Advertisements
Advertisements
Question
Principle: A person is said to have committed assault when apprehension is caused in the mind of a person that he is about to use physical force against his body.
Facts: 'A' abuses 'B' while he was sitting in a moving train, by aggressively shaking his fists when 'B' was standing on the railway platform at a distance.
Options
'A' has caused fear of assault in the mind of 'B'.
'A' has committed assault against 'B'.
A has not committed assault against 'B'.
'A' has caused apprehension of assault in the mind of 'B'.
Solution
A has not committed assault against 'B'.
Explanation:
Mere words do not amount to an assault. Here in the above-noted problem B was standing at a distance. For the assault, there must be minimum touching body of A. The reasonable conclusion drawn A has not committed assault against B. Hence "A has not committed assault against 'B'" is correct.
APPEARS IN
RELATED QUESTIONS
The question consists of legal propositions/principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Such principles may or may not be true in the real sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true. In other words, in answering the following question, you must not rely on any principles except the principle that is given hereinbelow for the question. Further, you must not assume any facts other than those stated in the question. The objective of this section is to test your interest in the study of law, research aptitude, and problem-solving ability.
Principle: A person is said to be of sound mind for the purpose of making a contract if, at the time, when he makes it, he is capable of understanding it and of forming a rational judgment as to its effect upon his interest.
Facts: X, who is usually of sound mind but occasionally of unsound mind enters into a contract with Y when he (X) is of unsound mind. Y came to know about this fact afterward and now wants to file a suit against X.
The question consists of two statements, one labelled as Assertion (A) and other as Reason (R).
You are to examine the two statements carefully and select the best option.
Assertion: Laws are means of achieving an end namely social control.
Reason: The ultimate end of law is to secure greatest happiness to greatest number.
Legal phrase is followed by four meanings. Choose the most appropriate option:
Animus posssidendi’ means:
Legal phrase is followed by four meanings. Choose the most appropriate option:
'Jus Gentium’ means:
Mark the best option:
An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" relates to ___________ theory.
Mark the best option:
Who is a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act?
Mark the best option:
Ex gratia means
The Indian Patents & Design Act enacted in
Under which Act can action be taken against wilful defaulters of banking loans?
The correct sequence in ascending order of their creation of the following international institution is:
- WTO
- GATT
- UNCTAD
- NAFTA
