BLS LLB 5 Years Sem 1 English 1 2024-25 - ATKT 60/40 Question Paper with Solutions

The Ladyship is Lady Booby, and the speaker is Parson Abraham Adams, in Henry Fielding's Joseph Andrews (Book IV, Chapter II).

The parties are Joseph Andrews and Fanny Goodwill. Adams has published their banns of marriage; Lady Booby has ordered him to publish them no more and has given as her reason that Joseph is a vagabond who will bring a nest of beggars into the parish. This is Adams's answer: he will obey her in anything lawful, but poverty is no ground for refusing two people the right to marry.

They are two townsmen of Dawson's Landing in Mark Twain's Pudd'nhead Wilson, and they appear as witnesses for the prosecution at the trial of the Italian twins for the murder of Judge York Driscoll.

They were the men who entered the house behind Mrs Pratt, the Judge's sister, on the night of the murder, and who saw the twins standing over the body. John Buckstone is separately described earlier in the novel as a good-natured, ignorant, energetic middle-aged Irishman, a great politician in a small way, who takes the twins to the mass-meeting at which Luigi kicks Tom Driscoll.

The speaker is Antonio, the merchant of the play's title, in the trial scene of Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice (Act IV, Scene i).

He says it to Bassanio, after Portia has confirmed that the bond is good and that Shylock is entitled to his forfeit. A "wether" is a castrated ram, and a tainted one is a diseased animal in a flock: Antonio is saying that he is the weakest and least useful member of the company, the one most fit to die, and that his friends should let him go.

Answer: She said that she would go to the market that day.

The changes made, and why:

Answer: They will complete the project by Friday.

The changes made:

1. This sentence is already passive, so the conversion runs the other way: the agent in the by-phrase, them, becomes the subject, and its case changes to they.
2. The old subject the project becomes the object.
3. The verb becomes will complete: the passive will be completed loses be and the participle and takes the plain future active.
4. The first "by" goes; the second stays. By them disappears with the by-phrase; by Friday is an adverb of time and has nothing to do with the voice.

Who she is

Hetty Sorrel is the orphaned niece of Mr and Mrs Poyser of the Hall Farm at Hayslope, in George Eliot's Adam Bede. She is seventeen, strikingly beautiful, vain, and entirely without imagination about other people. Adam Bede, the village carpenter, loves her and hopes to marry her; she thinks him worthy and dull.

The story

1. The seduction. Arthur Donnithorne, the young squire and heir to the estate, begins a secret courtship in the woods. He does not intend harm and is not a villain in Eliot's telling; he is a weak, well-meaning young man who cannot say no to himself. Hetty, for her part, believes she will become a lady.

2. The discovery and the parting. Adam sees them together and forces a quarrel. Arthur writes to Hetty ending the affair and leaves with his regiment. Hetty is pregnant and tells no one.

3. The engagement to Adam. With nowhere to turn, she agrees to marry Adam. The wedding is fixed for March.

8. The confession and the reprieve. In the prison Dinah Morris, the Methodist preacher, sits with her through the night, and Hetty at last tells what happened: she left the child in terror, could not stay away, went back, and found it dead. On the day of execution Arthur Donnithorne arrives with a reprieve, and the sentence is commuted to transportation.

9. The end. She dies on the way home some years later, without seeing Hayslope again.

What Eliot makes of her

Hetty is neither innocent nor wicked, and Eliot refuses both readings. She is a girl of no education and immense beauty who has been taught that beauty will settle her future, and who cannot imagine consequences until they arrive. The novel treats her vanity as a misfortune rather than a crime, and reserves its judgment for the man who had every advantage and used it.

3. He eats a cheap meal without money and is simply put out by the waiters.
4. He behaves offensively to a young woman, who turns out to be willing.
5. He shouts and sings on a corner, and is taken for a college boy celebrating a football victory.
6. He takes a silk umbrella from a man who had himself taken it and surrenders it at once.

Six attempts, six failures, and the joke behind each is the same: the law will not attend to him.

The turn

Outside an old church on a quiet street he hears an organist practising, and through the window comes an anthem he had known as a boy. It brings back mothers, roses, ambitions, friends and clean thoughts, and works in him what O. Henry calls a sudden and wonderful change. He sees the pit he has fallen into: the degraded days, the dead hopes, the wrecked faculties. He resolves to find work and be somebody again.

The occasion

The conversation is in Book IV, Chapter II of Henry Fielding's Joseph Andrews. Lady Booby has returned to her country seat, has found that Joseph Andrews, the footman she dismissed, is about to marry Fanny Goodwill, and has sent for the curate, Parson Abraham Adams, who has published their banns. She wants the marriage stopped.

How the conversation runs

1. She opens by attacking Fanny. Adams answers that Fanny is the sweetest-tempered, honestest young creature, and, all men allow, the handsomest woman in the parish. Lady Booby, who is jealous, tells him it is mighty becoming in a clergyman to trouble himself about handsome women.

2. She orders the banns stopped. "If they have put in the banns, I desire you will publish them no more without my orders."

3. Adams states his condition. He is "willing to surcease" if anyone puts in a sufficient caution and assigns a proper reason against the marriage. He does not refuse her outright; he asks her for a ground.

8. Adams disarms the threat. "I know not what your ladyship means by the terms master and service. I am in the service of a Master who will never discard me for doing my duty." If the doctor turns him from his cure, God will provide another; his family have hands, and while his conscience is pure he will not fear what man can do to him.

9. She ends the interview by forbidding him her house, and he takes his leave with many attempts at a bow.

What the scene shows

1. Adams is poor, ridiculous and unbudgeable. Fielding has spent three books making him a comic figure, and then gives him the only unanswerable speech in the novel.

2. Lady Booby has power and no argument. She moves from insult to command to legal pretext to threat, and loses at each stage, because none of them touches a man who does not want what she can take away.

3. The pun is the point. She means an employer and a job; he means God and his priestly duty. A threat works only on a man who wants what is being threatened.

3. She is a comic figure who ends in a real prison. She wins her verdict of £750 and never sees a penny, because Mr Pickwick refuses on principle to pay. Dodson and Fogg then arrest her for their own costs, and she is in the Fleet Prison when Mr Pickwick, imprisoned there himself for the same refusal, finds her. He pays her costs and his own to get her released.

Mrs Elizabeth Cluppins

Mrs Bardell's friend and neighbour, described by Dickens as a little, brisk, busy-looking woman, the wife of Mr Cluppins and the mother of eight children. She and Mrs Sanders attend the trial as Mrs Bardell's supporters, with pattens, an umbrella and a bottle of smelling-salts.

1. She is the plaintiff's key witness, called by Serjeant Buzfuz, and she is hoisted into the witness box by the combined efforts of Mrs Bardell, Mrs Sanders, Dodson and Fogg.

2. Her evidence is that she overheard the conversation. She had been out to buy three pounds of red kidney potatoes, found Mrs Bardell's street door "on the jar", walked in to say good-morning, went upstairs "in a permiscuous manner" into the back room, and heard voices in the front.

The need. Maharashtra faces a recurring shortage of blood in the summer months, when college camps stop and donations fall. Blood cannot be manufactured and has a shelf life of about thirty-five days, so supply depends entirely on people donating regularly. Most of our students are between eighteen and twenty-five and are eligible to donate, and many have never been told so.

The programme. The morning session would be the awareness half: a talk by a transfusion medicine officer on eligibility, safety and the myths that keep people away, and a short session on the legal framework, including the prohibition on paid donation. The afternoon would be the camp itself, conducted entirely by a licensed blood bank.

Arrangements proposed.

Thanking you,

Yours faithfully,
Rohan Kulkarni
Secretary, Students' Welfare Committee

Encl.: Consent letter from ____ Blood Bank; draft schedule.

I am a student of the five-year B.L.S. LL.B. course at ____ Law College, Mumbai. My coursework in Legal Method, Legal Language and Legal Writing has given me a working grounding in legal research, drafting and case analysis. I am familiar with SCC Online and Manupatra, can prepare case briefs, indexes and paper books, and have assisted in the compilation of records during a previous internship with Adv. S. Nair at the District Court, Mumbai.

If appointed I would be glad to take up drafting under supervision, research and opinions, the maintenance of case diaries and cause lists, liaison with counsel, filing, and attendance in court with your juniors. I am willing to work outside ordinary hours when a matter requires it.

I am particularly interested in your firm's civil and commercial litigation practice, and I should welcome the opportunity to build my professional training there.

My resume is attached for your reference. I would be glad to attend an interview at a time convenient to you.

Experience: Four weeks with Adv. S. Nair, District Court, Mumbai, 2024.
Skills: Legal research, drafting, MS Office, typing 40 w.p.m.
Languages: English, Hindi, Marathi.
Activities: Moot Court Committee; college debating team.
References: Available on request.

Declaration: I hereby declare that the particulars given above are true to the best of my knowledge.

Place: Mumbai
Date: 28 January 2025 Aditi Sharma

What it is

Banking fraud is any act of deception by which a person dishonestly obtains money, credit or property from a bank, or from a bank's customer through the banking system. It covers frauds committed against a bank, frauds committed by those inside it, and frauds committed on customers using banking channels.

The principal kinds

1. Loan and credit fraud. Borrowing on forged documents, inflated valuations, fake balance sheets or the same security pledged to several banks, and then diverting the money. This accounts for the largest amounts by value.

