Link for TELEGRAM channel on the first page KNOWLEDGE FOR ALL

KNOWLEDGE FOR ALL:

LEGAL STUDY MATERIAL FOR ALL

Motto: To support and uplift aspiring legal minds

JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA LLM ENTRANCE

(ANSWER KEY of Free Mock Test)

An initiative by-

UJJAWAL DIXIT SUNIDHI SACHDEVA

Advocate, Allahabad High Court B.A.LLB (JMI, New Delhi)
B.A.LLB (NLU Nagpur) CLAT PG 2024- AIR 50
LLM (RML NLU) CLAT PG 2025 -AIR 2
CLAT PG 2023 -AIR 35 Qualified- Haryana Judiciary Mains
CLAT PG 2024 -AIR 22 and Delhi Judiciary Mains
UGC Net Qualified

FOR MORE FREE MATERIAL AND MOCK JOIN TELEGRAM

https://t.me/+OldBBBV1wq5hYTU1
Link for TELEGRAM channel on the first page KNOWLEDGE FOR ALL
Link for TELEGRAM channel on the first page KNOWLEDGE FOR ALL

Jamia LLM Combined Answer Key (Q.1–140)

Q. No. Ans Q. No. Ans Q. No. Ans Q. No. Ans Q. No. Ans
1 B 2 A 3 D 4 B 5 C
6 B 7 A 8 B 9 A 10 D
11 B 12 C 13 D 14 C 15 A
16 D 17 B 18 D 19 B 20 B
21 B 22 C 23 C 24 A 25 A
26 C 27 A 28 B 29 C 30 A
31 C 32 B 33 C 34 A 35 B
36 B 37 B 38 B 39 D 40 A
41 A 42 C 43 C 44 C 45 B
46 B 47 C 48 B 49 B 50 B
51 C 52 C 53 D 54 C 55 A
56 C 57 C 58 A 59 A 60 D
61 C 62 C 63 C 64 C 65 C
66 C 67 C 68 D 69 C 70 B
71 A 72 B 73 A 74 B 75 C
76 B 77 A 78 C 79 D 80 D
81 B 82 A 83 C 84 B 85 C
86 B 87 A 88 B 89 C 90 B
91 D 92 B 93 A 94 A 95 D
96 A 97 D 98 B 99 B 100 D
101 B 102 C 103 D 104 B 105 C
106 B 107 C 108 C 109 C 110 B
111 C 112 C 113 C 114 B 115 C
116 C 117 B 118 B 119 D 120 D
121 A 122 A 123 C 124 B 125 B
126 A 127 D 128 A 129 C 130 D
131 A 132 A 133 B 134 D 135 C
136 B 137 B 138 B 139 C 140 B
Link for TELEGRAM channel on the first page KNOWLEDGE FOR ALL

Note: There was a typing error in Question no.2. It is reframed as follows:

2. Which renowned author, known for the novel “The God of Small Things” won the
Booker Prize in 1997?

A. Arundhati Roy
B. Salman Rushdie
C. Jhumpa Lahiri
D. Vikram Seth

1. What are Parliamentary Privileges, and how were they interpreted in light of the Sita
Soren judgment (2024)?

Answer: Parliamentary privileges are special rights and immunities enjoyed by members of
Parliament and State Legislatures to protect the independence and integrity of legislative
functions. These include freedom of speech in the House and immunity from legal
proceedings for anything said or voted in the House (Articles 105 and 194 of the
Constitution).

The scope of these privileges was redefined by the Supreme Court in the 2024 case of Sita
Soren v. Union of India. Sita Soren, a member of the Jharkhand Legislative Assembly and
daughter-in-law of former Chief Minister Shibu Soren, was accused of accepting bribes in
exchange for voting in a particular manner during the 2012 Rajya Sabha elections. She
claimed immunity under Article 194(2), relying on the precedent set in the P.V. Narasimha
Rao case (1998), where the Supreme Court had held that MPs could not be prosecuted for
bribery if they voted or spoke in the House as a consequence of that bribe.

In a significant departure, the Court held that immunity under Article 194(2) cannot extend to
corrupt acts like bribery, even if such acts are related to legislative activity. The Court
emphasized that accepting a bribe is not a part of any legislative function and that allowing
such immunity would undermine democratic accountability.

