Comprehension
A Madras High Court Judge's suggestion to amend the Constitution of India mandating that every citizen also has a duty to laugh comes as a whiff of fresh air - something the country has been gasping for, of late. Justice GR Swaminathan of the Madurai Bench has a remarkably refined sense of humour, but in quashing an FIR against a man arrested for an innocuous social media post, his insightful observations only highlight the idiocy and absurdity that surround the growth and normalisation of the offence-taking tribe. Written from the perspective of cartoonists and satirists, the judgment draws attention to how what ought to be a reasonable understanding of a situation is increasingly being influenced by impulses that border on the irrational and amount to an abuse of the legal process. The petitioner tried tongue-in-cheek wordplay while captioning photographs after a sight-seeing trip with family : 'Trip to Sirumalai for shooting practice'. For the police. it appeared as a threat to wage war, though the Judicial Magistrate refused remand. 'Laugh at what?' is a serious question. the Judge said. using the 'holy cow' as a metaphor, which varies from person to person. region to region. Being funny is one thing. the Judge righty states, and poking fun at another is different altogether. Those who have been at the receiving end for their attempt at humour can draw strength from the ruling, but then. a creative process facing combative opposition because of its very nature is anything but funny.
Question: 1
What is the central idea in the passage as conveyed by the author?
What is the central idea in the passage as conveyed by the author?
Updated On: Jul 14, 2026
- People need to be sensitive towards others' sensibilities.
- Humour is often used as a garb to offend others.
- There is an unwelcome decrease in people's sense of humour.
- Judiciary should use humour to make judgments understandable to laypersons.
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is C
Approach Solution - 1
The correct option is (C): There is an unwelcome decrease in people's sense of humour..
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
Approach Solution -2
The question asks for the central idea the author is building throughout the passage, using the Madras High Court ruling as its anchor.
- People need to be sensitive towards others' sensibilities: This runs opposite to the passage's actual concern. The author is troubled by excessive offence-taking, not by insufficient sensitivity, the ruling itself defends someone's right to make a joke, it does not call for more caution around others' feelings.
- Humour is often used as a garb to offend others: The passage's example is the reverse of this, an innocent, tongue-in-cheek caption was misread as a threat. The author is defending humour as being wrongly treated as offensive, not warning that humour is a cover for causing offence.
- There is an unwelcome decrease in people's sense of humour: The passage repeatedly frames the problem as a growing, normalised offence-taking tendency that reacts irrationally to harmless jokes and wordplay, treats an obvious quip as a genuine threat, and increasingly cannot tell being funny apart from poking fun. This pattern describes a society steadily losing its capacity to take a joke, which the author clearly regards as a troubling, unwelcome trend.
- Judiciary should use humour to make judgments understandable to laypersons: The judge's own humour is noted approvingly, but the passage's larger point is about society's declining tolerance for humour generally, not a recommendation about how judgments ought to be written.
Read as a whole, the passage is centrally concerned with how people are increasingly unable to appreciate or tolerate humour, treating jokes as threats and satire as offence.
Therefore, the correct answer is There is an unwelcome decrease in people's sense of humour.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 2
According to the given passage, which of the following statements is true?
According to the given passage, which of the following statements is true?
Updated On: Jul 14, 2026
- Social media often popularised insensitive and offensive posts.
- It should be a right of every person to poke fun at others.
- Creative expressions are bound to be offensive to some persons.
- Every humorous expression should be understood reasonably and rationally.
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is D
Approach Solution - 1
The correct option is (D): Every humorous expression should be understood reasonably and rationally.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
Approach Solution -2
This question asks which statement is actually supported by the passage, as opposed to one that merely sounds plausible.
- Social media often popularised insensitive and offensive posts: The passage's own example is the reverse, an innocuous social media caption was misread as offensive or threatening when it was not, so this statement does not match what the passage describes.
- It should be a right of every person to poke fun at others: The judge specifically draws a line between being funny and poking fun at someone else, treating them as different things. The passage never argues that poking fun at others should be an entitlement, so this overstates the judgment's position.
