Law

UPSC Law 2024 — Paper II

All 8 questions from UPSC Civil Services Mains Law 2024 Paper II (400 marks total). Every stem reproduced in full, with directive-word analysis, marks, word limits, and answer-approach pointers.

8Questions
400Total marks
2024Year
Paper IIPaper

Topics covered

Criminal law principles - mens rea, conspiracy, negligence, vicarious liability, product liability (1)Plea bargaining, intoxication as defence, Prevention of Corruption Act (1)Property offences - theft, misappropriation, CBT; nuisance; false imprisonment (1)Absolute liability, kidnapping vs abduction, abetment (1)Contract law - quasi-contract, LLP, unpaid seller, agency, geographical indications (1)Damages for breach, illegal vs void contracts, surety liability (1)Arbitral autonomy, indemnity, mistake in contract (1)Public interest litigation, IT Act safe harbour, RTI information format (1)

A

Q1
50M 150w Compulsory explain Criminal law principles - mens rea, conspiracy, negligence, vicarious liability, product liability

Answer the following questions in about 150 words each. Support your answer with relevant legal provisions and Judicial pronouncements : 10×5=50 (a) The underlying principle of mens-rea is expressed in the familiar Latin maxim — 'actus non-facit reum nisi mens sit rea,' – 'the act does not make a man guilty unless the mind is also guilty.' Explain with decided cases. 10 (b) 'The principle that every conspirator is liable for all the acts of co-conspirators if they are towards attaining the goals of the conspiracy even if some of them have not actively participated in the commission of that offence/s.' In the light of above statement, explain the principle of criminal conspiracy as per Indian Penal Code 1860. 10 (c) 'It is the degree of negligence which really determines whether a particular action will amount to rash and negligent act as required to hold a person guilty of homicide under Section 304-A of Indian Penal Code, 1860.' Discuss. 10 (d) 'The determination of vicarious liability of the state is linked with the negligence made by all its functionaries and no immunity can be claimed.' In the light of above observation discuss vicarious liability of state with reference to its sovereign functions. 10 (e) "The introduction of 'product liability' under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 marked an end of the 'buyer beware' doctrine and the introduction of 'seller beware' as the new doctrine." Discuss. 10

हिंदी में पढ़ें

निम्नलिखित में से प्रत्येक प्रश्न का उत्तर लगभग 150 शब्दों में दीजिए। अपना उत्तर सुसंगत विधिक प्रावधानों और न्यायिक निर्णयों से समर्थित कीजिए : 10×5=50 (a) दुराशय (मेन्स-रिया) का अन्तर्निहित सिद्धान्त एक प्रचलित लैटिन कहावत (मैक्सिम), — 'एक्टस नान फैसिट रियम निसि मेन्स सिट रिया,' – 'केवल कार्य किसी को अपराधी नहीं बनाता, यदि उसका मन भी अपराधी न हो,' में अभिव्यक्त है। निर्णीत वादों सहित समझाइए। 10 (b) 'यह सिद्धान्त कि सह-षड्यन्त्रकारियों के समस्त कार्यों के लिए प्रत्येक षड्यन्त्रकारी उत्तरदायी होगा, यदि वह षड्यन्त्र के उद्देश्यों की प्राप्ति की दिशा में किया गया है, भले ही उनमें से कुछ उस अपराध की पूर्णता में सक्रिय रूप से प्रतिभाग नहीं किये हैं।' उपरोक्त कथन के आलोक में भा. दण्ड संहिता 1860 के अनुसार 'आपराधिक षड्यन्त्र' को समझाइए। 10 (c) 'भारतीय दण्ड संहिता 1860 की धारा 304-A के अधीन व्यक्ति को मानव वध के लिए दोषी ठहराये जाने हेतु अपेक्षित कि क्या कोई विशिष्ट कृत्य उतावलापन या उपेक्षा से किया गया कृत्य है, वस्तुतः उपेक्षा की डिग्री (मात्रा) से विनिर्धारित होता है।' विवेचना कीजिए। 10 (d) 'राज्य के प्रतिनिहित दायित्व का विनिर्धारण इसके समस्त पदाधिकारियों द्वारा बरती गयी उपेक्षा से जुड़ी है और किसी उन्मुक्ति का दावा नहीं किया जा सकता है।' उपरोक्त संप्रेषण के आलोक में राज्य के प्रतिनिहित दायित्व का उसके सम्प्रभुकृत्यों के संदर्भ में विवेचना कीजिए। 10 (e) "उपभोक्ता संरक्षण अधिनियम 2019 के अंतर्गत 'उत्पाद-दायित्व' का लागू किया जाना 'क्रेता-सावधान सिद्धांत' के अंत (समाप्ति) और 'विक्रेता-सावधान' के नये सिद्धांत के प्रारम्भ (स्थापना) को चिह्नित करता है।" विवेचना कीजिए। 10