This decision restored the principle that constitutional privileges are not shields for
corruption. It clarified that while legislators need protection to discharge their duties freely,
this cannot be extended to criminal acts that erode public trust in democratic institutions.
Link for TELEGRAM channel on the first page KNOWLEDGE FOR ALL

2. How does the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, impact the Right to Freedom of Religion
under the Indian Constitution?

Answer:

The Right to Freedom of Religion is enshrined in Articles 25 to 28 of the Indian

Constitution, ensuring individuals and religious groups can freely profess, practice, and
propagate their religion, subject to public order, morality, and health. Article 26 specifically
grants religious denominations the autonomy to manage their own affairs in matters of
religion, including the administration of property.

The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, introduces significant changes to the management of
waqf properties—endowments made by Muslims for religious or charitable purposes. Key
amendments include:

1. Inclusion of Non-Muslim Members in Waqf Boards: The Act mandates the

inclusion of non-Muslim members in the Central Waqf Council and State Waqf
Boards, which were traditionally composed solely of Muslims. Proponents argue this
promotes diversity and transparency. However, critics contend that it infringes upon
the rights of Muslims to exclusively manage their religious endowments, potentially
violating Article 26. They fear it could lead to external interference in religious
affairs.

2. Government Authority Over Waqf Property Ownership: The Act empowers

government officials, specifically District Collectors, to determine the ownership of
disputed waqf properties. Previously, such matters were adjudicated by Waqf
Tribunals with expertise in Muslim law. This shift raises concerns about state
overreach into religious property management, potentially undermining the autonomy
granted to religious denominations under Article 26.

3. Changes to the Composition of Waqf Tribunals: The amendment removes the

requirement for an expert in Muslim law to be part of Waqf Tribunals. This change
could affect the adjudication of disputes related to waqf properties, as decisions may
lack the nuanced understanding of Islamic jurisprudence, impacting the fair resolution
of religious property matters.

Critics argue that these amendments collectively represent an encroachment on the religious
freedoms of the Muslim community. By altering the traditional structures of waqf
Link for TELEGRAM channel on the first page KNOWLEDGE FOR ALL

management and increasing governmental control, the Act may compromise the community's
ability to manage its religious affairs independently. This could be seen as conflicting with
the constitutional protections afforded under Articles 25 and 26, which are designed to
safeguard religious autonomy and prevent state interference in religious practices.

In conclusion, while the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, aims to enhance transparency and
address issues of mismanagement within waqf institutions, it raises significant constitutional
questions regarding the Right to Freedom of Religion. The potential for increased state
intervention in religious property management necessitates a careful examination to ensure
that the Act aligns with the constitutional mandate to protect religious freedoms and the
autonomy of religious denominations.

3. What are the main differences among the various schools of Jurisprudence?

Answer: Jurisprudence is the theoretical study of law, and over time, several schools of
thought have emerged, each offering a different perspective on what law is and how it
functions in society. The major schools include:

1. Analytical School – Focuses on law as it is (positive law). Thinkers like Bentham

and Austin defined law as a command of the sovereign backed by sanction. Austin’s
theory is known as the “Command Theory.” This school separates law from morality.

2. Natural Law School – Believes law must be rooted in morality, reason, or divine
order. From Cicero to Aquinas and modern thinkers like Finnis, this school holds
that unjust laws are not true laws (“lex iniusta non est lex”).

3. Historical School – Associated with Savigny, this school argues that law is a product
of a people’s customs and spirit (Volksgeist). It evolves organically from society, not
by arbitrary command.

4. Sociological School – Emphasized by Roscoe Pound, this school sees law as a tool
of social engineering. It aims to balance competing interests and address social needs
through legal institutions.

5. Realist School – American Realists like Holmes and Llewellyn argue that law is
what judges decide in practice, not what is written in books. They focus on actual
behavior of legal actors rather than legal theory.
Link for TELEGRAM channel on the first page KNOWLEDGE FOR ALL

6. Critical Legal Studies and Feminist Jurisprudence – These are more recent
schools that critique traditional law as reflecting dominant power structures. They
emphasize law’s role in reinforcing inequality.