2. Cheque and document fraud. Forged signatures, altered instruments, fabricated letters of credit and guarantees.

3. Insider and staff fraud. Unauthorised entries, misuse of dormant accounts, sanctioning loans against the rules.

4. The Banking Regulation Act, 1949, and the Reserve Bank of India's Master Directions on Frauds, which require classification and reporting of frauds and place the machinery on the banks.

5. Recovery. The SARFAESI Act, 2002, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018 for those who leave the country.

6. Customer protection. The RBI's rule on limited liability of customers in unauthorised electronic transactions: where the loss is due to the bank's failure the customer bears nothing, and where it is due to neither party the customer's liability is capped, provided the transaction is reported within the prescribed days. The reporting delay is what decides the outcome, and few customers know it.

7. The Banking Ombudsman scheme, now the RBI Integrated Ombudsman Scheme, and the national cybercrime reporting portal and helpline 1930 for the "golden hour" freeze of transferred funds.

What it is

The right to education is the right of every child to free and compulsory elementary schooling, and the corresponding duty of the State to provide it. In India it is a fundamental right under Article 21A of the Constitution, inserted by the Eighty-sixth Amendment, 2002:

The State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years in such manner as the State may, by law, determine.

How it became a fundamental right

1. It began as a Directive Principle. The original Article 45 directed the State to provide free and compulsory education for all children until the age of fourteen, within ten years. It was not enforceable, and it was not achieved.

3. No detention, no expulsion and no board examination up to the completion of elementary education, later amended to allow regular examination in classes V and VIII with a re-examination.

4. Section 12(1)(c), the provision that produced the litigation: private unaided schools must reserve at least twenty-five per cent of their entry-level seats for children from weaker sections and disadvantaged groups in the neighbourhood, reimbursed by the State. Upheld in Society for Unaided Private Schools of Rajasthan v. Union of India (2012).

5. Norms and standards for pupil-teacher ratio, buildings, working days and teaching hours, and a prohibition on the deployment of teachers for non-educational work other than the census, elections and disaster relief.

6. No corporal punishment and no mental harassment.

What has been achieved and what has not

Achieved: enrolment at the elementary stage is now near universal, the gap between girls and boys has closed almost entirely, and infrastructure and mid-day meals have improved retention.

1. The threat that started it

A small sum of money went missing in the house. Percy Driscoll assembled his four house slaves, and told them that if the thief did not confess he would sell them all down the river. Twain writes that this was, to a Missouri slave, "equivalent to condemning them to hell", and all three of the others confessed on the spot. Driscoll, well pleased with his own magnanimity, sold them locally instead, and set the incident down in his diary as an example of gentleness for his son to read one day.

2. The night that followed

Percy Driscoll slept well. Roxy did not sleep at all. A single thought had taken hold of her: her child could grow up and be sold down the river. She kept getting up to see whether he was still in his cradle, and she resolved that she would kill him and then herself, since killing him alone would not save him. She dressed herself for the river in her new Sunday gown, and then, ashamed that her baby was in a short grey tow-linen shirt while she was in her finery, she dressed him in one of the heir's long white baby-gowns with its blue bows and ruffles.

3. The two children were genuinely indistinguishable. She did not create the resemblance; she noticed it. And she noticed it in the only form that mattered, that the father could not tell them apart.

4. Precedent, as she understood it. Unable to bear the sin of it, she comforted herself with a story she had heard from an old preacher, that white folks and even kings had done the same, and concluded, "'Tain't no sin, white folks has done it!"

5. The system, not the woman. Twain's real answer to "why" is that a law which allows a child to be sold makes this act intelligible. Roxy commits a grave wrong and the novel puts the responsibility for it where it belongs.

Part 2: How it came into notice

1. Nobody suspected it for twenty-three years

The false Tom grew up as the heir, idle, cruel and in debt through gambling. The true heir grew up as the slave Chambers, illiterate and servile. Not one person in Dawson's Landing had the least suspicion, because there was nothing to suspect: the difference between the two men was social and had no physical existence at all.

5. The two discoveries

The thumb-print on the knife did not match either twin, and they were cleared. It did match Tom Driscoll, sitting in the courtroom, and Wilson named him: "The murderer of your friend and mine, Judge Driscoll of the generous and kindly spirit, sits in your midst."

Then, comparing the childhood slides, he found that the infant prints filed under one name belonged to the other man, and cried: "It's so! Heaven, what a revelation! And for twenty-three years no man has ever suspected it!" He announced to the court that the man in the dock's clothes was a slave and an impostor and the man treated as a slave was the true heir. Tom confessed.

6. The ending

The true heir was restored to his property and was ruined by it: brought up as a slave, he could not read, could not behave as the drawing rooms expected, and was at ease nowhere. The false Tom was not hanged. Once identified as a slave he was an asset of the estate, the creditors had the better claim, and he was sold down the river after all.