Answer approach & key points

Framework: Issue > Rule > Authority > Application. (a) explain: definition/context > points in order > small example > short close | (b) explain: definition/context > points in order > small example > short close | (c) discuss: intro > 3-4 dimensions > example > balanced close | (d) discuss: intro > 3-4 dimensions > example > balanced close | (e) discuss: intro > 3-4 dimensions > example > balanced close Full marks: Comprehensive, well-structured, with precise legal citations and case law.

  • Meaning of actus reus and mens rea; mental-state words in offence definitions (IPC/BNS)
  • General Exceptions (mistake of fact, accident, infancy, insanity) with BNS equivalents (ss. 14, 17, 18, 20–22)
  • Cases: R v. Prince, Sherras v. De Rutzen, Nathulal, M.H. George, Ranjit Udeshi
  • Strict liability exceptions in regulatory statutes
  • Definition: IPC 120A/BNS 61(1); punishment 120B/BNS 61(2); agreement as gist; overt act requirement for non-offence illegal acts
  • Liability for co-conspirators' acts; no need to know all details (Nalini, Kehar Singh)
  • Evidence: IEA s.10 / BSA s.8 (Mirza Akbar); proof by circumstances
  • Distinction from common intention (IPC 34 / BNS 3(5)); continuing offence (Ajay Aggarwal)
  • Provision and punishment: IPC 304A (2 years) vs BNS 106(1) (5 years; doctors 2 years), 106(2) hit-and-run (abeyance)
  • Rashness vs negligence (Idu Beg, Bhalchandra)
  • Gross negligence and doctors (Jacob Mathew), civil vs criminal negligence (Syad Akbar)
  • Causa causans (Kurban Hussein) and boundary with culpable homicide (Alister Pareira)
  • Article 300; P. & O. Steam Navigation distinction
  • Vidyawati (liability) and Kasturi Lal (immunity)
  • Decline: N. Nagendra Rao, Challa Ramakrishna Reddy; constitutional tort (Rudul Sah, Nilabati Behera, D.K. Basu)
  • Need for legislation (Law Commission First Report)
  • Definitions: product liability (s.2(34)), harm (s.2(22)); Chapter VI (ss. 82–87)
  • Manufacturer strict liability (s.84), service provider (s.85), seller incl. e-commerce (s.86)
  • Exceptions (s.87) and limits on 'seller beware'
  • Enforcement: CCPA powers, recalls; E-Commerce Rules 2020; comparison with 1986 Act
Q2
50M justify Plea bargaining, intoxication as defence, Prevention of Corruption Act

(a) "Justification for introduction of 'plea-bargaining' in India was that it will reduce delay in case of undertrial prisoners in a cheaper and quicker method." Do you appreciate its existence in the same form or not ? Justify your answer. 20 (b) 'Intoxication impairs perception and judgement both so one fails to foresee the result of his conduct.' In this backdrop, examine the law relating to the defence of intoxication and refer to the leading cases. 15 (c) How far do you agree that prevention of corruption Act 1988 is an important legal instrument in curbing corruption in the society. Discuss. What are the types of offences recognised under this law and what are punishments ? 15