Each school offers insights into the nature, purpose, and function of law. While analytical
jurisprudence helps in precise legal drafting, sociological and realist schools are useful for
legal reforms and understanding law in action.

4. How does Indian Environmental Law address the principle of Sustainable

Development?

Answer:

The principle of Sustainable Development seeks to balance economic development with

environmental protection. In India, this principle has been judicially recognized as part of
Article 21 (Right to Life) and is reflected in both statutory and constitutional frameworks.

The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 serves as an umbrella legislation empowering the
Central Government to take measures to protect and improve the environment. Other laws
like the Water Act, 1974, Air Act, 1981, and Biological Diversity Act, 2002, supplement
this framework.

The judiciary has played a crucial role in embedding sustainable development into Indian
law. In Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India (1996), the Supreme Court
explicitly adopted the principles of Sustainable Development, Polluter Pays, and
Precautionary Principle as part of Indian environmental jurisprudence.

In Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India (2000), the Court balanced development
(dam construction) with environmental concerns, stating that sustainable development does
not mean no development, but responsible development.

The National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, established the NGT to deal exclusively with
environmental disputes, further reinforcing sustainable practices.

Constitutionally, Articles 48A and 51A(g) direct the State and citizens respectively to
protect and improve the natural environment.

Challenges remain, such as inconsistent enforcement, clearance of projects without proper

environmental impact assessments (EIA), and dilution of EIA norms. However, India’s
Link for TELEGRAM channel on the first page KNOWLEDGE FOR ALL

commitment under international frameworks like the Rio Declaration, Paris Agreement,
and SDGs supports the strengthening of sustainable development principles domestically.

Thus, Indian environmental law integrates sustainable development through legal provisions,
judicial activism, and policy commitments, though constant vigilance and reform are
necessary to ensure long-term ecological justice.

5. What are the essential features of a Trademark under Indian Law?

Answer:

A trademark is a distinctive sign or symbol used by a business to identify its goods or

services and distinguish them from others. The Trade Marks Act, 1999 governs trademark
law in India.

Key features of a trademark:

1. Distinctiveness: The mark must be capable of distinguishing the goods/services of

one person from others. This includes invented words (e.g., Google), logos, slogans,
etc.

2. Graphical Representation: The mark must be capable of being represented on paper

to be registrable.

3. Non-functionality: It should not be a generic term or a part of the product's function

(e.g., shape of a bottle may be trademarked only if it’s distinctive).

4. Use in Trade: It must be used or proposed to be used in commerce. Mere intention

without use is not sufficient.

Types of trademarks include word marks, logos, service marks, certification marks, and
collective marks.

Registration and Protection:

 Registration is not mandatory but provides legal benefits, including exclusive right to
use and sue for infringement.

 Protection is for 10 years, renewable indefinitely.

 Infringement occurs when a similar mark is used without permission, causing

confusion or deception among consumers.
Link for TELEGRAM channel on the first page KNOWLEDGE FOR ALL

Passing Off: Even an unregistered trademark can be protected under the common law
remedy of “passing off,” which protects the goodwill associated with a mark.

Case law: In Cadila Healthcare Ltd. v. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (2001), the SC laid
down tests for deceptive similarity and consumer confusion, emphasizing the importance of
public health in pharmaceutical products.

Trademarks are vital to brand identity, consumer trust, and commercial success, and Indian
law provides comprehensive protection for their registration and enforcement.

6. What rights are granted under Indian Copyright Law to creators of cinematographic
and musical works?

Copyright in India is governed by the Copyright Act, 1957. It provides legal protection to
creators of original works, including literary, dramatic, musical, artistic, cinematographic
works, and sound recordings. The law grants exclusive rights to control the use of their work.

In the case of cinematographic films, the producer is generally the first owner of the
copyright. The rights include:

 Reproduction of the film

 Distribution and sale

 Public performance and broadcasting

 Adaptation

In the case of musical works, rights may belong to both the composer (musical work) and
the lyricist (literary work), and when combined with a performance or recording, the
performer and producer of sound recording also gain rights.

A key development came through the Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012, which granted
authors of musical and literary works incorporated in films the right to receive royalties, even
after assigning rights. This was to prevent exploitation by producers who previously paid a
one-time fee and reaped ongoing commercial benefits.

