitutional provisions happened here.c)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar took the award without prior consent of the President of India.d)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar has violated the provisions of the Constitution of India.Correct answer is option 'B'. 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(s) and the other as Facts. You are to examine the Principle(s) and apply it to the given Facts carefully and select the best option.Principles:1. Article 18 of the Constitution of India provides that no title, not being a military or academic distinction shall be conferred by the state.2. The Constitution of India says that no citizen of India shall accept any title from any foreign state without the prior consent of President.Facts: Ministry of information and broadcasting of China instituted international awards in various categories of cinemas which were given in a gala ceremony held in Beijing. Joseph Kumar, a leading Tollywood actor and citizen of India, was awarded with the Award of Best International Actor. XYZ, an NGO, filed a writ petition against Joseph Kumar claiming that he violated the provisions of Indian Constitution by receiving award from China without the prior consent of President.Decide.a)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar is the citizen of India and he violated the Constitution of India.b)The NGO will not succeed in the writ petition because there is no violation of constitutional provisions happened here.c)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar took the award without prior consent of the President of India.d)The NGO will succeed in the writ petition because Joseph Kumar has violated the provisions of the Constitution of India.Correct 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
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App for FREE
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
Get App
© EduRev
Education Revolution
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup