Question:medium

Principle: Everyone has the right of private defense to defend his body and property by use of reasonable force unless that person had time to have recourse to protection of public authorities.
Facts: X receives information at 5.00 pm that Y along with few friends is planning to burn his crop at midnight which is ready to be harvested. He does not inform the village Police Station which was just one kilometer away. He gathers his family members and directs them to collect some weapons in the form of swords and lathis to protect his field/crop. At around 11.00 pm Y and his aides attack the crop and a severe fight ensues wherein Y is seriously injured.
This question consists of legal principle(s) (hereinafter referred to as ‘principle‘) and facts. Such proposition may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. Principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Only one of the alternatives, i.e., (A), (B), (C), or (D) is the most reasonable conclusion. In other words, in answering the following questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles that are given herein below for every question. Further you must not assume any facts other than those stated in the question. The objective of this section is to test your ability in legal aptitude, study of law, research aptitude and problem solving ability even if the ’most reasonable conclusion‘ arrived at may be absurd or unacceptable for any other reason.

Updated On: Jul 15, 2026
  • X is not liable as he was exercising his right of private defence
  • X and his family are not liable for the injuries caused as they were exercising the right of private defence
  • X is liable
  • X and his family is liable as they have not informed the police
Show Solution

The Correct Option is D

Approach Solution - 1

The principle grants the right of private defence with one built in limit, it disappears whenever the person had time to have recourse to public authorities instead of taking matters into their own hands. So the first question is not whether X used reasonable force, it is whether that time to seek help existed.

X found out about the planned attack at 5 pm, a full six hours before it happened at 11 pm, and a police station was only a kilometre from his home. That combination of a long lead time and a nearby police station is precisely the scenario the principle's limit is written for, X plainly had the opportunity to have recourse to public authorities and chose not to take it.

Because that opportunity existed and went unused, the right of private defence never came into play for X or his family, regardless of how reasonable their later use of force may have looked in the moment. The failure to inform the police is the specific fact that decides the outcome here, not the fight itself.

So the correct answer is X and his family is liable as they have not informed the police.

Was this answer helpful?
0
Show Solution

Approach Solution -2

Testing each option by asking what fact would need to be different exposes the issue with three of the four choices.

  1. X is not liable as he was exercising his right of private defence: This would hold only if there had been no time to reach the police, but a six hour gap and a police station a kilometre away is exactly the opposite situation, so the fact this option needs is missing.
  2. X and his family are not liable for the injuries caused as they were exercising the right of private defence: Same requirement, this needs the absence of time to seek help, which the facts do not provide.
  3. X is liable: This would be a complete answer only if it also captured the family and the specific reason, but it leaves both out, so while directionally right, it is incomplete against the fuller option available.
  4. X and his family is liable as they have not informed the police: No change is needed, the six hour window and the nearby, unused police station are already present in the facts exactly as this option describes.

Since the facts already supply the very thing that defeats a private defence claim, unused time and an available police station, the option built on that failure is the one that fits without any adjustment.

Therefore, the correct answer is X and his family is liable as they have not informed the police.

Was this answer helpful?
0

Top Questions on Law of Torts

Questions Asked in CLAT exam

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage (extract): The work which Gandhiji had taken up was not only regarding the achievement of political freedom but also the establishment of a new social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood and maximum freedom for all. A new order cannot be established without radically changing the mind and attitude of men towards property and, at some stage or the other, the 'haves' have to yield place to the 'have-nots'. We have seen, in our time, attempts to achieve a kind of egalitarian society and the picture of it after it was achieved. But this was done, by and large, through the use of physical force. It may even be that, like a gas kept confined within containers under great pressure, or water held back by a big dam, once the barrier breaks, the reaction will one day sweep back with a violence equal in extent and intensity to what was used to establish and maintain the outward egalitarian form. This enforced egalitarianism contains, in its bosom, the seed of its own destruction. If egalitarianism is to endure, it has to be based not on the possession of the maximum material goods by a few or by all but on voluntary, enlightened renunciation of those goods which cannot be shared by others or can be enjoyed only at the expense of others.

According to the passage, egalitarianism will not survive if
View Solution
Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage (extract): The work which Gandhiji had taken up was not only regarding the achievement of political freedom but also the establishment of a new social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood and maximum freedom for all. This unfinished part of his experiment was perhaps even more difficult to achieve than the achievement of political freedom. In the political struggle, the fight was against a foreign power and all one could do was either join it or wish it success and give it his/her moral support. In establishing a social order on this pattern, there was a strong possibility of a conflict arising between diverse groups and classes of our own people.

According to the passage, which was the unfinished part of Gandhi's experiment?
View Solution
Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage (extract): In the political struggle, the fight was against a foreign power and all one could do was either join it or wish it success and give it his/her moral support. Experience shows that man values his possessions even more than his life because in the former he sees the means for perpetuation and survival of his descendants even after his body is reduced to ashes. We have seen, in our time, attempts to achieve a kind of egalitarian society and the picture of it after it was achieved. But this was done, by and large, through the use of physical force. This enforced egalitarianism contains, in its bosom, the seed of its own destruction. The root cause of class conflict is possessiveness or the acquisitive instinct.

Which of the following statements is 'not true' in the context of the passage?
View Solution