Question Description
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) seems to have been overzealous in registering a case against environmental lawyer Ritwick Dutta and his organisation, Legal Initiative for Forest and Environment, for violating Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) provisions. The gist of the allegations is their using foreign funds to encourage litigation that will stall existing and prospective coal-fired plants in India. While the sourcing of foreign funds and use is certainly something to keep an eye on, any criminalising of the act of opposition to coal plants, when pursued via legal means, is an absurd stance for a government to adopt. As a signatory to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and various key agreements, India has undertaken to gradually reduce its reliance on fossil fuel sources and be net zero, or source almost all power from non-fossil fuel sources by 2070. India has also consistently endorsed reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that speak of the urgency of ensuring global temperatures do not exceed 1.5°C of pre-industrial times, necessitating that global net anthropogenic CO2 emissions decline by about 45% from 2010 levels by 2030. However, under principles of Common and Differentiated Responsibility, India has maintained its right to rely on coal plants in the interim as it is still a developing economy.(Extracted with edits and reviews from "The right to litigate: On limiting the industrial exploitation of nature" The Hindu, April 26, 2023)Q.What is the authors opinion about criminalizing opposition to coal plants through legal means?a)The author supports it as a necessary measure.b)The author believes it is an absurd stance for the government to adopt.c)The author is neutral on the issue.d)The author thinks it depends on the specific circumstances.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: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) seems to have been overzealous in registering a case against environmental lawyer Ritwick Dutta and his organisation, Legal Initiative for Forest and Environment, for violating Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) provisions. The gist of the allegations is their using foreign funds to encourage litigation that will stall existing and prospective coal-fired plants in India. While the sourcing of foreign funds and use is certainly something to keep an eye on, any criminalising of the act of opposition to coal plants, when pursued via legal means, is an absurd stance for a government to adopt. As a signatory to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and various key agreements, India has undertaken to gradually reduce its reliance on fossil fuel sources and be net zero, or source almost all power from non-fossil fuel sources by 2070. India has also consistently endorsed reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that speak of the urgency of ensuring global temperatures do not exceed 1.5°C of pre-industrial times, necessitating that global net anthropogenic CO2 emissions decline by about 45% from 2010 levels by 2030. However, under principles of Common and Differentiated Responsibility, India has maintained its right to rely on coal plants in the interim as it is still a developing economy.(Extracted with edits and reviews from "The right to litigate: On limiting the industrial exploitation of nature" The Hindu, April 26, 2023)Q.What is the authors opinion about criminalizing opposition to coal plants through legal means?a)The author supports it as a necessary measure.b)The author believes it is an absurd stance for the government to adopt.c)The author is neutral on the issue.d)The author thinks it depends on the specific circumstances.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: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) seems to have been overzealous in registering a case against environmental lawyer Ritwick Dutta and his organisation, Legal Initiative for Forest and Environment, for violating Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) provisions. The gist of the allegations is their using foreign funds to encourage litigation that will stall existing and prospective coal-fired plants in India. While the sourcing of foreign funds and use is certainly something to keep an eye on, any criminalising of the act of opposition to coal plants, when pursued via legal means, is an absurd stance for a government to adopt. As a signatory to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and various key agreements, India has undertaken to gradually reduce its reliance on fossil fuel sources and be net zero, or source almost all power from non-fossil fuel sources by 2070. India has also consistently endorsed reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that speak of the urgency of ensuring global temperatures do not exceed 1.5°C of pre-industrial times, necessitating that global net anthropogenic CO2 emissions decline by about 45% from 2010 levels by 2030. However, under principles of Common and Differentiated Responsibility, India has maintained its right to rely on coal plants in the interim as it is still a developing economy.(Extracted with edits and reviews from "The right to litigate: On limiting the industrial exploitation of nature" The Hindu, April 26, 2023)Q.What is the authors opinion about criminalizing opposition to coal plants through legal means?a)The author supports it as a necessary measure.b)The author believes it is an absurd stance for the government to adopt.c)The author is neutral on the issue.d)The author thinks it depends on the specific circumstances.