Previous years solved LLB / BA-LLB question papers. Must have handbook for all the Law students of Chaudhary Charan Singh University
(a) Article 14 - Equal protection of laws and Equality before law.
(b) Article 15 - Right against discrimination on grounds of religion, caste, sex, place of birth or race.
(c) Article 16 - Equal opportunity in terms of public employment.
(d) Article 17 - Abolition of untouchability and prohibition of its practice.
(e) Article 18 - Abolition of titles except military and academic.
(a) Article 19 - Ensures protection of rights to freedom of: (i) speech and expression, (ii) assembly, (iii) association, (iv) movement, (v) residence, and (vi) profession
(b) Article 20 - Protection convicted offenders.
(c) Article 21 - Protection of life and personal liberty.
(d)Article 21A - Right to elementary education.
(e) Article 22 - Protection against arrest and detention in certain cases.3. Right against exploitation
(a) Article 23 - Prohibition of trafficking and forced labour.
(b) Article 24 - Prohibition of employment of children in Companies and factories, etc.4. Right to freedom to practice any religion
(a) Article 25 - Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion.
(b) Article 26 - Freedom to manage religious affairs.
(c) Article 27 - Freedom from payment of taxes for promotion of any religion or religious affairs.
(d) Article 28 - Freedom from attending religious instruction or worship in certain educational institutions5. Cultural and educational rights
(a) Article 29 - Protection of language, script and culture of minorities.
(b) Article 30 - Rights of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions.6. Right to constitutional remedies
Article 32 - The Constitution of India provides 5 writs to ensure the right to constitutional remedies to every citizen (i) Habeas corpus, (ii) Mandamus, (iii) Prohibition, (iv) Certiorari, (v) Quo-warrento
Q. Write a short note on International Custom as source of law. [2015 - 4 marks]
International Customs are the established international practices that are generally followed by the constituent nations. The International Court of Justice (ICJ), the apex law enforcing body of the United Nations has accepted international customs as source of international law.
The Statute of the ICJ, vide Chapter II Article 38, has recognized the international customs and general practices of nations as one of the court's sources of customary international law. This is applicable in the cases where there is a disagreement between member countries.
Q. Explain plebiscite in relation to Kashmir. [2015 - 4 marks]
Plebiscite
Plebiscite, also known as referendum, is a type of voting for or against laws. Plebiscite generally suggests a type of voting to support or oppose the constitution or the government.
Plebiscite in relation to Kashmir
Kashmir was given a special status by Article 370 of the Constitution of India. This special status was temporary and was to be withdrawn on attaining favorable political situation. As there were calls from various groups within the country to scrap Article 370, a Plebiscite front was formed to vote to decide the question whether Kashmir should remain with India to go to Pakistan or become an independent state. However, with the scrapping of Article 370, and introduction of Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Act in 2019, all these speculations have become impertinent.
Q. Critically examine the views of Duguit regarding 'Social Solidarity'. [2018 - 20 marks]
Social Solidarity
French Jurist Leon Duguit (1859-1928) was a leading exponent of social school of jurisprudence. He propounded the theory of 'Social Solidarity'. The basis of the theory of Social Solidarity is interdependence of individuals in the society.
A society is built up of individuals who are interdependent on other individuals. Helping each other is the fundamental principle of humanity. No member in a human society can remain alone without depending on others. Duguit envisaged the social solidarity as the spirit of oneness, the strength, cohesiveness, mutual consciousness and existential quality of the society.
According to Duguit, law should be made such that it promotes social solidarity. Unless it promotes the spirit of cooperation in the society, it is a bad law. He vouched that everyone in society should have rights and duties to promote social solidarity.
Main features of Social Solidarity Theory
1. Denial of supremacy of state supremacy: Druguit opposed state sovereignty vehemently. According to him, the state is an organisaiton of human and it is no different than any other human organisation. The state is also bound by the duty to server the purpose of Social solidarity.
2. Private and Public law are not distinct: Duguit believed that there should be no difference between private and public law. He vouched for a common law for all the people of the society.
3. Denial of Private rights: Duguit opined that the private rights should not exist at all. The private rights are against the social solidarity. If private rights are given to a section of the population, the cohesiveness is bound to loosen. According to him, there is only one right for all and that is to do their duties.
Criticism of Social Solidarity theory
Duguits Social Solidarity theory is criticized on the following grounds:
1. Social Solidarity is a natural law: Though Duguit tries to distinguish it from all the natural school of thought, but the very idea of Social Solidarity is based on Natural Principles of law.
2. Social Solidarity is a vague term: There are ambiguity in the expression 'Social Solidarity' and it can not be distinguished from metaphysics which is opposed by Duguit.
3. Denial of distinction between private and public rights leads to denial of individual rights in few sections of the society in different part of the world.
4. The social solidarity theory of Duguit overlooked the growing state. As a result, with the growth of the state, relevancy and ability to implement the theory started diminishing.
5. Duguit propounded that the Social Solidarity is a mandatory feature of the law for the society. The critics feel that it should have been a 'good to have' feature and not mandatory.
