ANALYSIS : ALL INDIA BAR EXAMINATION V
After a gap of nearly eight months, Bar Council of India has successfully conducted the fifth All India Bar Examination. The paper was easy as expected. I had appeared at the Amity University, NOIDA centre where around 1900 other students had appeared. Below is my analysis of the paper:
Difficulty level: Paper was moderately easy.
What was easy: Following the pattern adopted in the AIBE IV, a huge chunk of questions could have been answered just by looking into the Section/Article number from the respective bare acts.
What was tough: [I hated this part] Around a dozen of questions were based on statements made by jurists. For instance, certain quotes on tort, evidence etc. were reproduced and it was asked to name the jurists. Options included authors like Salmond, Pollock, Winfield, Phipson etc. Other than these there were several quotes/principles based on English judgments which are not very very commonly talked/discussed (from an angle of a law student). However one carrying books might have been able to answer them. (Of course there would be people who did not require books to search for these answers).
Relevancy of AIBE Study Material:
Though BCI has discontinued providing the published versions of the study material which Rainmaker has made, yet they are available on its website. Most of the students were seen carrying either the earlier published copies of them or their printed versions. I am not sure but around 50-65% questions could have been answered from there. This is just a guess. You need to carry them but you DO have to carry the bare acts.
Time Management: Most of the AIBE aspirants left their seats in the last 15 minutes. Three hours were sufficient for anyone with average time management skills.
What was annoying: Questions belonging to one subject were not kept together in one section but were scattered all over the paper. A lot of time and energy could have been saved if this was otherwise.
Recommendation for future aspirants: Do carry all the bare acts including the ones people generally skip like Specific Relief Act, Limitation Act and the Labour laws.
Few Questions (44 out of 100):
- In which case did the Supreme Court hold that the Preamble was not a part of the Constitution and which case overruled this?
- Ninety-seventh Amendment Act of the Constitution of India deals with _________?
- Article for THE Original Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India.
- ‘Equal pay for equal work’ is enforceable under which provision of the Constitution. Options: Art. 14 / 39 / 19 /or 21.
- Question on L. Chandrakumar Judgment.
- Which Article of the Constitution of India, 1950 deals with this: “The executive power of every State shall be so exercised as to ensure compliance with the laws made by Parliament and any existing laws which apply in that State, and the executive power of the Union shall extend to the giving of such directions to a State as may appear to the Government of India to be necessary for that purpose.” Ans. Article 256
- The principle of Absolute Liability was laid down in which case? This question was tricky as generally the concerned case is known as ‘M. C. Mehta v. Union of India’ or ‘the Oleum Gas leak case’. However the option was ‘Shriram Food and Fertilisers case’.
- Passive euthanasia is allowed. Case?
- Narco Analysis – Selvi & Ors. vs State Of Karnataka & Anr – volatile of fundamental rights under which articles of the Constitution of India, 1950.
- Article for ‘Law declared by Supreme Court to be binding on all courts The law declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all courts within the territory of India’.
- DNA Sample – relevant judgment from the options.
- Section for Blasphemy.
- Illustration based question on extortion.
- Section related to offence for use of criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty.
- Illustration based question on wrongful confinement.
- When does anticipatory bail become effective?
- Question based on Section 164 of CrPC.
- Several questions as to whether a particular offence was cognizable / bailable.
- Section for Res sub judice.
- Section for out of Court settlement.
- Section which deals with ‘Reference to High Court’.
- Who decides the mode of execution of a decree?
- Order which deals with ‘Suits by Indigent Persons’.
- What rights does a person lose on attachment of his property?
- Section for out of court settlement.
- Question on Agency.
- Question on Undue influence by lawyer on a client. (based on the relation)
- Question on misrepresentation.
- From whom should the consideration flow?
- Among the four given options, which cannot be covered by a ‘contract of indemnity’?
- What does Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act deal with?
- Which Act brought in rights for women in ‘Joint Family property’
- Section of HMA which deals with conciliation.
- What is Mubara’at?
- Question on Indian Divorce (Amendment) Act, 2001.
- When was Consumer Protection Act notified?
- Hart is related to? Correct option was ‘Concept of Law’.
- Natural Law is related to: (options)
- Among the four given options, which all cannot be transferred under the Transfer of Property Act?
- Among the four given options (serial number of BCI rules) deal with an Advocate’s duties towards his client.
- Pecuniary limit for District forum.
- Question related to Section 20 of Motor Vehicles Act.
- Question on Section 5 of Limitation Act.
- Section for expert opinion on Evidence – Section 45 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
Unnecessary details you may skip:
- Paper at Amity NOIDA began only at 11.15am but the students were given 15 extra minutes. (2.15pm)
- Many students had issues with a particular instruction which did not let them leave the examination hall before the completion of paper.
- Cheating? Well I won’t comment on it. This did help to create a lot of bonding between the aspirants. Many of them were seen exchanging mobile numbers after the test.
- A girl sitting nearby forgot to sign her OMR sheet and also left her identity card at her seat. Poor girl.
- The invigilator made a comment that how lawyers can forget to sign their documents.
Latest posts by Mohit Singh (see all)
- “Video conferencing cannot be directed in transfer petition” holds SC by 2:1, overrules Krishna Veni Nagam - October 9, 2017
- SC asks Centre, social media websites on AoR’s petition for keeping Indians’ data in India - September 7, 2017
- PIL before SC seeks J Lodha Panel’s recommendations to be declared unconstitutional + reference to 7 judge bench - January 6, 2017