Instructions:-
1. Attempt all the questions.
2. Once you have completed all the questions of a particular section click on the submit button for scores and explanations then move to the next sections.
3. For each correct answer, you receive 1 mark. For this mock, there is no negative marking.
English Language
Each set of questions in this section is based on a single passage. Please answer each question based on what is stated or implied in the corresponding passage. In some instances, more than one option may be the answer to the question; in such a case, please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.
In the early hours of August 17th, 1947, the Radcliffe Line was finally announced. This boundary, which was drawn by Sir Cyril Radcliffe, would divide British India into two independent nations: India and Pakistan. The process of drawing this line was not an easy one. When the British government announced its plan to withdraw from India, they left the task of drawing the boundary line to a British lawyer named Sir Cyril Radcliffe. The task was a daunting one, and Radcliffe had only a few weeks to complete it. He had no prior knowledge of the region, and he had never set foot in India before.
Radcliffe had a team of assistants to help him, but he had the final say on where the boundary line would be drawn. His task was complicated by the fact that the region was home to many different religious and ethnic groups. The boundary line had to be drawn in such a way that it would not cause any major disruptions in the region. Radcliffe worked tirelessly to complete the task, and on August 9th, 1947, he submitted his report to the British government. The process of drawing the boundary was highly secretive. Sir Cyril Radcliffe’s report containing the details of the boundary line was kept confidential until its public announcement on August 17th, 1947. This secrecy was maintained to prevent any pre-emptive conflicts or lobbying that could have influenced the final decision. As a result, the people directly affected by the partition and the new boundary had little knowledge or input regarding its specifics until it was officially revealed.
The announcement of the Radcliffe Line was met with mixed reactions. Many people were pleased that the boundary had finally been drawn, as it meant that they could now move to the country that they identified with. Others, however, were dismayed by the decision. The boundary line had caused many families to be split apart, and it had also led to the displacement of many people. In the days and weeks following the announcement, violence erupted across the region. Hindus and Sikhs were attacked in Pakistan, and Muslims were attacked in India. Millions of people were displaced, and many lost their lives. Despite the violence, the Radcliffe Line remained in place. It became the official boundary between India and Pakistan, and it has remained so to this day.
The boundary has been the cause of many disputes over the years, with both India and Pakistan claiming certain areas as their own. Today, the Radcliffe Line is seen as a major event in the history of India and Pakistan. It marked the end of British rule in the region, and the beginning of a new era for both nations. While the boundary line has caused many problems over the years, it has also allowed India and Pakistan to develop their own identities and cultures. And despite the challenges that the boundary has presented, the people of India and Pakistan have continued to move forward, building their nations and striving for a better future.
Quantitative Techniques
In a sports club consisting of 1,250 members, the ratio of the number of males to that of females is 3: 2. All the members are enrolled in five different games viz. Boxing, Judo Karate, Badminton, Table Tennis and Lawn Tennis. 18 percent of the females are enrolled in Judo Karate. 40 percent of the males are enrolled in Badminton. One-fifth of the females are enrolled in Table Tennis. The ratio of enrolment of males to females in Judo Karate is 3 : 2.
20 percent of the total number of members are enrolled in Boxing. The number of females enrolled in Table Tennis is 80 percent of the number of males enrolled in the same game. 12 percent of the males are enrolled in Lawn Tennis. The remaining males are enrolled in Boxing. 25 percent of the females are enrolled in Badminton and the remaining females are enrolled in lawn tennis.
Logical Reasoning
In many ways, the classroom of an educational institution is truly representative of the society within which it is instituted, since it provides democratic access to students from all sections of society. The coming together of many social worlds within these classrooms makes it a location of perpetual epistemological disruption. Here, learning takes place not only through the protocols of institutionalised pedagogy but also through the many ways in which we go astray of ourselves, as we dialogue with that stranger who is a classmate, a student, a teacher and who slowly becomes a member of a classroom community that we build together. And how we structure and inhabit this community will inform all our future possibilities of living together as social groups.
This inclusive nature of the classroom space is one of its greatest contributions to the process of learning. It is this accommodation of the variety of social locations from which our students come that has contributed to the civil discussions and debates and conversations through which the process of thinking is initiated. It is these conversations that take place across the lines of gender and caste and religion and nationality that inaugurate the process of critical questioning.
When the classroom becomes a space where students are disciplined into a narrow uniformity of dress code, then learning becomes a means of straitjacketing the body and the mind. When the uniformity of the classroom is shaped by political considerations and implemented through the authority of political power, then teaching is replaced by indoctrination and learning is replaced by unthinking parroting of political ideologies. Then, educational institutions will shut their gates to students who fail to display the uniformity of the uniformised body. And educational institutions will shut down the processes of learning and teaching and experimenting with the many ways in which we can build an equal, inclusive, compassionate and intelligent society.
Legal Reasoning
The defence of private defence has been provided under the IPC from S. 96 to 106.These provisions give the power to a person to protect his own body and property. Body may be of oneself or another person’s; likewise, property might also be moveable or immoveable, of himself or of another in cases of theft, robbery, mischief or criminal trespass or an attempt to do so. However, there are important limits on the right of private defence. Firstly, you cannot claim private defence for an act which under any circumstances justifies anything which was no defence but an offence and secondly, the right cannot be claimed when you yourself has initiated the attack.
The right of private defence does not exist for an act which is not an offence under the Penal Code and can only be availed to repel unlawful aggression and not for retaliation. Private defence will also not be valid in cases of self-defence.
In Chacko v. State of Kerala, the deceased reached the scene with a chopper after finding out that his brother was surrounded by armed assailants. It was held that no aggressor can claim private defence only on the ground that the deceased had a chopper.
Section 98 provides for the right of private defence in cases of unsoundness of mind and others such as due to the reason of youth, maturity in understanding, insanity, intoxication or by misconception; a person would have the right to private defence even if the act is not an offence. Say, A attempts to kill B due to unsoundness of mind and madness. A will not be guilty of any offence, but B will have the right to private defence in the same manner as if A was sane.
Section 100 provides for acts where the right of private defence of body extends to causing death; they are: assault which causes the apprehension of death or grievous hurt, assault for commission of rape, assault for gratifying unnatural lust, kidnapping or abducting, assault for confining a person, or an act or attempt of throwing or administering an acid attack.
Section 103 of the Code provides for the right of private defence of property which has caused death, namely robbery, housebreaking at night, mischief by fire on any building, tent or vessel, which is a human dwelling, theft, mischief, or house-trespass which causes apprehension of death or grievous hurt. The burden of proof always lies on the accused in the case of the General Exceptions of the IPC. The accused needs to prove his innocence to avail these defences.
Current Affairs & General Knowledge
The recent judgment of the Supreme Court of India upholding Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955, is a landmark judicial pronouncement on the citizenship criteria that are specially designed for Assam, which has been a state most affected by large-scale migration in the past. This verdict, pronounced by a Constitution Bench with a majority of 4:1, is legally consequential for the socio-cultural fabric of Assam. Section 6A is the result of the Assam Accord of 1985, which is a political solution to the complex demographic permutations that followed the influx from erstwhile East Pakistan-now Bangladesh. A provision that has been incorporated is a cut-off date of March 25, 1971, dividing the classifications into those admitted before the date, who are eligible for Indian citizenship, and those who are admitted after the date who are considered foreigners liable to be deported.
The majority opinion of Justice Surya Kant, with whom Chief Justice Chandrachud agreed, focused on the historical conditions of Assam and therefore differentiated legal treatment for its migrants. It is founded on a balanced reading of Article 14, which gives equal protection under the law, in combination with Article 11, where Parliament has exclusive powers over matters of citizenship. The Bench noted that section 6A postulates specific legal safeguards which balance humanitarian concerns with the cultural and demographic character of Assam. Such a legislative scheme does not offend the equality clause of Article 14 since it attempts to reconcile conflicting interests between accommodation of genuine migrants pre-1971 and the ability of the state to deal with subsequent migrations through identification and deportation. Articles 6 and 7 deal with the provision of Partition-era migrants and have no consideration of distinct migration pressures Assam was under post-1947, which Section 6A attempts to remedy.
Whereas Justice Pardiwala’s dissent brought out the constitutional principles being allegedly undermined by Section 6A by not providing any deterrent for continuing illegal immigration, as is absent from the very purposes of the Citizenship Act. Pardiwala referred to the lack of a “sunset clause” in Section 6A as a problem, arguing that it tacitly encourages continued immigration in the absence of a certain end. He emphasized the provision of Article 355, which obligates the Union government to safeguard states against external aggression, and was worried that Section 6A threatened Assam’s demographic stability.
This verdict has a more deep-rooted impact on the NRC and the CAA of 2019. While the NRC had declared in 2019 that there were 19 lakh people to be considered potential non-citizens in Assam, this is diametrically different from the CAA cut-off date for migrants who came to India after December 31, 2014, who incidentally are from Bangladesh, Afghanistan, or Pakistan but not Muslims. These statutory provisions have created legal and public debates about the fairness and workability of these schemes. The Supreme Court decision, therefore, upholds the validity of Section 6A but throws open difficult legal questions on India’s citizenship policies, especially in complex historical and demographic landscapes like Assam.