Q. Explain fully Kelson's Pure Theory of Law. Is it correct to say that this theory has left dry bones of law deprived of flesh and blood which give them life? [2018 - 20 marks]
Kelson’s Pure Theory of Law
Explained below are the main points of Kelson's Pure Theory of Law:
1. Law is a science: According to Kelson, law is a normative science. But law norms may be distinguished from Science norms. Science norms are based on cause and effect, such as law of gravitation. The law norms on the other hand, does not attempt to describe what actually occurs, but only prescribes certain rules. It says if one breaks the law then he ought to be punished. Kelson says, “Law is a de-psychologized command, a command which does not imply a will in psychological sense of the term.”
2. Hierarchy of Normative Relations: The science of law to Kelson is the knowledge of hierarchy or normative relations. He builds on Kant’s theory of knowledge and extends this theoretical knowledge of law also.
3. Separation of Law from other social sciences and Morals: Kelson limits the scope of jurisprudence by excluding its relations with social science. He separates law from politics, sociology, meta-physics and all other extra-legal disciplines.
4. The Grundnorm: Kelson’s Pure theory of law is based on the pyramidal structure of the hierarchy of norms which derive their validity from the basic norm which he termed as ‘Grundnorm.’ The Grundnorm or basic norm determines the content and give s validity to other norms derived from it. Kelson has no answer to the question as to where from the Grundnorm or basic norm derive its validity.
5. Pyramid of norms: Kelson considers legal science as a pyramid of norms with Grundnorm at the top. The subordinate norms are controlled by norms superior to them in hierarchical order. The Grundnorm is however, independent of any other norm being at the top.
Essential Features of Kelson’s Pure Theory of Law
1. The aim of a theory of law, like any science, it to reduce the chaos and convert multiplicity to unity.
2. Legal theory is science, not volition. It is Knowldge of what the law ‘is’ and not of the law ‘ought to be’.
3. The law is a normative science, not a natural science.
4. Legal theory as a theory of norms is not concerned with the effectiveness of legal norms.
5. A theory of law is formal, a theory to a particular system of positive law is that of possible to actual law.
Postulates of Kelson’s Pure Theory of Law
1. Law and states cannot be differentiated: According to Kelson, there is no difference between law and state. He says that when all derives their power and validity ultimately from the Grundnorm, there can be no superior person as sovereign.
2. No distinction between public and private law: according to Kelson, there is no difference between public and private law. When all law derive its power from Grundnorm, distinctive characters can not be attributed to it.
3. No difference between natural and Juristic persons: To Kelson, a legal personality is artificial and derives its validity from superior norms. Personality in law means an entity capable of bearing rights and duties.
4. No individual Rights: Kelson’s conception of law as a system of normative relations leads to the conclusion that there is no such thing as an individual right in law.
5. Supremacy of International Law: According to Kelson, international law is supreme. Kelson vouches that International law is ‘Juridical Order’ and should be given its due diligence.
Criticism of Kelson’s Pure Theory of law
The Pure theory of Kelson is criticized on the following grounds:
1. Grundnorm is vague and confusing: The critics of the Pure theory say that the Grundnorm, which is the very basis on which the theory is standing, is vague and confusing. Any theory whose base is confusing cannot establish a concrete theory of law.
2. The purity norms of Kelson's Pure Theory is not seamlessly maintained. Everything in Kelson’s theory traces back to the Grundnorm, which becomes an issue with the law makers, judges and legislators in practical implementation front.
3. There is a very little practical significance of the theory propagated by Kelson. Though it is not widely accepted, according to the critics, the Pure theory lacks practical significance.
4. Natural Law is excluded: It is criticised that the Natural Law is excluded in Kelson's Pure theory. Kelson presents a very scientific analysis of legal order, therefore, he could not take the natural law into consideration.
5. Kelson in his Pure Theory of Law, gives utmost importance to the International law, which according to him should be given highest priority. This leads to a number of inconsistencies with the implementation of the Grundnorms. According to critics, the International law does not fit into the Pure theory at all and should be taken out from this theory.
Q. Short note on Grundnorm [2019, 2021 - 4 marks]
Grundnorm is a German term which means basic norm or fundamental norm. The term was coined by famous jurist and legal philosopher Hans Kelsen. The theory of grundnorm is based on a need to find a point of origin for all law, on which basic law and the constitution can gain their legitimacy.
Note: Grundnorm is also referred as Ground Norm or groundnorm in question papers.
Jeremy Bentham was an English philosopher, jurist, and social reformer of the eighteenth century. He is regarded as the founder of modern utilitarianism. Bentham propagated his philosophy as the principle that "it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong."
Moral laws are a set of rules to be followed out of personal conscious. The consciousness may arise out of ones religious following or from education or any other such sources. But these laws are not necessarily be legislated by the legislature. These are general guidelines to be followed to lead a normal and ethical life.
Any immoral acts whether legal or illegal should be avoided. This is moral law.
Q. Short notes on Jurisprudence and Legislation. [2021 - 4 marks]
Judgement
urisprudence is the theoretical study of the processes of law. As a branch of a study it covers the principles of natural law, civil law, criminal law and all other laws of the nation.
Legislation
Legislation is the law made by the legislature of a nation for that nation. It is the constitution and promulgation of set of legal rules by an authority which has the power to do so.