हिंदी में पढ़ें

(a) "भारत में 'सौदा-अभिवाक' को लागू किये जाने का औचित्य यह रहा है कि यह विचाराधीन कैदियों के मामलों में सस्ता एवं शीघ्र विधि (तरीके) से विलम्ब को कम करेगा।" क्या आप इसके प्रचलन (अस्तित्व) के वर्तमान स्वरूप की प्रशंसा करते हैं अथवा नहीं ? अपने उत्तर का औचित्य सिद्ध करें। 20 (b) 'मत्ता (नशा) धारणा (बोध) और निर्णय-क्षमता को क्षीण (कम) करती है, जिससे एक व्यक्ति अपने आचरण (कृत्य) के परिणाम का पूर्वानुमान करने में असफल होता है।' इस पृष्ठभूमि में मत्ता के बचाव संबंधी विधि की समीक्षा कीजिए और निर्देशक वादों को संदर्भित कीजिए। 15 (c) आप कहाँ तक सहमत हैं कि भ्रष्टाचार निवारण अधिनियम 1988 समाज में भ्रष्टाचार दूर करने में एक महत्वपूर्ण विधिक साधन (अभिकरण) है। विवेचना कीजिए। इस विधि के अंतर्गत मान्य अपराधों के प्रकार क्या हैं और दण्ड क्या हैं ? 15

Answer approach & key points

Framework: Issue > Rule > Authority > Application. (a) justify: claim > 3-4 reasons > evidence > conclusion | (b) examine: intro > how/why with reasoning > evidence > conclusion | (c) discuss: intro > 3-4 dimensions > example > balanced close Full marks: Precise legal citations, clear distinction of concepts, and strong application of law to the specific context.

  • Origin: Criminal Law (Amendment) Act 2005, CrPC Ch. XXIA (ss. 265A–265L), now BNSS Ch. XXIII (ss. 289–300); Law Commission and Malimath
  • Scheme: eligibility (≤7 years; exclusions), voluntariness, mutually satisfactory disposition, sentence concessions (incl. BNSS s.293 first offenders), finality, confidentiality
  • Assessment: benefits vs low uptake, no charge bargaining, coercion risk, undertrial problem (s.479 BNSS)
  • Reasoned position with reform proposals
  • Involuntary intoxication: IPC 85 / BNS 23 — complete defence conditions
  • Voluntary intoxication: IPC 86 / BNS 24 — presumed knowledge, not intention
  • Cases: DPP v. Beard, Basdev v. PEPSU, Bablu v. Rajasthan; English: Majewski, Kingston
  • Assessment of policy rationale and specific vs basic intent
  • Background and definition of public servant (s.2(c)); P.V. Narasimha Rao
  • 2018 Amendment: undue advantage, bribe-giving, commercial organisations, s.17A, s.18A
  • Offences and punishments: ss. 7, 7A, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15
  • Procedure and evaluation: Special Judges, presumption (s.20), sanction (s.19); Neeraj Dutta (2022), Sita Soren (2024); limitations and Lokpal/CVC
Q3
50M discuss Property offences - theft, misappropriation, CBT; nuisance; false imprisonment

(a) "It is the mode of acquiring possession of property of other party with/without his consent, which determines the type of offence against property and thus distinguishes theft, misappropriation and Criminal breach of trust." Discuss. 20 (b) "A person is liable for Public nuisance, when he does an act or illegal omission which causes any common injury, danger or annoyance to the public ..." Discuss Nuisance in the light of above statement along with its types. 15 (c) Explain 'false imprisonment' as per law of Torts and distinguish it from 'malicious prosecution.' 15

हिंदी में पढ़ें

(a) "सहमति सहित/बिना सहमति के दूसरे पक्ष की सम्पत्ति का कब्जा प्राप्ति का तरीका सम्पत्ति के विरुद्ध अपराधों के प्रकार को विनिर्धारित करता है और इस प्रकार — चोरी, दुर्विनियोग और आपराधिक न्यास-भंग को विभेदित करता है।" विवेचना कीजिए। 20 (b) "एक व्यक्ति लोक उपताप के लिए उत्तरदायी होगा, जब वह कोई कार्य या अवैध लोप करता है जिससे जन सामान्य को साधारण क्षति, खतरा या क्षोभ कारित होता है ..." उपरोक्त कथन के आलोक में उपताप का इसके प्रकारों सहित विवेचना कीजिए। 15 (c) अपकृत्य विधि के अनुसार 'मिथ्या-कारावास' को समझाइए और 'विद्वेषपूर्ण अभियोजन' से विभेदित कीजिए । 15

Answer approach & key points

Framework: Issue > Rule: statute or Article > Authority > Application and conclusion. (a) discuss: intro > 3-4 dimensions > example > balanced close | (b) discuss: intro > 3-4 dimensions > example > balanced close | (c) explain: definition/context > points in order > small example > short close Full marks: Precise statutory citations, clear distinctions, relevant case law, and balanced analysis.

