CLAT PG 2025 Question Paper (SET C) Available: Download Solutions and Answer Key pdf

Justice Nagarathna invoked Plato's curative theory of punishment, suggesting penalties should aim at reformation and improvement. She acknowledged the competing interests between the victims' right to justice and the convicts' right to a second chance. The Court questioned whether heinous crimes against women warrant remission or reduction of sentences, underscoring respect for women irrespective of their societal standing. Justice Nagarathna reiterated that liberty and fundamental rights, including equality under Article 14, can only prevail when the rule of law is upheld. The judgment highlighted the necessity of balancing societal justice and individual liberty within constitutional boundaries.

The concept of double taxation implies that the same subject matter is taxed twice when it should be taxed only once. The GST law, as framed, does not envisage taxation of a transaction twice, and the fundamental principles of GST do not support such an imposition. Further, the importer, who is not the recipient of the service but is treated as a deemed recipient under the reverse charge mechanism, cannot be made liable to pay tax on a service that they have not directly availed. This stretches the scope of reverse charge mechanism beyond its intended purpose, which is to simplify tax collection by shifting the liability to pay tax from the service provider to the service recipient, particularly in cases where the service provider is located outside India and does not have a presence within the taxable territory. Moreover, the constitutional framework requires that a tax should be levied with legislative competence and should not contravene any fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution. The imposition of IGST on ocean freight under the reverse charge mechanism without proper legislative backing undermines the very essence of taxation principles enshrined in the Constitution of India. (This extract is taken from Mohit Minerals v. Union of India CA No. 1390/2022)

The Supreme Court, in *State of Punjab & Ors. v. Davinder Singh & Ors. (2024)*, examined the constitutional vision of equality, including sub-categorization within reserved categories. Justice Bela Trivedi, dissenting, stated that the presidential list of Scheduled Castes under Article 341 can only be amended by Parliament. She argued that sub-classification by states undermines the intent of Article 341, depriving certain categories of their rights and violating constitutional principles. Justice Trivedi emphasized adhering to plain and literal interpretation and upheld the ruling in *E.V. Chinnaiah*, affirming that affirmative action must stay within constitutional boundaries. Sub-classification should be reasonable and ensure equality among all sub-groups without excluding any category.

Under Section 171 of the Indian Contract Act, bankers, wharfingers, attorneys, and policy brokers have a general right to lien, allowing them to retain possession of goods until debts are cleared. This right, recognized as a possessory right, ensures temporary possession of goods without selling them without prior notice. In *Syndicate Bank v. Vijay Kumar and Others*, the Supreme Court held that the banker’s right to lien is a legal right rooted in customary law rather than contract. The judgment affirmed the applicability of Halsbury’s Laws of England, highlighting that this right is guaranteed by law and not contingent on contractual agreements.

Aquinas treated rights (ius/iura) as subjective, belonging to individuals, and synonymous with justice. Hobbes, influenced by Benthamite and Austinian positivism, defined rights as liberties in the absence of duty, leading to a state of nature with no binding obligations. This regression in philosophy highlights the correlation between rights and duties. According to Hohfeld, rights only make sense as claim-rights (correlating to someone’s duty), liberties (protected by non-interference duties), powers (enforced by officials’ duties), and immunities (secured by officials’ duties against interference). The interdependence of rights and duties ensures the coherence of legal and moral philosophy.

Henkin described international organisations as “new laws at its birth,” highlighting their role in transforming international law’s sources, actors, and processes. Since its establishment with 51 member states, the UN has grown into a multidimensional institution with 193 members, positioning itself as a global constitutional organisation. Its primary objective is to safeguard world order and maintain peace and security. Specialised agencies like the WHO, OECD, and ILO have further contributed to shaping international law over the last century, underscoring the importance of these organisations in global governance.

