Question Description
Directions: The question consists of two parts, one labelled as Principles and the other as Facts. You are to examine the principles and apply it/them to the given facts carefully and select the best option.Principles: The wrong of battery means intentional application of force to another person without any lawful justification. Even though the force used is very trivial and does not cause any harm, the wrong of battery is still constituted. Mere passive obstruction, however, cannot be considered the use of force.Facts: A security guard unlawfully prevented the plaintiff from entering the club premises. While preventing plaintiff, the guard was entirely passive like a door.Q. Has he committed the offence of battery?a)Guard has committed the offence of assault as he unlawfully prevented the plaintiff to enter into the club premises.b)The force used by the guard is very trivial in nature, so he is not liable for any offence.c)There is no offence of battery as mere passive obstruction cannot be considered the use of force.d)He has committed the offence of wrongful restraint.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for Humanities/Arts 2025 is part of Humanities/Arts preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the Humanities/Arts exam syllabus. Information about Directions: The question consists of two parts, one labelled as Principles and the other as Facts. You are to examine the principles and apply it/them to the given facts carefully and select the best option.Principles: The wrong of battery means intentional application of force to another person without any lawful justification. Even though the force used is very trivial and does not cause any harm, the wrong of battery is still constituted. Mere passive obstruction, however, cannot be considered the use of force.Facts: A security guard unlawfully prevented the plaintiff from entering the club premises. While preventing plaintiff, the guard was entirely passive like a door.Q. Has he committed the offence of battery?a)Guard has committed the offence of assault as he unlawfully prevented the plaintiff to enter into the club premises.b)The force used by the guard is very trivial in nature, so he is not liable for any offence.c)There is no offence of battery as mere passive obstruction cannot be considered the use of force.d)He has committed the offence of wrongful restraint.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for Humanities/Arts 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: The question consists of two parts, one labelled as Principles and the other as Facts. You are to examine the principles and apply it/them to the given facts carefully and select the best option.Principles: The wrong of battery means intentional application of force to another person without any lawful justification. Even though the force used is very trivial and does not cause any harm, the wrong of battery is still constituted. Mere passive obstruction, however, cannot be considered the use of force.Facts: A security guard unlawfully prevented the plaintiff from entering the club premises. While preventing plaintiff, the guard was entirely passive like a door.Q. Has he committed the offence of battery?a)Guard has committed the offence of assault as he unlawfully prevented the plaintiff to enter into the club premises.b)The force used by the guard is very trivial in nature, so he is not liable for any offence.c)There is no offence of battery as mere passive obstruction cannot be considered the use of force.d)He has committed the offence of wrongful restraint.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Directions: The question consists of two parts, one labelled as Principles and the other as Facts. You are to examine the principles and apply it/them to the given facts carefully and select the best option.Principles: The wrong of battery means intentional application of force to another person without any lawful justification. Even though the force used is very trivial and does not cause any harm, the wrong of battery is still constituted. Mere passive obstruction, however, cannot be considered the use of force.Facts: A security guard unlawfully prevented the plaintiff from entering the club premises. While preventing plaintiff, the guard was entirely passive like a door.Q. Has he committed the offence of battery?a)Guard has committed the offence of assault as he unlawfully prevented the plaintiff to enter into the club premises.b)The force used by the guard is very trivial in nature, so he is not liable for any offence.c)There is no offence of battery as mere passive obstruction cannot be considered the use of force.d)He has committed the offence of wrongful restraint.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for Humanities/Arts. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for Humanities/Arts Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Directions: The question consists of two parts, one labelled as Principles and the other as Facts. You are to examine the principles and apply it/them to the given facts carefully and select the best option.Principles: The wrong of battery means intentional application of force to another person without any lawful justification. Even though the force used is very trivial and does not cause any harm, the wrong of battery is still constituted. Mere passive obstruction, however, cannot be considered the use of force.Facts: A security guard unlawfully prevented the plaintiff from entering the club premises. While preventing plaintiff, the guard was entirely passive like a door.Q. Has he committed the offence of battery?a)Guard has committed the offence of assault as he unlawfully prevented the plaintiff to enter into the club premises.b)The force used by the guard is very trivial in nature, so he is not liable for any offence.c)There is no offence of battery as mere passive obstruction cannot be considered the use of force.d)He has committed the offence of wrongful restraint.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 parts, one labelled as Principles and the other as Facts. You are to examine the principles and apply it/them to the given facts carefully and select the best option.Principles: The wrong of battery means intentional application of force to another person without any lawful justification. Even though the force used is very trivial and does not cause any harm, the wrong of battery is still constituted. Mere passive obstruction, however, cannot be considered the use of force.Facts: A security guard unlawfully prevented the plaintiff from entering the club premises. While preventing plaintiff, the guard was entirely passive like a door.Q. Has he committed the offence of battery?a)Guard has committed the offence of assault as he unlawfully prevented the plaintiff to enter into the club premises.b)The force used by the guard is very trivial in nature, so he is not liable for any offence.c)There is no offence of battery as mere passive obstruction cannot be considered the use of force.d)He has committed the offence of wrongful restraint.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: The question consists of two parts, one labelled as Principles and the other as Facts. You are to examine the principles and apply it/them to the given facts carefully and select the best option.Principles: The wrong of battery means intentional application of force to another person without any lawful justification. Even though the force used is very trivial and does not cause any harm, the wrong of battery is still constituted. Mere passive obstruction, however, cannot be considered the use of force.Facts: A security guard unlawfully prevented the plaintiff from entering the club premises. While preventing plaintiff, the guard was entirely passive like a door.Q. Has he committed the offence of battery?a)Guard has committed the offence of assault as he unlawfully prevented the plaintiff to enter into the club premises.b)The force used by the guard is very trivial in nature, so he is not liable for any offence.c)There is no offence of battery as mere passive obstruction cannot be considered the use of force.d)He has committed the offence of wrongful restraint.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: The question consists of two parts, one labelled as Principles and the other as Facts. You are to examine the principles and apply it/them to the given facts carefully and select the best option.Principles: The wrong of battery means intentional application of force to another person without any lawful justification. Even though the force used is very trivial and does not cause any harm, the wrong of battery is still constituted. Mere passive obstruction, however, cannot be considered the use of force.Facts: A security guard unlawfully prevented the plaintiff from entering the club premises. While preventing plaintiff, the guard was entirely passive like a door.Q. Has he committed the offence of battery?a)Guard has committed the offence of assault as he unlawfully prevented the plaintiff to enter into the club premises.b)The force used by the guard is very trivial in nature, so he is not liable for any offence.c)There is no offence of battery as mere passive obstruction cannot be considered the use of force.d)He has committed the offence of wrongful restraint.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 parts, one labelled as Principles and the other as Facts. You are to examine the principles and apply it/them to the given facts carefully and select the best option.Principles: The wrong of battery means intentional application of force to another person without any lawful justification. Even though the force used is very trivial and does not cause any harm, the wrong of battery is still constituted. Mere passive obstruction, however, cannot be considered the use of force.Facts: A security guard unlawfully prevented the plaintiff from entering the club premises. While preventing plaintiff, the guard was entirely passive like a door.Q. Has he committed the offence of battery?a)Guard has committed the offence of assault as he unlawfully prevented the plaintiff to enter into the club premises.b)The force used by the guard is very trivial in nature, so he is not liable for any offence.c)There is no offence of battery as mere passive obstruction cannot be considered the use of force.d)He has committed the offence of wrongful restraint.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice Humanities/Arts tests.