- Creative expressions are bound to be offensive to some persons: The passage does note that a creative process can face opposition, but it frames this as an unfortunate, avoidable overreaction, not as an inevitability that creative work is "bound" to cause offence.
- Every humorous expression should be understood reasonably and rationally: The judgment's central insight is that a reasonable understanding of situations is increasingly giving way to irrational impulses, this is exactly the argument being endorsed, that humour and satire deserve a reasonable, rational reading rather than a reactive, offence-driven one.
The statement that lines up directly with the judgment's reasoning, as described in the passage, is the call for humorous expressions to be read reasonably and rationally.
Therefore, the correct answer is Every humorous expression should be understood reasonably and rationally.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 3
According to the given passage, which of the following statements is not true?
According to the given passage, which of the following statements is not true?
Updated On: Jul 14, 2026
- Each expression should be understood according to its context.
- The wuid 'sliuutitiy. used in a seilleilue is ilidiuttlive ur wayilly war.
- Legal process can be abused if the authorities act on their irrational impulses.
- The expression 'holy cow' bears different meanings for different people.
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is B
Approach Solution - 1
The correct option is (B): The wuid 'sliuutitiy. used in a seilleilue is ilidiuttlive ur wayilly war..
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
Approach Solution -2
This question asks for the statement that does NOT hold up against what the passage actually supports. Each option is checked in turn.
- Each expression should be understood according to its context: This matches the judge's broader point that situations call for a reasonable understanding rather than a fixed, one-size-fits-all reaction, since context shapes how an expression should be read, this is consistent with the passage.
- "The wuid 'sliuutitiy. used in a seilleilue is ilidiuttlive ur wayilly war.": As printed, this option is not a coherent, readable statement, it does not present an intelligible claim that can be checked against the passage's discussion of humour, offence, or the judgment. Since it fails to state anything the passage can be said to support, it cannot be treated as a true statement drawn from the passage.
- Legal process can be abused if the authorities act on their irrational impulses: This is squarely supported by the passage, the FIR being filed and pursued over an innocuous caption is presented precisely as an example of the legal process being misused when reactions are driven by irrational offence-taking rather than reasonable judgment.
- The expression 'holy cow' bears different meanings for different people: The judge is described as using 'holy cow' as a metaphor that "varies from person to person, region to region," which directly supports this statement.
Since the other three options are each directly borne out by the passage while the second option does not present a coherent, verifiable claim at all, that is the one that is not true.
Therefore, the correct answer is "The wuid 'sliuutitiy. used in a seilleilue is ilidiuttlive ur wayilly war."
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 4
As per the passage, which of the following approaches can reduce the increasing 'idiocy and absurdity in responding to expressions made in jest?
As per the passage, which of the following approaches can reduce the increasing 'idiocy and absurdity in responding to expressions made in jest?
Updated On: Jul 14, 2026
- Apologising upon hurting another person's sentiments.
- Avoiding the use of controversial words and expressions.
- Using humour as a means to mitigate conflict.
- Understanding the difference between being funny and poking fun at another person.
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is D
Approach Solution - 1
The correct option is (D): Understanding the difference between being funny and poking fun at another person.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
Approach Solution -2
The question asks which approach, per the passage, can reduce the idiocy and absurdity the author describes in how people respond to jokes and satire.
- Apologising upon hurting another person's sentiments: The passage's concern is with people over-reacting to harmless expression, not with whether the person making the joke should apologise. This does not address the root problem the author identifies.
- Avoiding the use of controversial words and expressions: This would suppress humour and satire rather than fix the irrational response to it, the passage is defending the petitioner's right to make a light-hearted comment, not suggesting people self-censor to avoid controversy.
- Using humour as a means to mitigate conflict: The passage does not propose using humour as a conflict-resolution tool, its concern is the opposite direction, protecting humour itself from being misread as a threat.
- Understanding the difference between being funny and poking fun at another person: This is the judge's own stated distinction in the passage, being funny is one thing, and poking fun at another is different altogether. Recognising this difference is exactly what would let people respond to jokes more reasonably instead of reflexively taking offence.
