LLM Foundation Course Judicial Process Solved Question Papers with Answers 2015 to 2026 - Mumbai University | munotes

Judicial Process is the Foundation Course paper of the LLM, and the first thing to know about this folder is that the same subject is examined under three different codes. It is Paper III of Group I, Constitutional and Administrative Law, under code 26901; of Group V, Criminal Law and Criminal Administration, under 26905; and of Group VI, Environment and Legal Order, under 26906. The syllabus behind all three is the same, so a paper set for another Group is still your paper, and this folder is worth reading end to end whichever Group you are in. The 2019 scan proves the point on its own: it holds a Group VI paper and a Group I paper, sat in the same year, on the same syllabus.

Count the papers before you plan your revision, because eight files hold eleven printed papers. The scan filed as 2016 is two complete papers, QP Codes BB-11803 and 60935. The scan filed as 2018 is two more, Q.P. Codes 40949 and 40950. The scan filed as 2019 is a Group VI paper with its Marathi half followed by a wholly separate Group I paper. Every one of the eleven is answered here.

The shape has not changed in eleven years, which makes preparation unusually predictable. Every paper in this folder is 100 marks in three hours, prints seven questions, and asks you to attempt any four. No question carries a printed mark figure: the paper says only that all questions carry equal marks, so each is worth 25. There is no short answer section, no multiple choice section and no compulsory question. Seven essays, choose four, cite case law.

The syllabus is small and it repeats. Counted across all eleven papers, Dharma appears in every one, and so does some question on the relation between law and justice or the theories of justice. Precedent, judicial creativity and judicial review appear in ten of the eleven; the nature and scope of the judicial process, and judicial activism, in nine. After that the frequency drops sharply: judicial accountability, the independence of the judiciary and the pursuit of constitutional goals and values in five each, public interest litigation in four, the National Judicial Commission in three.

That distribution has a practical consequence worth acting on. Prepare six topics properly, Dharma, law and justice, precedent, judicial review, judicial creativity with activism, and the nature and scope of the judicial process, and you can answer at least four questions on every single paper in this folder. That is not an estimate; it was checked paper by paper against all eleven. On the 2022-23 paper those six topics answer all seven questions.

Two of the short notes use the syllabus vocabulary rather than ordinary language, and a candidate who does not recognise the phrase will write around the question. Equivalence theories, asked in 2022-23, and dependency theories, asked in 2025-26, are the syllabus names for two of the three possible relations between law and justice: equivalence holds that justice is nothing more than the positive law of the stronger class, dependency holds that justice depends on law for its realisation but is not the same as law, and the third position is that justice is independent of law altogether. The liberal utilitarian tradition, also asked in 2025-26, belongs to the syllabus division of the bases of justice into the liberal contractual, the liberal utilitarian and the liberal moral traditions. Answer in those words.

The examiner sets this paper through quotations, so learn a few verbatim. Benjamin Cardozo is quoted by name in five of the eleven papers, and four different sentences of his are used: that the final cause of law is the welfare of society, that the serious business of the judge begins when the colours do not match and the index fails, that the process of law is not a mechanical adding and subtracting of rules but a process of reasoning, and that the judicial process at its highest reaches is not discovery but creation. Blackstone on judges as the living oracles of the law, Lord Acton on power tending to corrupt, Justice Bhagwati on judicial review as a part of the basic structure, Justice Krishna Iyer on judicial independence as the soul of democracy and Bentham on the greatest happiness are each set once. In every case the quotation is a frame, not the question: what follows the dash is what you have to answer.

One habit of this subject catches people out. Because there is no short answer section, a short note here is worth roughly twelve and a half marks, not five, and the later papers give you four notes and ask for any two. A note in this paper is a small essay with authority in it, and answering it in eight lines leaves marks on the table.

These are model answers prepared by munotes. They are a study aid and not official University answer keys, which the University of Mumbai does not publish.