question_answer

Each question consists of legal principle(s) (here-in-after referred to as 'principle') and facts. Such proposition may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. Principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Only one of the alternatives, i.e. [a], [b], [c] or [d] is the most reasonable conclusion. In other words, in answering the following questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles that are given herein below for every question. Further you must not assume any facts other than those stated in the question. The objective of this section is to test your ability in legal aptitude, study of law, research aptitude and problem solving ability even if the 'most reasonable conclusion' arrived at may be absurd or unacceptable for any other reason.

Principle Nothing is an offence if it is done under intoxication and the person commiting the offence was incapable to understand the nature of the act. Intoxication should be without knowledge or against the will of the person.

Facts 'A', 'B' and 'C' were having a party in Bar where 'A' persuaded 'B' and 'C' to take alcoholic drinks. On the persistent persuasion 'B' and 'C' also consumed alcohol along with 'A'. 'B' and 'C' had never consumed alcohol before. After intoxication, there was some argument between 'B' and 'C' where 'C' pushed 'B' with full force causing serious injury to 'B'.

A) 'C' is liable

B) 'C' is not liable because he was intoxicated

C) 'A' is liable because 'A' persuaded them to consume alcohol whereas they had never consumed alcohol

D) 'A' and 'C' both are liable