The lack of reliable electricity impacts economic development and exacerbates inequalities, particularly for women and low-income households. Promoting renewable energy fosters social equity, poverty alleviation, and inclusive growth. Transitioning to renewable energy is a strategic investment in sustainability and resilience. The right to equality under Article 14 and the right to life under Article 21 are intertwined with environmental protection. Recognizing the right to a healthy environment obligates states to prioritize sustainable development, address climate change, and safeguard future generations. (Extract from *MK Ranjitsinh and Ors v. Union of India, 2024 SC*)

The Court stated that judicial thinking should not be constrained by outdated laws or foreign legal systems. Instead, India must develop its own jurisprudence to meet modern needs. It highlighted the rule of strict and absolute liability, mandating that enterprises engaged in hazardous activities adhere to the highest safety standards. The scope of Epistolary jurisdiction was also discussed, affirming that procedural formalities must not obstruct access to justice. Justice should prioritize substance over technicalities, ensuring laws are dynamic and responsive to industrial and societal advancements.

The Industrial Disputes Act broadly defined ‘industry,’ but interpretations varied, creating confusion. The Board argued it was not an industry as its purpose was public welfare, not profit. The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice M. Hameedullah Beg, provided a broad and inclusive definition, emphasizing the nature of activity and the employer-employee relationship. This judgment extended labour protections to workers in public utilities, statutory bodies, and even some non-profit organizations. It underscored the judiciary's role in ensuring social justice and worker protections in a rapidly industrializing nation.

An ostensible sale with transfer of possession and ownership, but containing a clause for reconveyance in accordance with Section 58(c) of the Act, will clothe the agreement as a mortgage by conditional sale. Referring to Section 58(c) of the Transfer of Property Act the observed, “A deeming fiction was added in the negative that a transaction shall not be deemed to be a mortgage unless the condition for reconveyance is contained in the document which purports to effect the sale.” The issue under adjudication was whether the transaction between the parties was an absolute sale of the property or it was a mortgage. The court relied upon the case Bishwanath Prasad Singh v. Rajendra Prasad and Anr, 2006 SC and held that A bare perusal of the said provision clearly shows that a mortgage by conditional sale must be evidenced by one document whereas a sale with condition of retransfer may be evidenced by more than one document. A sale with a condition of retransfer is not a mortgage. It is not a partial transfer. By reason of such a transfer all rights have been transferred reserving only a personal right to the purchaser and such a personal right would be lost unless the same is exercised within the stipulated time. The execution of separate agreement for reconveyance, either contemporaneously or subsequently, shall militate against the agreement being mortgaged by conditional sale. There must exist a debtor and creditor relationship. The valuation of the property, and the transaction value, along with the duration of time for reconveyance, are important considerations to decide the nature of the agreement. There will have to be a cumulative consideration of these factors, along with the recitals in the agreement, intention of the parties, coupled with other attendant circumstances, considered in a holistic manner. The language used in the agreement may not always be conclusive. (Extract from Prakash (Dead) By LR. V. G. Aradhya Ors, 2023 SC)

Under Section 271 of the Companies Act, even financially sound companies can be wound up for specified reasons, unlike insolvency cases under the IBC, which focus on revival or winding up due to inability to pay debts. The Supreme Court emphasized that these situations cannot be equated when evaluating potential violations of Article 14 or 21 of the Constitution. Revival under the IBC often requires sacrifices from stakeholders, including workers and creditors, which are acceptable unless they are manifestly unjust. The Court rejected a word-by-word comparison of the waterfall mechanisms under the Companies Act and IBC, highlighting that the two enactments serve distinct objectives and cannot be conflated.