  • Theft (IPC 378 / BNS 303): taking without consent, dishonest intention at taking; Pyare Lal Bhargava, K.N. Mehra, claim of right
  • Criminal misappropriation (IPC 403 / BNS 314): innocent possession, later dishonest intention; finder illustrations
  • CBT (IPC 405 / BNS 316): entrustment/dominion; Jaswantrai Akhaney, R.K. Dalmia, Pratibha Rani; aggravated forms
  • Comparative conclusion on possession and timing of intention
  • Definition: IPC 268 / BNS 270; 'common injury, danger or annoyance to the public'
  • Remedies: criminal (IPC 290 / BNS 292; BNSS 152 ex-CrPC 133; Ratlam), civil (CPC s.91; special damage — Rose v. Miles, Fritz v. Hobson)
  • Types: public, private (injury to property; comfort/health — Ram Raj Singh, Radhey Shiam), statutory; PYA Quarries test
  • Defences: prescription, statutory authority; coming to the nuisance no defence
  • False imprisonment: total restraint without lawful justification; actionable per se; Bird v. Jones, Meering, Robinson, Herd
  • Indian compensation cases (Rudul Sah, Bhim Singh); BNS 127, BNSS 399
  • Malicious prosecution: elements (prosecution, favourable termination, no reasonable cause, malice, damage); Mohammad Amin, WBSEB v. Dilip Kumar Ray
  • Distinctions: interest, nature, damage, malice, burden, outcome
Q4
50M comment Absolute liability, kidnapping vs abduction, abetment

(a) 'If an enterprise is permitted to carry on any hazardous or inherently dangerous activity for its profits, the cost of any accident arising on account of such activity must be an appropriate term of overheads.' Comment. (M. C. Mehta v. U.O.I.) 20 (b) 'Kidnapping is a substantive offence while abduction is not an offence exclusively. It becomes offence, when committed with a criminal intent.' Explain. 15 (c) 'The offence of abetment depends upon the intention of the abettor not upon the act committed by the abetted person.' Explain. 15

हिंदी में पढ़ें

(a) 'यदि किसी एक उद्यम को उसके लाभों के लिए किसी संकटमयी या स्वाभाविक रूप से जोखिमपूर्ण गतिविधि संचालित करने के लिए अनुमति दी जाती है तो ऐसी गतिविधि से उत्पन्न किसी दुर्घटना की कीमत के लिए उपरिव्यय (प्रभार) में समुचित शर्त (निबंधन) होगी ।' टिप्पणी कीजिए । (एम. सी. मेहता बनाम भारत संघ) 20 (b) 'व्यपहरण एक मौलिक अपराध है जबकि अपहरण आत्यंतिक रूप से अपराध नहीं है । यह जब आपराधिक आशय से किया जाता है तब अपराध हो जाता है ।' समझाइए । 15 (c) 'दुष्प्रेरण का अपराध दुष्प्रेरक के आशय पर निर्भर करता है न कि दुष्प्रेरित व्यक्ति द्वारा किये गये कार्य पर ।' समझाइए । 15

Answer approach & key points

Framework: Issue > Rule > Authority > Application. (a) comment: context > arguments both sides > judgment > close | (b) explain: definition/context > points in order > small example > short close | (c) explain: definition/context > points in order > small example > short close Full marks: Precise statutory citations, clear distinction of concepts, and balanced legal analysis.

