Updated On : April 3, 2023
Summary: Legal Aptitude questions do not test your knowledge of existing law. Instead, they test your ability to correctly interpret the given principle, strictly adhere to it and apply it to the given facts. It is more of a test of language and reasoning skills. In this section, questions are principle and fact-based, wherein you are provided with a legal proposition (principle) and a set of facts to which the proposition (principle) has to be applied.
Most of you often panic about attempting this section since you don’t have any Legal Knowledge. However, cracking this section is easy if prepared well. Let's know how you can better prepare for the CLAT legal aptitude section.
While solving legal aptitude questions, you should disregard all prior knowledge and strictly interpret the principle the way it is given.
Legal Aptitude for CLAT has now become a comprehension-based aptitude test wherein the questions are indirect and inference-based. The Consortium prepares the question paper to challenge the students taking the exam logically.
Remember, in case of a tie, aspirants with a higher score in legal aptitude will be given first preference. This denotes the significance of Legal Aptitude on your CLAT ranking, ultimately being the deciding factor of the college you will study in!
You do not have prior exposure to legal terms and legal maxims! Well, no need to worry! You can crack the legal Aptitude section with a good amount of practice.
This post shall guide you through CLAT Legal Aptitude Preparation Tips, how to solve legal questions, and more.
As the Consortium came up with a new CLAT Exam Pattern, you must approach the legal aptitude section differently because the passages will have to be comprehended to look for facts and applicable rules.
The following are some of the tips that you can follow to enhance your CLAT Legal Aptitude Preparation 2024.
Our LegalEdge expert Harsh explained that a total of 35 questions would be asked from the legal aptitude section of the exam.
Therefore, it is critical to focus more on this section since you may not know a lot of legal concepts. CLAT legal aptitude preparation tips and tricks include knowing the pattern and syllabus.
Before starting the preparation, it is essential to be aware of the detailed CLAT Syllabus 2024, as this will help you understand the important topics from the exam point of view.
|Study of law||Research aptitude||Problem-solving ability||Questions based on hypothetical situations|
|Important court decisions||Indian Constitution||Indian Penal Code||Law of Torts|
|Indian Contract Act||Legal Fundamentals & Terms||General Legal Principles||–|
As the competition for the CLAT exam is increasing exponentially, you must put your maximum effort into the exam to deal with the competition and come out with flying colors.
Effective time management plays a vital role in securing a good rank in the entrance exam. Also, it will help you boost your confidence, set priorities, and reduce stress levels.
The following are some of the CLAT Time Management Tips 2024 that you can follow to enhance your legal reasoning preparation.
According to experts, you require a sound knowledge of judgment and amendments while solving legal facts.
The following are some of the best tips to enhance your legal preparation and crack the CLAT exam on the first attempt.
Read more: Short tricks to solve para jumble questions in CLAT
Here are a few CLAT Legal Aptitude Preparation Tips you can follow to quickly answer all the questions asked in the Legal Aptitude section.
Yes. The legal aptitude questions are designed to test your legal reasoning, research aptitude, and problem-solving ability. The Legal Aptitude section is divided into three sections:
Harsh mentioned that the most important tip for preparing for CLAT 2024 is to take help from the preparation books.
The following CLAT Books can be helpful in preparing the legal aptitude section.
A proper last week's preparation plan is more critical than a year-long preparation. It would be best to focus only on the following things while preparing for the CLAT Legal Aptitude last week.
Till 2019, you were presented with the statements and facts. But from 2020, you are expected to comprehend the passages and draw facts and arguments on your own.
The following are some of the important CLAT Logical Reasoning questions
(1) The old woman didn’t like the look or sound of the kid. She scowled at her husband. ‘Where did you pick up this kitten from? Why do we need her?’ When the old man told her she was a goat kid, she picked her up and exclaimed in amazement: ‘Yes, she is a goat kid!’ All night, they went over the story of how the kid had come into their hands.
That same night the old lady gave the goat kid that resembled a kitten a nickname: Poonachi. She once had a cat by the same name. In memory of that beloved cat, this goat kid too was named Poonachi. They had acquired her without spending a penny. Now they had to look after her somehow. Her husband had told her a vague story about meeting a demon who looked like Bakasuran and receiving the kid from him as a gift. She wondered if he could have stolen it from a goatherd. Someone might come looking for it tomorrow. Maybe her husband had told her the story only to cover up his crime?
The old woman was not used to lighting lamps at night. The couple ate their evening meal and went to bed when it was still dusk. That night, though, she took a large earthern lamp and filled it with castor oil extracted the year before. There was no cotton for a wick. She tore off a strip from a discarded loincloth of her husband’s and fashioned it into a wick.
She looked at the kid under the lamplight in that shed as though she were seeing her own child after a long time. There was no bald spot or bruise anywhere on her body. The kid was all black. As she stared at the lamp, her wide-open eyes were starkly visible. There was a trace of fatigue on her face. The old woman thought the kid looked haggard because she had not been fed properly. She must be just a couple of days old. A determination that she must somehow raise this kid to adulthood took root in her heart.
She called the old man to come and see the kid. She looked like a black lump glittering in the lamplight in that pitch-black night. He pulled fondly at her flapping ears and said, ‘Aren’t you lucky to come and live here?’
It had been a long time since the couple had such pleasant chit-chat. Because of the kid’s sudden entry into their lives, they ended up talking a while about the old days.
[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from Poonachi, or the Story of a Black Goat, by Perumal Murugan, translated by N. Kalyan Raman, Context, 2018.]
Question: Why did the old woman doubt her husband’s story about how he had got the kid?
(a) Because goat kids are only sold in livestock markets.
(b) Because she thought the story was vague, and that he had actually stolen it from a goatherd.
(c) Because she did not think Bakasuran was so generous as to gift him a goat kid.
(d) Because her husband was a habitual thief and regularly stole things from other people.
Rationale: The correct answer is (b) – because she thought the story was vague, and that he had actually stolen it from a goatherd. Both these points are set out in the third paragraph. There is no information in the passage that would support the claim in option (a); similarly, there is nothing in the passage to indicate that the old woman thought Bakasuran was not generous, neither is there any information in the passage to indicate that her husband was a habitual thief, and so, neither (a), (c), nor (d) is correct.
Read more: Short tricks on how to read a newspaper for the CLAT exam
Question: Why did the old woman name the goat kid ‘Poonachi’?
(a) Because the kid made small bleating noises that sounded like ‘Poonachi’.
(b) Because the kid reminded the old woman of her husband, whose name was also Poonachi.
(c) Because the old woman had first thought the kid was a kitten, and so she named it after a beloved cat she had once had.
(d) Because ‘Poonachi’ was the name typically given to goat kids in the area the couple lived in.
Rationale: The correct answer is (c) – because the old woman had first thought the kid was a kitten, and so she named it after a beloved cat she had once had. This is apparent from the first three sentences of the third paragraph. There is no indication of any noises made by the kid in the passage, so option (a) cannot be correct. Similarly, there is no indication of the old woman’s husband’s name in the passage, and so, option (b) cannot be correct either. Option (d) cannot be correct since there is no information in the passage about what name was typically given to kids in the area that the old couple lived in.
Question: What does the word ‘haggard’ as used in the passage mean?
(a) Dark in color and hard to see.
(b) Looking exhausted and unwell.
(c) Direct and outspoken.
(d) Furry and warm.
Rationale: The correct answer is (b) – looking exhausted and unwell. This can be inferred from the information set out in the fifth paragraph, which indicates that there was a trace of fatigue on the kid’s face and that the old woman thought the kid looked haggard because she had not been fed properly. Both these pieces of information, that is, that the kid looked fatigued, and had not been fed properly, would support the meaning of ‘haggard’ set out in option (b). While the passage also discusses how dark the kid is, this discussion is not related to the use of the word ‘haggard’ in any way, and so, option (a) cannot be correct. There is nothing in the passage to indicate that the kid made any sounds, so option (c) cannot be correct. Neither is there any discussion in the passage about how furry the kid may have been and so, option (d) cannot be correct.
Question: Why was the old woman not used to lighting lamps at night?
(a) Because the couple usually ate their evening meal and slept at dusk.
(b) Because her daughter used to light the lamps in their household.
(c) Because the couple was very poor, and could not afford oil for lamps.
(d) Because the old couple did not usually exchange pleasant chit-chat.
Rationale: The correct answer is (a) – because the old couple usually ate their evening meal and slept at dusk. This is apparent from the first two lines of the fourth paragraph. There is no mention of the couple’s daughter in the passage, so, option (b) cannot be correct. Neither option (c) nor option (d) is related to the author’s explanation of why the old woman was not used to lighting lamps at night.
Question: What can we infer from the passage about why the old couple talked about the old days that night?
(a) The old couple did not usually like talking with each other and avoided conversation.
(b) The old couple was very poor, and we were so tired after working all day that they did not feel like talking.
(c) The old woman was usually very upset with her husband and thought he was a thief.
(d) They spoke about the old days because of the kid’s sudden entry in their lives, and the pleasant chit-chat they exchanged about it.
Rationale: The correct answer is (d) - they spoke about the old days because of the kid’s sudden entry in their lives, and the pleasant chit-chat they exchanged about it. This can be inferred from the last two paragraphs of the passage; the last line of the passage clearly indicates this. Nothing in the passage supports options (a) or (b) as the correct answer. While the third paragraph indicates that the old woman may have suspected her husband had stolen the kid, the author does not relate this to their talking about the old days that night.
Mahmood Kaskar resided in the city of Mumbai and was long suspected of having committed several offenses, including smuggling. Kaskar came across a police check-post on the road on 15 December 2019, and, afraid that the police would find the contraband that he had hidden in the trunk of his car, he drove through the check-post instead of stopping. In doing so, he smashed his car through the barricades at the check-post, and a piece from the barricades flew a few feet away and injured a policeman manning the check-post. Kaskar was later caught by the police, and charged with the offense of obstructing justice, which the police claimed he did by crashing through the check-post. Kaskar was acquitted of this charge since the police were not able to produce adequate evidence before the court. Some months later, the police, bent on teaching Kaskar a lesson, filed charges of injuring a police officer on duty against Kaskar.
Question: When Kaskar was convicted, he filed an appeal claiming that the decision violated the protection against double jeopardy in Article 20. Will Kaskar succeed?
(a)No, since the second charge filed against Kaskar was in relation to a different offense than the first one.
(b)Yes, since he had already been prosecuted for crashing through the barricades and could not be prosecuted for the same actions again.
(c)Yes, since he had already been acquitted the first time charges were filed against him.
(d)No, since he was long suspected of having committed several offenses.
Rationale: The correct answer is (a) - no, since the second charge filed against Kaskar was in relation to a different offense than the first one. The passage tells us that the protection against double jeopardy is against a person being ‘prosecuted and punished for the same offense more than once. Since Kaskar was being prosecuted for a different offense the second time (that of injuring a police officer on duty) than the first time (that of obstructing justice), the protection against double jeopardy would not apply in this case. Since the second prosecution involved a different offense, options (b) and (c) cannot be the correct answer. Option (d) is irrelevant to the question, and so, cannot be the correct answer.
Read more: Short tricks to Score 42+ in CLAT Legal Reasoning
Question: Sometime after the two prosecutions mentioned in the previous question, the police manage to recover CCTV footage from the area near the place where the police check-post was and filed fresh charges of obstructing justice against Kaskar for crashing through the check-post. They claim that the CCTV footage would help them win the case this time. Kaskar claims that this fresh, third trial, violates his protection against double jeopardy in Article 20 of the Constitution. Will he succeed?
(a)Yes, since Kaskar is a citizen of India and is protected under Article 20 of the Constitution.
(b)No, since the police were able to bring fresh evidence before the court in this new trial.
(c)Yes, since he had already been prosecuted for the offense of obstructing justice and was acquitted.
(d)No, since he was prosecuted but not punished for the same offense in the first trial.
Rationale: The correct answer is (d) - no, since he was prosecuted but not punished for the same offense in the first trial. The protection under Article 20 is against a person being ‘prosecuted and punished for the same offense more than once. Since Kaskar had been prosecuted, but not punished in the first trial, he would not have the advantage of this protection under Article 20. For the same reason, (c) cannot be the correct answer. While options (a) and (b) may be true, they do not address the issue of whether the protection under Article 20 applies in this third trial, and so, neither (a) nor (b) can be the correct answer.
Question: Concerned at the increasing number of instances of rash driving in Mumbai, the legislature passes a law on 12 January 2020, making rash driving a criminal offense punishable with three months’ imprisonment. The police, who are hell-bent on punishing Kaskar by now, file fresh charges and initiate a fourth case against Kaskar, claiming that his act of driving through the police check-post constituted rash driving. Kaskar now claims that this fourth trial violates the first clause of Article 20. Will the police succeed in this fourth trial?
(a)Yes, since Kaskar had injured a policeman when he drove through the check-post.
(b)No, since driving through a check-post does not constitute rash driving.
(c)No, since rash driving was not an offense at the time Kaskar drove through the police check-post.
(d)Yes, since Kaskar had been prosecuted for different offenses in the previous three trials.
Rationale: The correct answer is (c) – no, since rash driving was not an offense at the time Kaskar drove through the police check-post. The first clause of Article 20 provides that “a
person cannot be convicted for an offense which was not an offense at the time at which it was committed”. Since rash driving was not an offense on 15 December 2019 when Kaskar drove through the check-post, he cannot be punished for having committed that offense. While options (a) and (b) may or may not be true, they do not address the question of whether Kaskar’s
rights under the first clause of Article 20 had been violated, and so, neither (a) nor (b) can be the correct answer. Option (d) is irrelevant to the question – it addresses the issue of double jeopardy rather than the protection under the first clause of Article 20, and so, (d) cannot be the correct answer.
Question: While he was in custody, the police decided to investigate whether Kaskar was involved in the instances of smuggling that he was suspected of having committed. They asked him to produce a DNA sample that they could use to compare against the evidence they obtained from a boat suspected to have been used in such smuggling activities. Kaskar refused, claiming that forcing him to provide a DNA sample would violate his protection against self-incrimination under Article 20. Can the police force Kaskar to provide the DNA sample?
(a)Yes, since DNA samples amount to physical evidence, and not testimonial evidence.
(b)Yes, since smuggling is a serious offense, Kaskar was already suspected of being involved in it.
(c)No, since producing DNA samples would amount to compelling Kaskar to be a witness against himself.
(d)No, since Kaskar had not been charged with smuggling at the time he was asked to produce the sample.
Enhance your preparation levels with the help of the best CLAT Online Coaching classes.
Rationale: The correct answer is (a) – yes since DNA samples amount to physical evidence, and not testimonial evidence. The decision in Kathu Kalu Oghad clarifies that the protection against self-incrimination under Article 20 extends to “the production of information based on personal knowledge” (testimonial evidence) but not ‘physical evidence’ like “a writing sample or a thumb impression”. For this reason, (c) cannot be the correct answer. Options (b) and (d) may be true, but they do not address the question, and so, neither can be the correct answer.
Question: Assuming that the Supreme Court was bound to follow the decision in Kathu Kalu Oghad while deciding Selvi, what decision should the Supreme Court have taken in Selvi as regards the forcible administration of narco-analysis on a person?
(a)It would be constitutional, since it is a new technology, and is different from other techniques of extracting evidence like fingerprints or thumb impressions.
(b)It would be unconstitutional since it would amount to forcibly extracting testimonial evidence.
(c)It would be constitutional, since it only has a physical effect, and so, would amount to extracting physical evidence.
(d)It would be unconstitutional since it puts a person in an abnormal state of mind where they cannot remember their rights under Article 20.
Rationale: The correct answer is (b) – it would be unconstitutional since it would amount to forcibly extracting testimonial evidence. As the passage tells us, the administration of sodium pentothal would lower a person’s inhibitions, and take them into a trance, inducing them to converse casually – as a result of which, they may provide information based on personal knowledge (testimonial evidence). While it may be new technology, and different from thumb impressions or handwriting samples, the forcible use of narco-analysis may result in the extraction of testimonial evidence, and so, (a) cannot be the correct answer. While it may have a physical effect, the end result of the forcible administration of narco-analysis would be the extraction of testimonial evidence, and so, (c) cannot be the correct answer. While (d) may be true, it does not address the issue of whether the forcible administration of narco-analysis violates the protection against self-incrimination under Article 20, and so, (d) cannot be the correct answer.
Frequently Asked Questions
What are the CLAT Legal Aptitude Preparation Tips?
Some of the general preparation tips to crack Legal Aptitude are: Read the passage carefully to answer the questions correctly. Pay attention to all the small details and identify the principles and roles in the passage. Ensure to refer to the best books for preparation.
Which are the best books for CLAT Legal Aptitude section?
Some of the best books for the CLAT Legal Aptitude section are Legal Aptitude for CLAT and other Law Exams: Workbook by A. P Bhardwaj, Our Judiciary (National Book Trust) by National Book Trust, Legal Aptitude (CLAT) by R. K Gupta and Samiksha Gupta.
What are the important topics to be studied under CLAT Legal Aptitude?
Research aptitude, Problem-solving ability, Questions based on hypothetical situations, Law of Torts, Indian Contract Act, Indian Constitution, and Important court decisions.
Can I prepare for CLAT Legal Aptitude Exam in one month?
How to answer CLAT Legal Reasoning Questions easily?
Is one month enough for CLAT Legal Aptitude Preparation?
Is Legal Aptitude Questions easy?