Updated On : September 15, 2023
Reader's Digest: Curious about how to ace the Legal Aptitude section in CLAT? Wondering how to sharpen your legal reasoning skills? Check out these top CLAT Legal Aptitude preparation tips & unlock the path to success! Let's dive in!
Most students appear in front of their mentors in a state of panic, worried about the many legal principles they need to memorise. The good news is that you are not required to memorise any of them! This is not a test of Legal Knowledge.
Instead, they test your ability to interpret the given principle correctly, 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.
While solving legal aptitude questions, you should disregard all prior knowledge and strictly interpret the principle the way it is given. You should especially avoid using any prior knowledge of a law or legal principle you might have read about before, as the passage might have specifically changed a factor of the original law for the purpose of the section.
Legal Aptitude for CLAT has become a comprehension-based aptitude test wherein the questions are indirect and inference-based. The Consortium prepares the CLAT question paper to challenge the exam's students 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 developed a new CLAT Exam Pattern, you must approach the legal aptitude section differently because the passages must be comprehended to look for facts and applicable rules.
The following are some tips you can follow to enhance your CLAT Legal Aptitude Preparation 2024:
So you wish to score well in the legal reasoning section? Would you also like to learn how to structure your preparation and strategy without knowing how to proceed? Well, Legal Edge has just the video for you! This video will help you reach a good legal reasoning score and help boost your preparation.
Our LegalEdge expert explained that a total of 38-40 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.
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 colours.
Effective time management is vital to securing a good entrance exam rank. 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.
The following are some of the best CLAT Legal Aptitude Preparation Tips to enhance your legal preparation and crack the CLAT exam on the first attempt:
Here are a few CLAT Legal Aptitude Preparation Tips you can follow to quickly answer all the questions asked in the Legal Aptitude section:
The following CLAT Books can help prepare 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 CLAT Legal Aptitude Preparation Tips:
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 independently.
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 at dusk. That night, though, she took a large earthen 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 on 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 talked 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 1: 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) She thought the story was vague and that he had stolen it from a goatherd.
(c) Because she did not think Bakasuran was so generous as to gift him a goat kid.
(d) Her husband was a habitual thief and regularly stole things from others.
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. No information in the passage 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, and 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.
Question 2: 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, 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, 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 where the old couple lived.
Question 3: What does the word ‘haggard’ as used in the passage mean?
(a) Dark in colour 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 in the fifth paragraph, which indicates 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 using the word ‘haggard’ in any way, so option (a) cannot be correct. Nothing in the passage indicates 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, so option (d) cannot be correct.
Question 4: 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. The passage does not mention the couple’s daughter, 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 5: 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 into 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 into 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 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 offences, 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 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 obstructing justice, which the police claimed he did by crashing through the check-post. Kaskar was acquitted of this charge since the police could not 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 1: 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 offence 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 committing several offences.
Rationale: The correct answer is (a) - no since the second charge filed against Kaskar was in relation to a different offence 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 offence more than once. Since Kaskar was prosecuted for a different offence 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 offence, options (b) and (c) cannot be the correct answer. Option (d) is irrelevant to the question and cannot be the correct answer.
Question 2: Sometime after the two prosecutions mentioned in the previous question, the police recovered CCTV footage from the area near where the police check-post 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 obstructing justice and was acquitted.
(d)No, since he was prosecuted but not punished for the same offence in the first trial.
Rationale: The correct answer is (d) - no, since he was prosecuted but not punished for the same offence in the first trial. The protection under Article 20 is against a person being ‘prosecuted and punished for the same offence 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 3: Concerned at the increasing number of instances of rash driving in Mumbai, the legislature passed a law on 12 January 2020, making rash driving a criminal offence 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, rash driving was not an offence when Kaskar drove through the police check-post.
(d) since Kaskar had been prosecuted for different offences in the previous three trials.
Rationale: The correct answer is (c) – no, since rash driving was not an offence when Kaskar drove through the police check-post. The first clause of Article 20 provides that “a person cannot be convicted for an offence which was not an offence at the time at which it was committed”. Since rash driving was not an offence on 15 December 2019 when Kaskar drove through the check-post, he cannot be punished for committing that offence. 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 4: 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 provide the DNA sample?
(a)Yes, since DNA samples amount to physical evidence, not testimonial evidence.
(b)Yes, since smuggling is a serious offence, 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 when asked to produce the sample.
Rationale: The correct answer is (a) – yes, since DNA samples amount to physical evidence, 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, so neither can be the correct answer.
Question 5: 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 that differs 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 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, 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, 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.
In conclusion, effective preparation for the CLAT Legal Aptitude section is crucial for success in the exam. Following the right strategies and techniques can enhance your legal reasoning skills and boost your overall performance. Here are the key takeaways to remember from these CLAT Legal Aptitude Preparation Tips:
- Understand the structure and syllabus of the CLAT Legal Aptitude section.
- Develop analytical and logical reasoning skills.
- Build a strong foundation in legal knowledge.
- Practice legal reasoning questions and case analysis.
- Enhance legal vocabulary and comprehension.
- Utilize previous year's papers and mock tests for practice.
- Manage your time effectively during the exam.
- Seek guidance from experts and coaching resources.
- Create a personalized study plan and revision schedule.
By implementing these tips and dedicating consistent effort, you can confidently approach the CLAT Legal Aptitude section and improve your chances of success in the CLAT exam. Best of luck with your preparation!
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the purpose of the Legal Reasoning section in the CLAT exam?
What topics are covered in the passages of the Official CLAT Legal Reasoning Sample Paper?
How can a general awareness of contemporary legal and moral issues benefit me in the Legal Reasoning section?
How to increase marks in CLAT Legal Reasoning section?
How to answer CLAT Legal Reasoning Questions easily?
What is a good score in CLAT Legal Reasoning Sample Paper (official)?
Does Consortium release the Legal Reasoning Sample Paper every year?