In Indian Performing Rights Society v. Sanjay Dalia (2015), the Supreme Court clarified
that even if rights are assigned, original authors may retain economic interest, especially
when their work continues to generate revenue.
Link for TELEGRAM channel on the first page KNOWLEDGE FOR ALL

The law also protects moral rights under Section 57, allowing authors to claim authorship
and object to distortion or mutilation of their work.

Thus, copyright law in India recognizes multiple layers of authorship and ownership,
particularly in creative collaborations like films and music. It seeks to balance creative
control, economic rights, and public interest in artistic works.

7. When does the Right to Private Defence of body under IPC extend to causing
death?

The right to private defence under the Indian Penal Code (Sections 96 to 106) permits
individuals to protect themselves, others, or property against unlawful aggression. While the
law encourages individuals to rely on state machinery, it recognizes that immediate self-help
may be necessary in situations where the threat is imminent.

Under Section 100 of the IPC, the right to private defence extends to causing death of the
assailant if the assault causes a reasonable apprehension of:

1. Death

2. Grievous hurt

3. Rape

4. Kidnapping or abduction

5. Wrongful confinement which prevents one from approaching a public authority

6. Acid attack or an attempt to throw acid

This right is not unlimited. The force used must be proportionate to the threat faced and
used only when there is no time to seek state protection.

In Darshan Singh v. State of Punjab (2010), the Supreme Court held that the right to
private defence is a right, not an offence. A person should not be expected to run away when
confronted with imminent danger.

Importantly, Section 99 IPC states that this right is not available against public servants
acting in good faith under the law, nor does it allow retaliation or excessive harm once the
danger has passed.
Link for TELEGRAM channel on the first page KNOWLEDGE FOR ALL

In summary, the right to private defence, including the right to cause death, is legally
protected under specific circumstances and must be exercised responsibly, with the sole
objective of averting immediate and grave danger.

8. What are the safeguards against arbitrary arrest under the Code of Criminal
Procedure?

The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), provides several safeguards to protect
individuals from arbitrary and unlawful arrest. These safeguards are rooted in the
constitutional principles of personal liberty (Article 21) and equality before the law
(Article 14).

One of the most important provisions is Section 41 CrPC, which limits police power to
arrest without a warrant. For offences punishable up to 7 years, arrest is permitted only if:

 The police believe the person has committed the offence

 The arrest is necessary to prevent further offences or ensure cooperation in

investigation

 The officer records reasons in writing for making or not making the arrest

Section 41A introduces an alternative to arrest—a notice of appearance before the police
officer. If the person cooperates, arrest is not necessary. This provision is particularly crucial
in preventing unnecessary arrests in matrimonial or economic offences.

Section 50 CrPC mandates that the arrested person must be informed of the grounds of arrest
and the right to bail. Section 50A requires the police to inform a relative or friend about the
arrest.

Section 57 states that no person can be detained for more than 24 hours without being
produced before a magistrate. This is also supported by Article 22(2) of the Constitution.

Judicial decisions have reinforced these safeguards. In Joginder Kumar v. State of UP

(1994), the Supreme Court ruled that arrest should not be mechanical; it must serve a legal
purpose. In Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014), the Court directed police to avoid
routine arrests, especially in dowry cases, and strictly follow Section 41A.
Link for TELEGRAM channel on the first page KNOWLEDGE FOR ALL

Furthermore, the Supreme Court in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) laid down
guidelines that must be followed during arrest, including preparation of an arrest memo,
medical examination, and informing relatives.

Together, these provisions and judicial pronouncements aim to ensure that arrests are made
fairly, transparently, and only when necessary, thereby upholding the dignity and liberty of
individuals.

9. What is the Uniform Civil Code (UCC), and should it be implemented in India?

Answer:

The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) refers to a proposal to formulate and implement a common
set of personal laws governing marriage, divorce, succession, adoption, and maintenance for
all citizens of India, irrespective of religion. The objective is to replace religion-specific
personal laws with one uniform law applicable to all.

Constitutional Basis:

 Article 44 of the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) states: “The State shall
endeavour to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of
India.”

 Being a DPSP, Article 44 is not enforceable in courts but reflects the constitutional
vision of national integration and equality.