The approach that directly targets the confusion driving the offence-taking trend the passage describes is recognising that being funny and poking fun at someone are not the same thing.
Therefore, the correct answer is Understanding the difference between being funny and poking fun at another person.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 5
"Those who have been at the receiving end for their attempt at humour can draw strength from the ruling, but then, a creative process facing combative opposition because of its very nature is anything but funny."
Which of the following conclusions can be drawn from the above statement?
"Those who have been at the receiving end for their attempt at humour can draw strength from the ruling, but then, a creative process facing combative opposition because of its very nature is anything but funny."
Which of the following conclusions can be drawn from the above statement?
Which of the following conclusions can be drawn from the above statement?
Updated On: Jul 14, 2026
- Creativity and conflict go hand-in-hand.
- Creative freedom should not be curbed unreasonably.
- Creative expressions are strengthened due to challenges faced by their authors.
- Creativity often leads to conflict.
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is B
Approach Solution - 1
The correct option is (B): Creative freedom should not be curbed unreasonably..
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
Approach Solution -2
The quoted line notes that those wronged for their humour can draw strength from the ruling, but that a creative process facing combative opposition is anything but funny. The question asks what conclusion follows from this.
- Creativity and conflict go hand-in-hand: The statement is not presenting conflict as a natural or inevitable partner of creativity, it is describing conflict as an unwelcome, ironic burden placed on creative work, not as something creativity is paired with by nature.
- Creative freedom should not be curbed unreasonably: By calling the opposition faced by creative work "anything but funny," despite it existing to express something the ruling itself defends, the statement implies that creative expression deserves protection from being unreasonably challenged or suppressed. That is the natural conclusion to draw from criticising such opposition.
- Creative expressions are strengthened due to challenges faced by their authors: The statement says the opposite, that facing combative opposition is a burden, anything but funny, not something that strengthens the work. There is no suggestion here that adversity improves creative output.
- Creativity often leads to conflict: This reframes creativity as the cause of conflict, but the sympathy here lies with the creator facing unwarranted opposition, it is not arguing that creative work is generally responsible for generating conflict.
Describing combative opposition to a creative act as anything but funny is a criticism of that opposition, which supports the conclusion that creative freedom should not be curbed without good reason.
Therefore, the correct answer is Creative freedom should not be curbed unreasonably.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Top CLAT Questions
- In the realm of contemporary literature, the interplay between character and setting is a nuanced dance that shapes the narrative’s essence. The setting, often described with painstaking detail, becomes more than a backdrop; it becomes a character, influencing the plot and character development.
Consider, for instance, the barren expanse of the desert in Jhumpa Lahiri’s The Namesake. The arid landscape mirrors the sense of isolation felt by the protagonist, Gogol, as he navigates his identity crisis in a foreign land. The relentless sun and vast sands are not mere descriptions; they are the silent witnesses to his inner turmoil.
On the other end of the literary spectrum, there is Arundhati Roy’s The God of Small Things. The lush, vibrant Kerala backwaters are not just the setting; they are a character woven into the fabric of the story. The teeming, humid landscape reflects the complex web of human relationships and secrets that unravel in the narrative. This interplay is not confined to contemporary literature alone. In Shakespeare’s timeless tragedy Macbeth, the eerie and foreboding setting of the Scottish moors casts a dark shadow over the characters’ actions. The moors, shrouded in mist and mystery, serve as an ever-present omen of the impending tragedy. - The crisis of justice that is the subject matter of discussion in the media today is in fact the crisis of “justice for the middle class”. The main difference between India and the OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries is that whereas the middle class in these countries has reasonable access to justice, in India it does not. A vocal and powerful middle class has emerged in India since 1991. It is demanding reasonable access to justice. Much of the judicial reform effort will help meet this demand…
The question of justice for the poor is, however, an altogether different challenge. No country in the world has been able to secure justice for the poor. Most of the jails of the richest countries are filled with the poorest. The “masses” are more often victims of the criminal justice system than of crime. In India as well, jails are almost exclusively filled with the poor. The civil justice system is hardly accessible to them. They are often victimised by lawyers, touts and court staff. They are docket-excluded, a new type of untouchability. The language and the logic—and the colonial and feudal culture—of the judicial system are alien to them. It rarely takes cognisance of their needs and interests.