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) seems to have been overzealous in registering a case against environmental lawyer Ritwick Dutta and his organisation, Legal Initiative for Forest and Environment, for violating Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) provisions. The gist of the allegations is their using foreign funds to encourage litigation that will stall existing and prospective coal-fired plants in India. While the sourcing of foreign funds and use is certainly something to keep an eye on, any criminalising of the act of opposition to coal plants, when pursued via legal means, is an absurd stance for a government to adopt. As a signatory to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and various key agreements, India has undertaken to gradually reduce its reliance on fossil fuel sources and be net zero, or source almost all power from non-fossil fuel sources by 2070. India has also consistently endorsed reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that speak of the urgency of ensuring global temperatures do not exceed 1.5°C of pre-industrial times, necessitating that global net anthropogenic CO2 emissions decline by about 45% from 2010 levels by 2030. However, under principles of Common and Differentiated Responsibility, India has maintained its right to rely on coal plants in the interim as it is still a developing economy.(Extracted with edits and reviews from "The right to litigate: On limiting the industrial exploitation of nature" The Hindu, April 26, 2023)Q.What is the authors opinion about criminalizing opposition to coal plants through legal means?a)The author supports it as a necessary measure.b)The author believes it is an absurd stance for the government to adopt.c)The author is neutral on the issue.d)The author thinks it depends on the specific circumstances.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: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) seems to have been overzealous in registering a case against environmental lawyer Ritwick Dutta and his organisation, Legal Initiative for Forest and Environment, for violating Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) provisions. The gist of the allegations is their using foreign funds to encourage litigation that will stall existing and prospective coal-fired plants in India. While the sourcing of foreign funds and use is certainly something to keep an eye on, any criminalising of the act of opposition to coal plants, when pursued via legal means, is an absurd stance for a government to adopt. As a signatory to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and various key agreements, India has undertaken to gradually reduce its reliance on fossil fuel sources and be net zero, or source almost all power from non-fossil fuel sources by 2070. India has also consistently endorsed reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that speak of the urgency of ensuring global temperatures do not exceed 1.5°C of pre-industrial times, necessitating that global net anthropogenic CO2 emissions decline by about 45% from 2010 levels by 2030. However, under principles of Common and Differentiated Responsibility, India has maintained its right to rely on coal plants in the interim as it is still a developing economy.(Extracted with edits and reviews from "The right to litigate: On limiting the industrial exploitation of nature" The Hindu, April 26, 2023)Q.What is the authors opinion about criminalizing opposition to coal plants through legal means?a)The author supports it as a necessary measure.b)The author believes it is an absurd stance for the government to adopt.c)The author is neutral on the issue.d)The author thinks it depends on the specific circumstances.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) seems to have been overzealous in registering a case against environmental lawyer Ritwick Dutta and his organisation, Legal Initiative for Forest and Environment, for violating Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) provisions. The gist of the allegations is their using foreign funds to encourage litigation that will stall existing and prospective coal-fired plants in India. While the sourcing of foreign funds and use is certainly something to keep an eye on, any criminalising of the act of opposition to coal plants, when pursued via legal means, is an absurd stance for a government to adopt. As a signatory to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and various key agreements, India has undertaken to gradually reduce its reliance on fossil fuel sources and be net zero, or source almost all power from non-fossil fuel sources by 2070. India has also consistently endorsed reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that speak of the urgency of ensuring global temperatures do not exceed 1.5°C of pre-industrial times, necessitating that global net anthropogenic CO2 emissions decline by about 45% from 2010 levels by 2030. However, under principles of Common and Differentiated Responsibility, India has maintained its right to rely on coal plants in the interim as it is still a developing economy.(Extracted with edits and reviews from "The right to litigate: On limiting the industrial exploitation of nature" The Hindu, April 26, 2023)Q.What is the authors opinion about criminalizing opposition to coal plants through legal means?a)The author supports it as a necessary measure.b)The author believes it is an absurd stance for the government to adopt.c)The author is neutral on the issue.d)The author thinks it depends on the specific circumstances.