Law Legal Studies · Civics Polity

Legal Principles and Doctrines

2,603 Questions

Legal principles and doctrines establish the foundational rules of jurisprudence and civil rights. Questions cover constitutional reasonable restrictions, courtroom evidence standards, and property laws. These topics are strictly necessary for law legal studies exams and judicial services prelims.

Constitutional doctrinesGuardianship rightsExpert testimony standardsCriminal trial instructionsContractual authorityRegistration law principles

Legal Principles and Doctrines Questions

Multiple choice

Defamation is concerned with

  1. character of a person

  2. Reputation of a person

  3. Behaviour of a person

  4. Both 1 and 2

  5. None of these
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
B Correct answer
Explanation

The ‘character’ of a person is what a person “actually is”, while ‘reputation’ is what neighbours and other say, “what he is”. Defamation is concerned with the reputation.

Multiple choice

To succeed in the defence of insanity, the accused has to show that he was of unsound mind

  1. at the time of commission of the act

  2. after the commission of the act

  3. before the commission of the act

  4. at any time in his life

  5. Any of the above
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
A Correct answer
Explanation

To succeed in the defence of insanity, the accused has to show that he was of unsound mind at the time of commission of the act. The defence of insanity falls under the chapter of General Exception of the Indian Penal Code.

Multiple choice

The Court may presume the existence of any fact which it thinks likely to have happened, regard being had to the common course of ___________ in their relation to the facts of the particular case.

  1. natural events

  2. human conduct

  3. public and private business

  4. All of the above
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
D Correct answer
Explanation

Under Section 114 of Indian Evidence Act, the Court may presume the existence of any fact which it thinks is likely to have happened, regard being had to the common course of natural events, human conduct and public and private business, in their relation to the facts of the particular case. 

Multiple choice

Which of the following distinctions of a confession from an admission is not correct?

  1. Where conviction can be based on statement alone, it is a confession and where some supplementary evidence is needed to authorise a conviction, it is an admission.

  2. Confession is defined whereas admission is not defined in the Indian Evidence Act.

  3. If the prosecution relies on a statement as being true, it is confession and if the statement is relied on because it is false, it is admission.

  4. In criminal cases, a statement by accused, not amounting to confession, but giving rise to inference that the accused might have committed the crime, is his admission.
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
B Correct answer
Explanation

Admission is defined in the Indian Evidence Act, whereas confession is not defined.

Multiple choice

Tape recorded conversation is relevant as an evidence on satisfying the following conditions, except

  1. the voice of the person alleged to be speaking must be identified by the maker of the record or by other who knows it

  2. accuracy of what was actually recorded has to be proved by the maker of the record and satisfactory evidence, direct or circumstantial, has to be there, so as to rule out the possibility of tampering with the record

  3. tape recording must not be before 3 months of the production

  4. the subject matter recorded has to be shown relevant according to the rules of relevancy in the Evidence Act
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
A Correct answer
Explanation

Tape recorded conversation is relevant as an evidence on satisfying the voice of the person alleged to be speaking must be identified by the maker of the record or by other who knows it.

Multiple choice

Consent is not said to be free when it is caused by

  1. coercion

  2. undue influence

  3. fraud

  4. all of these
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
D Correct answer
Explanation

Consent is not free when obtained through coercion, undue influence, or fraud. All three factors undermine voluntary agreement. Free consent must be given without pressure, manipulation, or deception.

Multiple choice

Which of the following statements is correct?

  1. In the case of fraud, the person making representation believes it to be true.

  2. In the case of misrepresentation, the maker does not believe it to be true.

  3. Fraud does not afford a ground for bringing an action in tort for damages, whereas misrepresentation does.

  4. In the case of misrepresentation, the fact that plaintiff had means of discovering the truth by exercising ordinary diligence can be good defence against the repudiation of the contract but such a defence cannot be set up in the case of fraud other than fraudulent silence.
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
D Correct answer
Explanation

Fraud involves intentional deception - the person making the statement knows it is false. Misrepresentation occurs when someone makes a false statement believing it to be true (innocent misrepresentation) or without reasonable grounds for believing its truth (negligent misrepresentation). A key legal distinction is that for misrepresentation, the defendant can argue that the plaintiff had the means to discover the truth through ordinary diligence, but this defense is not available for fraud cases except fraudulent silence.