  • Facts and ratio of the Oleum gas case: absolute, non-delegable duty; no exceptions
  • Departure from Rylands v. Fletcher and its exceptions
  • Rationale: enterprise liability, loss-spreading, deterrence (capacity-based compensation), victim protection
  • Later development and statutes: Charan Lal Sahu, Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action, PLI Act 1991, NGT Act s.17(3), CLND Act 2010; critique
  • Kidnapping: IPC 359–361 / BNS 137(1); age limits (IPC 16/18; BNS 'child' under 18); consent immaterial; punishment IPC 363 / BNS 137(2)
  • Cases: S. Varadarajan, Thakorlal Vadgama, Raja Ram
  • Abduction: IPC 362 / BNS 138; force or deceit; continuing; punishable with specified intents (BNS 140, 87)
  • Distinction and conclusion
  • Definition: IPC 107 / BNS 45 — instigation, conspiracy, intentional aid
  • IPC 108 Explanations / BNS 46: offence need not be committed; abetted person may be innocent; abetment of abetment
  • Punishment scheme: BNS 49, 51–53, 54, 55–56; Jamuna Singh
  • Intention in instigation: Ramesh Kumar, Sanju (abetment of suicide, IPC 306 / BNS 108); distinction from conspiracy

B

Q5
50M 150w Compulsory explain Contract law - quasi-contract, LLP, unpaid seller, agency, geographical indications

Answer the following questions in about 150 words each. Support your answer with relevant legal provisions and Judicial pronouncements : 10×5=50 (a) A "'Quasi-Contract' arises out of judicial principles and not out of contractual agreement between two parties." Explain. 10 (b) Every partner of a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) for the purposes of its business is its agent but not that of other partners. Analyse the extent of liability of LLP and its partners. 10 (c) 'The rights of an unpaid seller do not depend upon any agreement, express or implied, between the parties. They arise by implication of law.' Explain. 10 (d) Mutual rights and duties of the Principal and agent may be wholly provided for in their contract. Discuss the general duties of the agent with special reference to the duty of reasonable care and skill. 10 (e) What is the commercial significance of the Geographical Indications of Goods ? Explain the benefits that accrue to the registered proprietors and authorised users by registration of Geographical Indications of Goods. 10

हिंदी में पढ़ें

निम्नलिखित में से प्रत्येक प्रश्न का उत्तर लगभग 150 शब्दों में दीजिए । अपना उत्तर सुसंगत विधिक प्रावधानों और न्यायिक निर्णयों से समर्थित कीजिए : 10×5=50 (a) "'संविदा-कल्प' न्यायिक सिद्धांतों से उद्भूत होती है और न कि दो पक्षकारों के मध्य संविदात्मक करार से ।" समझाइए । 10 (b) 'व्यापार के उद्देश्यों के लिए 'सीमित दायित्व भागीदारी' का प्रत्येक भागीदार इसका अभिकर्ता होता है परंतु दूसरे भागीदारों का नहीं ।' सीमित दायित्व भागीदारी और इसके भागीदारों के दायित्व के विस्तार-क्षेत्र का विश्लेषण कीजिए । 10 (c) 'असदत विक्रेता के अधिकार पक्षकारों के मध्य किसी अभिव्यक्त या विवक्षित करार पर निर्भर नहीं होते हैं । वह विधि की विवक्षा से उत्पन्न होते हैं ।' समझाइए । 10 (d) प्रमुख और अभिकर्ता के परस्पर अधिकार और कर्तव्य के लिए उपबंध उनके संविदा में पूर्णतः दिए जा सकें । अभिकर्ता के सामान्य कर्तव्यों का, युक्तियुक्त सावधानी एवं कौशल के विशेष संदर्भ में विवेचना कीजिए । 10 (e) सामानों (वस्तुओं) के भौगोलिक संकेतों (जी.आई.) का वाणिज्यिक महत्व क्या होता है ? सामानों के भौगोलिक संकेतों के पंजीकृत कराने से पंजीकृत मालिक और अधिकृत प्रयोक्ता के लिए उद्भूत लाभों को समझाइए । 10

Answer approach & key points

Framework: Issue > Rule > Authority > Application. (a) explain: definition/context > points in order > small example > short close | (b) analyse: intro > causes > effects > stakeholders/linkages > way forward | (c) explain: definition/context > points in order > small example > short close | (d) discuss: intro > 3-4 dimensions > example > balanced close | (e) explain: definition/context > points in order > small example > short close Full marks: Precise statutory citations, clear distinction of concepts, relevant case law, and structured argument.

