send mail to support@abhimanu.com mentioning your email id and mobileno registered with us! if details not recieved
Resend Opt after 60 Sec.
By Loging in you agree to Terms of Services and Privacy Policy
Claim your free MCQ
Please specify
Sorry for the inconvenience but we’re performing some maintenance at the moment. Website can be slow during this phase..
Please verify your mobile number
Login not allowed, Please logout from existing browser
Please update your name
Subscribe to Notifications
Stay updated with the latest Current affairs and other important updates regarding video Lectures, Test Schedules, live sessions etc..
Your Free user account at abhipedia has been created.
Remember, success is a journey, not a destination. Stay motivated and keep moving forward!
Refer & Earn
Enquire Now
My Abhipedia Earning
Kindly Login to view your earning
Support
Type your modal answer and submitt for approval
Examine the Statement and Conclusions given below and choose a suitable answer from the options given:
Statement: Necessity knows no law.
Conclusions:1. The act of a captain throwing some cargo into the ocean to save the ship from sinking is justified by the principle.
2. The act of a man out of poverty and starvation stealing some food from a hotel is justified by the principle.
3. The act of a tourist killing a tiger when it was attacking a villager is justified by the principle.
Only Conclusion 1 follows.
Only Conclusion 2 follows.
Only Conclusion 1 and 3 follow.
All Conclusions follow.
Statement: Necessity knows no law. The act of a captain throwing some cargo into the ocean to save the ship from sinking is justified by the principle and The act of a tourist killing a tiger when it was attacking a villager is justified by the principle. These two are necessity of stuation, if captain not threw carto into the ocean than the whole ship sank and all the passengers and crew on the ship will die. Same as in 2nd situation, if tourist din't kill tiger, then tigen kill the villager. As a humanity a man's life is more important than a tiger. The act of a man out of poverty and starvation stealing some food from a hotel is justified by theprinciple, But in this condition steal is not only option for man to out of peverty and starvation. He had many options like waging, job, etc. Hence, Only Conclusion 1 and 3 follow.
By: SANAT DATT BHARDWAJ ProfileResourcesReport error
Access to prime resources
New Courses