In *Shambu Nath Mehra vs. The State of Ajmer (1956 SCR 199)*, the learned Judge has stated the legal principle thus: “This lays down the general rule that in a criminal case the burden of proof is on the prosecution and section 106 is designed to meet certain exceptional cases in which it would be impossible, or at any rate disproportionately difficult for the prosecution to establish facts which are ‘especially’ within the knowledge of the accused and which he could prove without difficulty or inconvenience. The word ‘especially’ underscores facts that are pre-eminently or exceptionally within the knowledge of the accused. It added, if the section were to be interpreted otherwise, it would lead to the very startling conclusion that in a murder case the burden lies on the accused to prove that he did not commit the murder because who could know better than him whether he did or did not.” It is evident that it cannot be the intention and Privy Council has twice refused to construe this section, as reproduced in certain other Acts outside India, to mean that the burden lies on the accused person to show that he did not commit the crime for which he is tried. These cases are *Attygalle v. The King. 1936 PC 169 (AIR V 23) (A)* and *Seneviratne v. R, 1936-3 All ER 36 at p.49 (B)*. In case resting on circumstantial evidence, an accused person’s failure to provide a reasonable explanation as required by S. 106 could serve as an additional link in the chain of circumstances. (Based on facts from *State of West Bengal vs. Mir Mohammad Omar Ors, AIR 2000 SUPREME COURT 2988*)

In *Kehar Singh v. Union of India (1989)*, the Supreme Court affirmed that the President acts under a constitutional power distinct from judicial authority. This power permits the President to reach a different conclusion regarding guilt or sentence without modifying the judicial record. While the President is not obligated to disclose reasons for the decision, the exercise of this power must be based on legitimate and relevant reasons. In *Shatrughan Chauhan v. Union of India (2014)*, the Court reiterated that the Presidential act does not alter the judicial record but operates on a separate constitutional plane to ensure justice and clemency in deserving cases.

The Court held that while rights under a contract are generally assignable unless the contract is of a personal nature or prohibits assignment, obligations cannot be assigned without the consent of the other party. This principle was affirmed in *Khardah Co. Ltd. v. Raymon & Co. (India) (P) Ltd. (1962)*, which noted that the assignment of obligations requires consent, effectively creating a novation of the contract. On the other hand, rights can be transferred unless explicitly restricted by the contract or by law. The term "representative-in-interest" includes assignees, but obligations, being personal and based on the promisee’s reliance on the promisor, cannot be transferred without mutual agreement.

SEBI exercises wide-ranging powers under the SEBI Act, SCRA, and Depositories Act of 1996, including legislative, administrative, and adjudicatory authority. Section 11 mandates SEBI to regulate the securities market and protect investor interests, while Section 30 empowers it to frame regulations consistent with the Act. SEBI adopts a consultative approach, involving domain experts, market players, and the public in drafting and reviewing regulations. This dynamic framework ensures SEBI’s regulations align with the evolving securities market and maintain its integrity.

In *Nil Ratan Kundu and another v. Abhijit Kundu* (2008), the Court emphasized that custody decisions require a human touch and cannot be decided solely by interpreting legal provisions. The Court stated that the child’s comfort, health, education, intellectual development, and moral and ethical values are essential considerations. The child’s intelligent preference should be considered, but the final decision must prioritize their welfare. Similarly, in *Gaurav Nagpal v. Semedha Nagpal* (2009), the Court reiterated that the welfare of the child, including moral and ethical values, outweighs legalistic arguments and conflicting parental claims. These principles ensure that custody decisions focus on the child’s holistic well-being.

Duty is an obligation recognised by law to avoid conduct fraught with unreasonable risk of damage to others. The question whether duty exists in a particular situation involves determination of law. Hence, three ingredients are necessary for the existence of a duty of care: (i) foreseeability of the damage, (ii) proximity of relationship between the parties, and (iii) whether it is “just, fair and reasonable” that the law should impose a duty of care. In *Caparo Industries Plc. v. Dickman* (1990), the court held that breach of duty is concerned with the standard of care that ought to have been adopted in the circumstances and whether the defendant’s conduct fell below that standard, i.e., whether he was careless. The court, quoting *Rajkot Municipal Corporation v. Manjulben Jayantilal Nakum* (1997), stated that as a tort, negligence consists of legal duty to take care and breach of that duty. Duty determines whether the type of loss suffered by the plaintiff in the particular way in which it occurred can ever be actionable. The process of determining a breach of duty involves three steps: First, it is necessary to ascertain the qualities of the reasonable person, given the qualities attributed to him, would have taken in the circumstances. The factors that are permissible to take into account in this regard are prescribed by law, but the amount of care that the reasonable person would have taken is a question of fact. Lastly, it must be determined whether the defendant took less care than the reasonable person would have taken.