  • Concept: obligation implied in law to prevent unjust enrichment; Moses v. Macferlan; restitution
  • Indian Contract Act ss. 68–72
  • Cases: B.K. Mondal, Mulamchand, Kanhaiya Lal Mukundlal Saraf
  • Conclusion on equitable basis vs statutory codification
  • LLP as body corporate (s.3); agency of partners (s.26) vs Partnership Act
  • LLP's liability (s.27) and limits
  • Partners' liability (s.28): limited, but personal for own wrongful acts; holding out (s.29)
  • Unlimited liability for fraud (s.30); 2021 amendments
  • Definition of unpaid seller (s.45)
  • Rights against goods (s.46): lien (ss.47–49), stoppage in transit (ss.50–52), resale (s.54); withholding delivery
  • Why by operation of law: arise from status, survive passing of property, effective against third parties (s.53)
  • Personal remedies (ss.55–56)
  • Contractual variation vs statutory default duties
  • Obedience (s.211), reasonable care and skill (s.212) with standard and remoteness; Pannalal Jankidas; Chaudhry v. Prabhakar
  • Accounts and communication (ss.213–214); fiduciary duties (ss.215–218)
  • Non-delegation (s.190) and exceptions
  • Definition (s.2(1)(e) GI Act 1999); TRIPS Articles 22–24
  • Commercial significance: collective brand, premium, exports, livelihoods, traditional knowledge; examples
  • Benefits: exclusive use and infringement relief (ss.20–22), authorised users (s.17), 10-year renewable registration (s.18), prima facie evidence (s.23), non-assignability (s.24), bar on trade mark (s.25), offences (ss.38–40)
  • Limits: enforcement abroad, quality control; Tea Board v. ITC
Q6
50M discuss Damages for breach, illegal vs void contracts, surety liability

(a) Discuss the rules which are taken into account by the courts while awarding damages for the breach of contract. Refer to the relevant statutory provisions and case law. 20 (b) 'An illegal contract is always void but a void contract is not always illegal.' Examine while illustrating both the types of contract. 15 (c) 'The liability of a surety is secondary, but it is co-extensive with that of Principal debtor.' In this backdrop, discuss the nature and extent of liability of surety. 15

हिंदी में पढ़ें

(a) संविदा-भंग के लिए प्रतिकर (नुकसानी) अधिनिर्णीत करते समय न्यायालयों द्वारा गणना में लिए जाने वाले नियमों की विवेचना कीजिए । सुसंगत सांविधिक प्रावधानों और वाद विधि को संदर्भित कीजिए । 20 (b) 'एक अवैध संविदा सदैव शून्य होती है परन्तु एक शून्य संविदा सदैव अवैध नहीं होती है ।' दोनों प्रकार की संविदा का उदाहरण देते हुए परीक्षण कीजिए । 15 (c) 'प्रतिभू का दायित्व द्वितीयक (गौण) होता है परन्तु यह मूल ऋणी के दायित्व के समविस्तीर्ण होता है ।' इस पृष्ठभूमि में प्रतिभू के दायित्व के प्रकृति और विस्तार की विवेचना कीजिए । 15

Answer approach & key points

Framework: Issue > Rule: statute or Article > Authority > Application and conclusion. (a) discuss: intro > 3-4 dimensions > example > balanced close | (b) examine: intro > how/why with reasoning > evidence > conclusion | (c) discuss: intro > 3-4 dimensions > example > balanced close Full marks: Precise statutory and case law references, clear application to facts, balanced discussion.