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) seems to have been overzealous in registering a case against environmental lawyer Ritwick Dutta and his organisation, Legal Initiative for Forest and Environment, for violating Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) provisions. The gist of the allegations is their using foreign funds to encourage litigation that will stall existing and prospective coal-fired plants in India. While the sourcing of foreign funds and use is certainly something to keep an eye on, any criminalising of the act of opposition to coal plants, when pursued via legal means, is an absurd stance for a government to adopt. As a signatory to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and various key agreements, India has undertaken to gradually reduce its reliance on fossil fuel sources and be net zero, or source almost all power from non-fossil fuel sources by 2070. India has also consistently endorsed reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that speak of the urgency of ensuring global temperatures do not exceed 1.5°C of pre-industrial times, necessitating that global net anthropogenic CO2 emissions decline by about 45% from 2010 levels by 2030. However, under principles of Common and Differentiated Responsibility, India has maintained its right to rely on coal plants in the interim as it is still a developing economy.(Extracted with edits and reviews from "The right to litigate: On limiting the industrial exploitation of nature" The Hindu, April 26, 2023)Q.What is the authors opinion about criminalizing opposition to coal plants through legal means?a)The author supports it as a necessary measure.b)The author believes it is an absurd stance for the government to adopt.c)The author is neutral on the issue.d)The author thinks it depends on the specific circumstances.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) seems to have been overzealous in registering a case against environmental lawyer Ritwick Dutta and his organisation, Legal Initiative for Forest and Environment, for violating Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) provisions. The gist of the allegations is their using foreign funds to encourage litigation that will stall existing and prospective coal-fired plants in India. While the sourcing of foreign funds and use is certainly something to keep an eye on, any criminalising of the act of opposition to coal plants, when pursued via legal means, is an absurd stance for a government to adopt. As a signatory to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and various key agreements, India has undertaken to gradually reduce its reliance on fossil fuel sources and be net zero, or source almost all power from non-fossil fuel sources by 2070. India has also consistently endorsed reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that speak of the urgency of ensuring global temperatures do not exceed 1.5°C of pre-industrial times, necessitating that global net anthropogenic CO2 emissions decline by about 45% from 2010 levels by 2030. However, under principles of Common and Differentiated Responsibility, India has maintained its right to rely on coal plants in the interim as it is still a developing economy.(Extracted with edits and reviews from "The right to litigate: On limiting the industrial exploitation of nature" The Hindu, April 26, 2023)Q.What is the authors opinion about criminalizing opposition to coal plants through legal means?a)The author supports it as a necessary measure.b)The author believes it is an absurd stance for the government to adopt.c)The author is neutral on the issue.d)The author thinks it depends on the specific circumstances.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) seems to have been overzealous in registering a case against environmental lawyer Ritwick Dutta and his organisation, Legal Initiative for Forest and Environment, for violating Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) provisions. The gist of the allegations is their using foreign funds to encourage litigation that will stall existing and prospective coal-fired plants in India. While the sourcing of foreign funds and use is certainly something to keep an eye on, any criminalising of the act of opposition to coal plants, when pursued via legal means, is an absurd stance for a government to adopt. As a signatory to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and various key agreements, India has undertaken to gradually reduce its reliance on fossil fuel sources and be net zero, or source almost all power from non-fossil fuel sources by 2070. India has also consistently endorsed reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that speak of the urgency of ensuring global temperatures do not exceed 1.5°C of pre-industrial times, necessitating that global net anthropogenic CO2 emissions decline by about 45% from 2010 levels by 2030. However, under principles of Common and Differentiated Responsibility, India has maintained its right to rely on coal plants in the interim as it is still a developing economy.(Extracted with edits and reviews from "The right to litigate: On limiting the industrial exploitation of nature" The Hindu, April 26, 2023)Q.What is the authors opinion about criminalizing opposition to coal plants through legal means?a)The author supports it as a necessary measure.b)The author believes it is an absurd stance for the government to adopt.c)The author is neutral on the issue.d)The author thinks it depends on the specific circumstances.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.