Multiple choice

The maxim 'delegates non protest delegate' means

  1. a person whom authority has been given cannot delegate the authority to another

  2. a person whom authority has been given can delegate the authority to another with prior permission

  3. a person whom authority has been given to indemnify agent for injury caused by principal's neglect can delegate the authority

  4. that authority can be delegated under protest by the person to whom it has been given
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
A Correct answer
Explanation

The maxim 'delegatus non potest delegare' (corrupted in the question as 'delegates non protest delegate') means a delegate cannot delegate their authority to another. This principle of agency law states that when authority is delegated to a person, they must exercise it personally unless the original principal authorizes sub-delegation. This prevents unauthorized passing of responsibility and maintains accountability in agency relationships.

Multiple choice

Consent is not said to be free when it is caused by

  1. coercion

  2. undue influence

  3. fraud

  4. all of these
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
D Correct answer
Explanation

Free consent requires absence of coercion, undue influence, fraud, misrepresentation, and mistake. When consent is vitiated by any of these factors, the contract becomes voidable at the option of the aggrieved party. All three options (coercion, undue influence, fraud) are recognized grounds that make consent unfree.

Multiple choice

A confession by an accused is irrelevant if it is caused by

  1. inducement

  2. threat

  3. promise

  4. All of the above

  5. None of these
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
D Correct answer
Explanation

A confession made by an accused person is irrelevant in a criminal proceeding if the making of the confession appears to the court to have been caused by any inducement, threat or promise.

Multiple choice

Where there is reasonable ground to believe that ____________ have conspired together to commit an offence or an actionable wrong, anything said, done or written by any one of such persons in reference to their common intention, after the time when such intention was first entertained by any one of them is a relevant fact as against each of the persons believed to be so conspiring as well as for the purpose of proving the existence of the conspiracy as for the purpose showing that any such persons was a party to it.

  1. two or more persons

  2. five or more persons

  3. one or more persons

  4. No limit prescribed
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
A Correct answer
Explanation

Under Section 10 of the Indian Evidence Act, where there is reasonable ground to believe that two or more persons have conspired together to commit an offence or an actionable wrong, anything said, done or written by any one of such persons in reference to their common intention, after the time when such intention was first entertained by any one of them is a relevant fact as against each of the persons believed to be so conspiring as well as for the purpose of proving the existence of the conspiracy as for the purpose showing that any such persons was a party to it.

Multiple choice

In context of public service commission, what does Article 311(2) refer to?

  1. To save public servants from caprices of officers of inferior rank

  2. To enable public servants to cross examine witnesses produced against them

  3. To distinguish security of tenure of civil servants from services of groups A and B

  4. None of these
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
A Correct answer
Explanation

Article 311(2) is for protecting a civil servant from the caprices of officers of inferior rank.

Multiple choice

Which of the following literally means ‘command’?

  1. Writ to certiorari

  2. Writ to mandamus

  3. Writ to quo warranto

  4. Writ to prohibition
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
B Correct answer
Explanation

Mandamus literally means 'command'. Therefore, when it is issued, it commands a public authority or officer to do or not to do something which is in the nature of his/her public duty.

Multiple choice

The term minimum non - curat lex means law does not take account of triffles.

  1. True

  2. False

  3. Partly true

  4. Cannot say
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
A Correct answer
Explanation

The legal maxim 'de minimis non curat lex' means that the law does not concern itself with trivial matters or trifles. Courts will not entertain cases involving insignificant or negligible issues where the cost of litigation outweighs the stakes. This principle prevents judicial resources from being wasted on inconsequential matters.