  • Compensatory purpose; ss. 73–75 Indian Contract Act
  • Remoteness: general and special damages; Hadley v. Baxendale, Victoria Laundry, Heron II
  • Measure, mitigation (Murlidhar Chiranjilal), nominal and exemplary/mental-agony exceptions
  • Stipulated sums (s.74): Fateh Chand, ONGC v. Saw Pipes, Kailash Nath; rescission (s.75)
  • Definitions: void agreement (s.2(g)), void contract (s.2(j)), unlawful consideration/object (s.23), partial illegality (s.24)
  • Illustrations of illegal agreements
  • Void but not illegal: ss. 20, 25–30, 56; minors (Mohori Bibee)
  • Consequences: collateral transactions (Gherulal Parekh), restitution (s.65), in pari delicto (Kuju Collieries, Immani Appa Rao) and exceptions
  • Contract of guarantee (s.126); parties
  • Secondary nature: accessory; rights of subrogation (ss.140–141) and indemnity (s.145)
  • Co-extensive liability (s.128): creditor may proceed directly (Bank of Bihar, Indexport); insolvency of principal (Lalit Kumar Jain 2021); limited/continuing guarantees (ss.129–131)
  • Discharge: ss.133–139, 141–143
Q7
50M comment Arbitral autonomy, indemnity, mistake in contract

(a) "The principle of arbitral autonomy is an integral element of the ever evolving domain of arbitration law .... The basis of arbitral autonomy is to give effect to the true intention of the parties to distance themselves from the 'risk of domestic judicial parochialism.' " Comment with reference to the theory and practice. 20 (b) 'Sections 124 and 125 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 are not exhaustive of the law of indemnity.' Comment in the context of Indemnity and Indemnity-holder's rights. 15 (c) 'Mistake does not defeat consent, but only misleads the parties.' Explain citing the relevant legal provisions and cases decided by the courts. 15

हिंदी में पढ़ें

(a) माध्यस्थम्-स्वायत्तता का सिद्धान्त माध्यस्थम् विधि के निरन्तर विकसित हो रहे क्षेत्र का एक अभिन्न तत्त्व है । माध्यस्थम्-स्वायत्तता का आधार पक्षकारों के वास्तविक आशय को प्रभावी बनाने के लिए देशज न्यायिक संकीर्णता के जोखिम से अपने को दूर रखना है । सिद्धान्त और व्यवहार के संदर्भ सहित टिप्पणी कीजिए । 20 (b) 'भारतीय संविदा अधिनियम 1872 की धाराएं 124 और 125 क्षतिपूर्ति की विधि के संबंध में पूर्ण नहीं है।' क्षतिपूर्ति और क्षतिपूर्ति-धारकों के अधिकारों के संदर्भ में टिप्पणी कीजिए। 15 (c) 'भूल सहमति को विफल नहीं करती है, बल्कि केवल पक्षकारों को भ्रमित करती है।' सुसंगत विधिक प्रावधानों और न्यायालयों द्वारा विनिर्णीत बादों को उद्धृत करते हुए समझाइए। 15

Answer approach & key points

Framework: Issue > Rule > Authority > Application. (a) comment: context > arguments both sides > judgment > close | (b) comment: context > arguments both sides > judgment > close | (c) explain: definition/context > points in order > small example > short close Full marks: Precise legal definitions, accurate statutory citations, relevant case law with ratio, and clear application to the specific question.

  • Theory: party autonomy, separability, kompetenz-kompetenz (s.16), minimal intervention (s.5), narrow review (ss.34, 48)
  • Evolution in India: Bhatia, Saw Pipes, Venture Global → BALCO, 2015 Amendment, Ssangyong
  • Pro-autonomy cases: Vidya Drolia, Amazon v. Future, Interplay (2023), Cox & Kings (2023)
  • Limits: Perkins Eastman, CORE (2024), Gayatri Balasamy (2025) on modification; time limits (s.29A)
  • Sections 124 and 125 content
  • Non-exhaustive aspects: loss not caused by human conduct, implied and statutory indemnities (ss.69, 145, 222–223), Secretary of State v. Bank of India
  • Rights before actual payment: Osman Jamal, Gajanan Moreshwar, Khetarpal Amarnath
  • Indemnifier's subrogation and conclusion
  • Consent and free consent (ss.13–14)
  • Bilateral mistake of fact (s.20): Couturier v. Hastie, Raffles v. Wichelhaus, Tarsem Singh; value opinions excluded
  • Mistake of law (s.21) and unilateral mistake (s.22)
  • Exceptions negating consent: identity (Cundy v. Lindsay vs Phillips v. Brooks), non est factum; induced mistake as fraud/misrepresentation
Q8
50M critically examine Public interest litigation, IT Act safe harbour, RTI information format