The Court emphasized the necessity for the Law Commission of India to undertake a comprehensive review of tribunals to enhance their independence and efficiency. It also suggested evolving a model for constituting or reconstituting tribunals to build public confidence in their functioning. The Court expressed concern over the ineffectiveness of alternative mechanisms devised for judicial review, stressing that judicial review and remedies are fundamental rights. The quality of justice dispensed by tribunals was deemed unsatisfactory, calling for urgent reforms to uphold the rights of citizens.

Section 47 of the Registration Act states that a registered document operates from the time it would have commenced to operate if no registration had been required. Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act mandates that a transfer of immovable property of value above Rs. 100 must be made through a registered deed. The Court reiterated that without a duly stamped and registered deed, no right, title, or interest in immovable property can be transferred. Referring to *Ram Saran Lall v. Domini Kuer*, the Court noted the harmonious balance between Section 54 and the deeming fiction under Section 47. Section 54 distinguishes between transfers of tangible immovable property above Rs. 100, which require registration, and transfers below Rs. 100, which can be made through delivery or a registered instrument.

In *Lata Singh v. State of U.P. (2006)*, the Supreme Court held that live-in relationships between consenting heterosexual adults are not offences, though they may be perceived as immoral. The Domestic Violence Act (DV Act) was enacted to protect women from domestic violence and to cover relationships "in the nature of marriage." The distinction lies in a close analysis of the relationship's nature, as outlined in Section 2(f) of the DV Act. Other legislations, such as Section 125 Cr.P.C., Section 498-A IPC, and Section 304-B IPC, address maintenance, mental cruelty, and dowry deaths, respectively. However, the DV Act explicitly covers relationships resembling marriage, providing women legal remedies for protection and maintenance.

The environmental rule of law creates essential tools to structure environmental protection, facilitating a shared understanding between science, regulatory decisions, and policy perspectives. It recognizes that environmental governance must involve all stakeholders, not just lawyers and judges, to address pressing challenges such as climate change, habitat destruction, and degradation. This rule emphasizes the interconnectedness of the natural world, highlighting that environmental issues in one region affect the entire ecosystem. By understanding and addressing global environmental issues, such as rising temperatures, melting glaciers, and desertification, the environmental rule of law aims to safeguard humanity’s future and the survival of ecosystems worldwide.

The environmental rule of law creates essential tools to structure environmental protection, facilitating a shared understanding between science, regulatory decisions, and policy perspectives. It recognizes that environmental governance must involve all stakeholders, not just lawyers and judges, to address pressing challenges such as climate change, habitat destruction, and degradation. This rule emphasizes the interconnectedness of the natural world, highlighting that environmental issues in one region affect the entire ecosystem. By understanding and addressing global environmental issues, such as rising temperatures, melting glaciers, and desertification, the environmental rule of law aims to safeguard humanity’s future and the survival of ecosystems worldwide.

The Court noted from MP Jain SN Jain’s treatise on Principles of Administrative Law that a fundamental principle of natural justice requires disclosing material evidence relied upon during adjudication. Without such disclosure, the decision is vitiated as it denies the affected party a real and effective opportunity to defend themselves. The Court emphasized that the test for disclosure hinges on whether the material is relevant for adjudication. If prejudice can be demonstrated by showing that the undisclosed material could have altered the outcome, the decision is deemed unfair and contrary to natural justice principles.

Fuller argued that principles of law must be generally applicable, communicated effectively, and applied prospectively. They should have clear standards, avoid contradictions, and refrain from imposing impossible obligations. Consistency is essential, and frequent changes to laws can negatively impact those subjected to abrupt alterations. Fuller stressed that laws should respect human capabilities and practical realities. Additionally, he highlighted that implementation mechanisms are critical for the effectiveness of any law, as exemplified in historical contexts.