Behind it lies the older argument about usury, which the medieval Church forbade to Christians and which was therefore left to Jews, who were excluded from most other occupations. Shylock defends the practice with the story of Jacob and Laban's sheep; Antonio dismisses the defence. Each despises the other's way of making a living, and each has been forced into that way by the arrangements of the city.

2. The religious and personal conflict

This is the deepest layer, and it is the one Shakespeare gives to Shylock to state. On his own uncontradicted account, Antonio has spat upon his gaberdine, called him dog, and voided his rheum upon his beard on the Rialto, and Antonio does not deny it. Asked to lend money to a man who has done these things, Shylock puts the question: shall he say, "Hath a dog money? Is it possible a cur can lend three thousand ducats?"

Antonio's answer is the most revealing line in the play: "I am as like to call thee so again, to spit on thee again, to spurn thee too." He does not apologise, does not soften, and asks for the loan as to an enemy rather than a friend. The conflict is therefore not a misunderstanding; it is openly acknowledged on both sides.

The trial: the conflict in court

Shylock refuses three thousand ducats, then six, then thrice the sum. Offered a reason he says only that it is his humour, that he bears "a certain loathing" to Antonio, and that some men cannot abide a gaping pig or a harmless necessary cat.

His argument in law is unanswerable on its own terms, and it is the sharpest speech in the play: Venice keeps slaves, whom you bought and use as your asses and your dogs; would you free them and marry them to your heirs? You answer, the slaves are ours. So the pound of flesh is his, dearly bought, and if you deny him the law of Venice has no force.

He grounds his refusal on an oath sworn by his holy Sabbath: "An oath, an oath, I have an oath in heaven." When Portia asks for mercy he answers, "My deeds upon my head! I crave the law."

Antonio, meanwhile, has stopped fighting. He tells Bassanio he is "a tainted wether of the flock, meetest for death", and asks only that his friend live to write his epitaph.

The case

Hetty Sorrel is tried at the Stoniton assizes in George Eliot's Adam Bede for child murder, the death and concealment of her newborn infant. She had left home in secret, failed to find Arthur Donnithorne, given birth alone on the road, and said nothing to anyone before or since. She offers no defence, no confession and no explanation, so the prosecution case is wholly circumstantial and rests on two witnesses.

Sarah Stone

Who she is. A widow of Stoniton, a stranger to Hetty, who took her in one evening out of pity when she appeared at the door exhausted and near her time. She has children of her own and kept baby linen in the house. She has no standing, no expertise and no interest whatever in the outcome.

What she proves.

1. That Hetty came to her house and was received.

How he gives it. In the halting speech of a working man describing exactly what he saw. He offers no theory, accuses nobody, and volunteers no opinion, and it is that restraint which makes his account impossible to shake.

Comment on the presentation

1. Neither witness is a professional, and that is the point. Eliot could have built the case on a doctor or a constable. She chose a widow who takes in strangers and a man who chops wood, because the strength of their evidence lies in having no case to make.

2. Each is unshakeable for a different reason. Sarah Stone is identifying her own needlework, which she made with her hands and can recognise beyond argument. Olding is describing a physical scene, and nothing in it depends on his judgment.

3. The two divide the case exactly between them.

Conclusion

Eliot's presentation of these two witnesses is a study in how a perfectly conducted trial can produce a tragedy. Both are honest, disinterested and accurate; neither exaggerates; nobody lies; and their evidence, taken together, closes a chain that the prisoner will not break. The jury returns "Guilty" and is not wrong on what it was shown.

4. Composed afterwards. He behaves with great presence of mind once the thing is done, and very nearly escapes altogether. It is the detective Dr Austin Bond, brought in because ordinary methods fail against a man nobody suspects, whose attention to physical detail unravels it.

Emily

1. She is the cause of everything and is barely on the stage. Emily is attached to Franting, who treats her badly. Harder loves her. That triangle supplies the whole motive of the story, and Emily herself is given very little to say and does nothing to bring the killing about.

2. She is a woman with no good choice. Bennett places her between a brutal man she is bound to and a gentle one who cannot protect her by any ordinary means, and the story does not pretend that she has a way out.

3. Her importance is what she represents, not what she does. She is the point at which Harder's private feeling turns into a reason to act, and Bennett keeps her deliberately faint so that the reader cannot rest the moral weight on her.

2. He unsettles the assumption that violence belongs to violent-looking people. The educated, gentle, poetic man commits a premeditated killing, and the world very nearly lets him pass because he does not look the part.

3. He keeps Emily thin on purpose. A fully drawn Emily would let the reader decide the case on her suffering. Bennett gives just enough of her to establish the motive and no more, so the reader is left holding the act itself.

Conclusion

Emily and Lomax Harder are a motive and an actor, and Bennett's design is that the reader should feel the pull of the first and then be made to judge the second. Their relation explains the crime completely and excuses it not at all, and the distance between those two statements is the whole meaning of the story.