Law (UGC/NET Paper II & III)

The realist school in jurisprudence emphasizes understanding law as it actually operates in society rather than as it's written in books. This focus on social context, judicial behavior, and law's practical effects aligns it with the sociological approach to law. Analytical approach focuses on logical analysis of legal concepts, historical approach examines legal evolution, and 'positive approach' isn't a standard jurisprudential school categorization.

This question requires knowledge of the chronological order of specific Indian Supreme Court decisions interpreting 'industry' under the Industrial Disputes Act. The claimed order is Dhanrajgiri Hospital (ii), Bangalore Water Supply (not listed but influential), Indian Red Cross Society (i), State of Punjab (iii), and Prema Govinda (iv). Without verification of exact case dates, the claimed order (ii), (i), (iii), (iv) is provided.

The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 provides for divorce through various grounds (Section 13), making marriage dissoluble. The traditional Hindu view indeed considers marriage sacramental. Both statements can be independently true - the Act changed traditional law by introducing divorce while retaining the concept of marriage as sacred. The correct code is A (both true).

The Works Committee is a bipartite forum for employer-worker communication established under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Section 3). It aims to promote industrial relations and prevent disputes through discussion. The Trade Disputes Act, Trade Unions Act, and Employment Standing Order Act do not establish Works Committees.

D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) is the landmark Supreme Court case that established comprehensive guidelines for arrest, detention, and custodial violence prevention. The case addressed custodial death and procedural safeguards during arrest. It did not deal with dowry death, murder, or sexual harassment specifically - it was about arrest procedures and custodial rights.

The term 'dignity of the individual' appears explicitly in the Preamble to the Constitution of India ('...dignity of the individual...'). While Article 21 is the operational guarantee of life and personal liberty that embodies this principle, the specific phrase 'dignity of the individual' is Preamble language. However, Article 21 is often cited as the substantive manifestation of this dignity.

General Exceptions in IPC (Sections 76-106) cover circumstances where acts are not criminal despite causing harm: accident (Section 80), insanity (Section 84), and intoxication (Sections 85-86). 'Well calculated Murder' implies premeditated killing with mens rea, which is murder (Section 300) - never a general exception. General exceptions are defenses, not planned crimes.

This requires matching international law cases with legal principles. The Rann of Kutch Arbitration (1968) dealt with territorial boundaries. The Temple of Preah Vihear Case (ICJ 1962) concerned regional/state succession issues. The Asylum Case (1950) addressed estoppel principles in international law. The Kasikili/Sedudu Island (1999) applied equity principles in boundary adjudication.

Opinio juris sive necessitatis (the belief that a practice is legally obligatory) is a required element of customary international law. French legal scholar Francois Geny (1861-1959) contributed significantly to international legal theory and is credited with formulating the concept of opinio juris in the context of identifying customary international law.

In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), the Supreme Court held that 'reasonableness' runs like a golden thread through fundamental rights, particularly Article 21's 'procedure established by law'. This case transformed Article 21 by requiring procedures to be fair, just, and reasonable, not merely arbitrary. The golden thread metaphor is specific to this landmark judgment.

A time-barred debt is one where the limitation period for filing a suit has expired. Under the Limitation Act, such debts are not enforceable in court. However, if a fresh promise to pay is made (in writing and signed by the debtor or agent), it can revive the debt and make it enforceable again. The question asks about a promise to pay time-barred debt without specifying if it's a fresh promise.

The Fiction Theory (also known as Concession Theory) states that the state creates corporations as legal personalities by conceding or granting them recognition as artificial persons. This theory treats corporate personality as a legal fiction created by law, not a natural fact. It's the opposite of the Realist Theory which treats corporations as real human associations.

In Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab (1996), the Supreme Court overruled P. Rathinam v. Union of India and held that the Right to Life under Article 21 does not include the Right to Die. The court distinguished between suicide (criminalized) and passive euthanasia (later permitted in 2011 Aruna Shanbaug case).

An accused can be compelled to give fingerprints (i) and participate in identification parade (iii) as these are considered evidence, not testimony. However, Article 20(3) and the right against self-incrimination protect an accused from being compelled to give evidence against themselves (ii). The Constitution protects against testimonial compulsion, not physical evidence like fingerprints.

Employers are generally not vicariously liable for independent contractors' acts, but exceptions exist for inherently dangerous work, employer's own negligence, non-delegable duties, and unauthorized work by contractor. 'Technical exceptions' broadly encompasses these recognized categories where employer liability attaches despite the independent contractor relationship.

Abetment under IPC is a continuing offence that continues until the abetted offence is committed or the abetment is withdrawn by the abettor. Unlike some offences that are complete when the act is done, abetment has a continuous nature - it can extend over a period of time and the abettor remains liable until the main offence occurs or they actively withdraw.

This question tests Latin maxims in law. Options A, B, and C are correctly matched. However, option D incorrectly states 'injuria sine damnum' means 'injury with damage' - it actually means 'injury without damage' (legal wrong without financial loss). Since the question asks which is NOT correctly matched, D is the right answer.