(a) "There is, in recent years, a feeling which is not without any foundation that 'public interest litigation' is now tending to become 'publicity interest litigation' or 'private interest litigation', and has a tendency to be counter-productive." Examine the statement critically. 20 (b) Discuss the relevance of the 'safe harbour' clause under the Information Technology Act 2000. Comment on the need to make the intermediaries liable for transmitting the posts and communications of third parties. 15 (c) An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought. Are there any exceptions to this rule? Explain with suitable illustrations. 15

हिंदी में पढ़ें

(a) "हाल के वर्षों में, यह महसूस किया जा रहा है जो कि निराधार नहीं है, कि 'लोक हित वाद' अब 'प्रचार हित वाद' या 'निजी हित वाद' की ओर अनुकूल हो रहा है और जो एक प्रत्युत्पादक प्रवृत्ति है।" इस कथन का आलोचनात्मक परीक्षण कीजिए। 20 (b) सूचना तकनीकी अधिनियम 2000 के अंतर्गत 'सेफ हार्बर' (सुरक्षित आश्रय) उपखंड की सुसंगतता का विवेचना कीजिए। तीसरे पक्षों की प्रविष्टियों (पोस्ट्स) और सूचनाओं को परोक्षित करने के लिए मध्यस्थों (विचौलियों) को उत्तरदायी बनाने की आवश्यकता पर टिप्पणी कीजिए। 15 (c) एक सूचना जिस रूप में मांगी गयी है, साधारणतया उसी रूप में दी जानी आवश्यक है। क्या इस नियम के कोई अपवाद हैं? उपयुक्त उदाहरण सहित समझाइए। 15

Answer approach & key points

Framework: Issue > Rule > Authority > Application. (a) examine: intro > how/why with reasoning > evidence > conclusion | (b) discuss: intro > 3-4 dimensions > example > balanced close | (c) explain: definition/context > points in order > small example > short close Full marks: Precise legal citations, balanced analysis, and clear illustrations.

  • Origin and purpose: relaxed locus standi under Arts 32/226; S.P. Gupta, Hussainara Khatoon, Bandhua Mukti Morcha; achievements
  • Evidence of misuse: publicity, business-rival, blackmail and political PILs (Kalyaneshwari, Dattaraj Thaware, Tehseen Poonawalla)
  • Counter-productive effects: docket burden, judicial overreach into policy (K. Balu), unenforceable orders
  • Corrective response: Janata Dal v. H.S. Chowdhary, Balwant Singh Chaufal guidelines, SC PIL Guidelines and Order XXXVIII SC Rules 2013; balanced conclusion (discipline, not abolition)
  • Section 79 conditions (79(2)(a)–(c)) and loss of protection (79(3))
  • Relevance: Avnish Bajaj/Bazee.com context, free speech and innovation; Shreya Singhal reading down 'actual knowledge'
  • Case law on active vs passive intermediaries: Myspace v. Super Cassettes, Christian Louboutin
  • Accountability regime: IT Rules 2021 (SSMI duties, traceability), s.69A blocking, Kunal Kamra (fact-check unit struck down); case for liability (deepfakes, CSAM, misinformation) with a proportionate, due-process balance
  • Section 7(9) RTI Act 2005 and the two exceptions: disproportionate diversion of resources; detriment to safety/preservation of record
  • Illustrations for each exception (bulk copying → inspection; fragile records → scanned copies/supervised inspection)
  • Information not held in the requested form need not be created: s.2(f), CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay
  • Exceptions change only the form, not a ground for refusal; alternative form must be offered

Practice Law 2024 Paper II answer writing

Pick any question above, write your answer, and get a detailed AI evaluation against UPSC's standard rubric.

Start free evaluation →

Write this answer and get it marked in about 20 seconds

Free account: 5 AI evaluations a month, marked against the rubric above.

Start free

Already have an account? Log in