| GyanCentral - The hub for engineering and law students - IIT-JEE, AIEEE, BITSAT, CLAT, AILET - 2012: Legal Reasoning- 1 Sep 28th 2012, 00:39 | GyanCentral - The hub for engineering and law students - IIT-JEE, AIEEE, BITSAT, CLAT, AILET - 2012 | | The most comprehensive career education and test preparation forums in india. | | | Legal Reasoning- 1 Sep 28th 2012, 00:19 1. Legal Principle- Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that person's consent, moves that property in order to such taking, is said to commit theft. Whoever commits theft, shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years or with fine or with both. Factual Situation- Anil sees a ring belonging to Rohit lying on a table in Rohit's house. Not venturing to misappropriate the ring immediately for fear of search and detection, Anil hides the ring under the sofa cover, where it is highly improbable that it will be ever found by Rohit. Anil has the intention of taking the ring from the hiding place and selling it when the loss is forgotten. Decision- Is Anil guilty of theft? a. Yes b. No c. Yes, because Anil had the intention of removing the ring from Rohit's possession. d. Yes, because Anil had the intention of taking movable property from Rohit's possession, and with this intention he moved the property. Answer-d 2. Legal Principle- Whoever kidnaps or abducts any person in order that such person may be murdered or may be so disposed of as to be put in danger of being murdered shall be punished. Factual Situation- A kidnaps K intending and knowing the fact to be likely that K may be sacrificed to an idol so that his wife will be cursed from the three months long fever. Police arrested A. A defends himself that his intention is not to murder K. Decide. Decision: a. A is not liable because he has not kidnapped for murder. b. A is not liable for intention to murder rather than liable for kidnapping c. A is liable for kidnapping and abduction d. A is liable for both kidnapping, and abducting in order to murder. Answer- d 3. Legal Principle- Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that person's consent, moves property in order to such taking, is said to commit theft. Factual Situation- Kirti puts a bait for dog in his pocket and induces Amrit's dog to follow him. Amrit's dog began to follow Kirit. Amrit when came to know about it informed police. Police arrived at Kirit's house and Kirit without any fear told to police that I have not brought the dog myself as the people steal the goods and objects. Decide a. Kirit has not committed any offence because he has stolen nothing from Amit's possession. b. Kirit has not committed any offence because he has not stolen any movable goods or object from Amrit's possession. c. Kirit has committed the offence of undue influence because he has influenced unduly the dog. d. Kirit has committed the offence of theft as his intention is to take away the dog from Amrit's possession without his consent and his offence is complete when the dog began to follow. Answer-d 4. Principle: a person is liable for all the direct consequences of his act, which he could have reasonably foreseen as naturally flowing from his act. Facts : Anant, while driving his scooter at a high speed knocked down shanker, a middle-aged person, walking on the road. Shankar broke his leg as a result of the accident. But since Shankar was suffering from diabetes, the leg had to be amputated. Shankar filed a suit against Anant for the loss of the leg. a) Anant is liable, since the loss of the leg is directly attributable to his act. b) Anant is not liable for the loss of leg, since he did not know Shanker was suffering from diabetes c) Anant is not liable, since a diabetes patient like Shankar should not have walked on the road. Answer- a 5. Principle: Everybody is under a legal obligation to take reasonable care to avoid act or omission which he can foresee would injure his neighbour. The neighbour for this purpose is any person whom he should have in his mind as likely to be affected by his act. Facts: Krishnan, while driving his car at a high speed in a crowded road, knocked down a cyclist. The cyclist died on the spot with a lot of blood spilling around. Lakshmi, a pregnant woman passing by, suffered from a nervous shock, leading to an abortion. Lakshmi filed a suit against Krishnan claiming damages. a) Krishnan will be liable, because he owed a duty of reasonable care to everyone on the road including Lakshmi. b) Krishnan will not be liable because he could not have foreseen Lakshmi suffering from a nervous shock which eventually led to an abortion from his act. c) Krishnan will be liable to Lakshmi because he failed to drive carefully. Answer- b | | | |  | |
No comments:
Post a Comment