Arguments in Favour of UCC:

1. Equality before Law (Article 14): Different personal laws lead to inequality,
especially gender inequality (e.g., unequal inheritance or divorce rights in some
religious laws).

2. Secularism: A secular state should not allow laws based on religion in civil matters.

3. National Integration: A common civil code can promote unity and reduce communal
divisions.

4. Judicial Advocacy: The Supreme Court has repeatedly supported UCC in cases like:

o Shah Bano Case (1985): Urged for UCC to ensure justice to Muslim women.
Link for TELEGRAM channel on the first page KNOWLEDGE FOR ALL

o Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995): Criticized misuse of religious

conversion to circumvent personal laws.

Arguments Against UCC:

1. Cultural and Religious Sensitivities: Personal laws are deeply intertwined with
religious identity. Sudden imposition may cause unrest.

2. Minority Rights (Article 25): UCC may be perceived as infringing on the right to
freedom of religion.

3. One-size-fits-all Issues: Uniformity may not account for India’s diverse social and
cultural practices.

Recent Developments (2024–25):

 The Law Commission (2023) reopened consultations on UCC and invited public and
expert opinions.

 The Uttarakhand UCC Bill (2024) became the first State-level initiative to codify
UCC covering marriage, divorce, inheritance, and live-in relationships. It sparked
nationwide debates.

 Parliamentary discussions are ongoing, with calls for a nationwide UCC gaining
political traction.

 Some opposition groups and civil society organizations have raised concerns over the
lack of consensus and fear of majoritarian overreach.

Should it be Implemented?

The answer depends on how the UCC is implemented. A phased, consultative, and
inclusive approach—respecting diversity while ensuring constitutional values like gender
equality and justice—can help strike a balance. The UCC should not be seen as a tool of
uniformity but of equality and harmonization, crafted with sensitivity to all communities.

Thus, while the idea of UCC aligns with constitutional ideals, its implementation must be
cautious, transparent, and inclusive to avoid alienation and protect India's pluralistic ethos.
Link for TELEGRAM channel on the first page KNOWLEDGE FOR ALL

10. What is a dying declaration, and can it be the sole basis for conviction under
Indian law?

A dying declaration is a statement made by a person who is on the brink of death, explaining
the cause or circumstances leading to their death. Under Section 32(1) of the Indian
Evidence Act, 1872, such a statement is admissible as evidence, even though it is hearsay,
because the declarant is not available to testify in court. The underlying principle is that a
person who is dying is presumed to speak the truth, having no reason to lie.

Yes, a dying declaration can legally be the sole basis for conviction, provided the court is
satisfied that the statement is genuine, voluntary, and made in a fit state of mind. There is
no legal requirement that it must be corroborated by other evidence. However, the court
must exercise caution and ensure that the statement is free from tutoring, prompting, or
suspicion.

In Khushal Rao v. State of Bombay (1958), the Supreme Court held that a dying
declaration can form the sole basis of conviction if it is found to be truthful and voluntary.

In Laxman v. State of Maharashtra (2002), the Court clarified that a medical certificate of
the declarant’s mental fitness is not mandatory if the court is otherwise satisfied that the
declarant was in a fit state of mind to make the statement.

In Puran Chand v. State of Haryana (2010), the Supreme Court reiterated that a dying
declaration, if credible, can alone form the basis of conviction, without the need for
corroboration. However, the court must be convinced of its reliability and consistency.

If there are multiple dying declarations, consistency becomes crucial. If they contradict
each other, the court must analyze which one appears more reliable or whether
corroborative evidence is needed. In such cases, courts generally do not rely solely on any
one declaration unless it clearly stands out as trustworthy.

Courts have also rejected dying declarations when found to be suspicious or made under
duress. In Uka Ram v. State of Rajasthan (2001), the Court warned against accepting a
dying declaration blindly, emphasizing that it must inspire full confidence.

In conclusion, a dying declaration can be the sole basis for conviction, but only when the
court is fully satisfied about its authenticity, voluntariness, and truthfulness. It is a
Link for TELEGRAM channel on the first page KNOWLEDGE FOR ALL

powerful piece of evidence, but due to the inability of the maker to be cross-examined, it
must be scrutinized with great care.