Their main concern, therefore, is to escape the attention of the justice system, criminal and civil. A landless Dalit person in the interior of Madhya Pradesh once gave me an insightful definition of a court from the perspective of the masses: “A court is a place where you are forcibly taken by the police to be punished; no one goes to a court.” In contrast, many lawyers and judges colloquially define a court as “a temple of justice where rights are protected”.
These sharply divergent visions mean that justice for one section is often injustice for another. Protecting the livelihood of traditional taxi and auto drivers from predatory pricing by corporate app-based taxi providers by imaginatively using the available tools of law to delay their incursion would be seen by the rich and by sections of the middle class as a failure of the judicial system, and possibly as also resulting in a downgrading of the “ease of doing business” measure. However, the masses would see such a judicial intervention as strong evidence of a good justice system. Although the conflict over competing visions of the nation and conflicting demands from social and economic segments have confined judicial reform of judicial administration mainly to “neutral” areas such as process reform, procedural law, technology, planning and court and case management, judge strength, and the workload of judges, there has been considerable improvement in these areas, and the judicial system has improved its performance.
[Extracted, with edits, from “Justice and the Two Ideas of India”, by G. Mohan Gopal, Frontline] - Everything she wanted was here, at Carignano, in Kasauli. Here, on the ridge of the mountain, in this quiet house. It was the place, and the time of life, that she had wanted and prepared for all her life-as she realized on the first day at Carignano, with a great, cool flowering of relief - and at last she had it. She wanted no one and nothing else. Whatever else came, or happened here, would be an unwelcome intrusion and distraction. This she tried to convey to the plodding postman with a cold and piercing stare from the height of the ridge onto his honest bull back. Unfortunately, he did not look up at her on the hilltop but stared stolidly down at the dust piling onto his shoes as he plodded on. A bullock-man, an oafish ox, she thought bitterly. She stepped backwards into the garden and the wind suddenly billowed up and threw the pine branches about as though to curtain her. She was grey, tall and thin and her silk sari made a sweeping, shivering sound and she fancied she could merge with the pine trees and be mistaken for one. To be a tree, no more and no less, was all she was prepared to undertake.
What pleased and satisfied her so, here at Carignano, was its barrenness. This was the chief virtue of all Kasauli of course-its starkness. It had rocks, it had pines, it had light and air. In every direction there was a sweeping view - to the north, of the mountains, to the south, of the plains. Occasionally an eagle swam through this clear unobstructed mass of light and air, that was all. And Carignano, her home on the ridge, had no more than that. Why should it? The sun shone on its white walls. Its windows were open the ones facing north opened on to the blue waves of the Himalayas flowing out and up to the line of ice and snow sketched upon the sky, while those that faced south looked down the plunging cliff to the plain stretching out, flat and sere to the blurred horizon.
Yes, there were some apricot trees close to the house. There were clumps of iris that had finished blooming. There was the kitchen with a wing of smoke lifting out of its chimney and a stack of wood outside its door. But these were incidental, almost unimportant.
[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from “Fire on the Mountain” by Anita Desai] - English literature is a vast and diverse field that has left an indelible mark on the world of letters. From the eloquent plays of William Shakespeare to the complex novels of Jane Austen and the profound poetry of William Wordsworth, English literature offers a window into the human experience. One of the luminaries of English literature is William Shakespeare, often hailed as the greatest playwright in the history of English language. His works, including Hamlet, Macbeth, and Romeo and Juliet, are celebrated for their exploration of human nature, love, ambition, and tragedy. His characters, such as the tormented Hamlet and the star-crossed lovers Romeo and Juliet, continue to captivate readers and audiences worldwide.
The 19th century ushered in a new era of literary giants. Jane Austen’s novels, such as Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility, provide incisive social commentary through the lens of wit and romance. Austen’s heroines, like Elizabeth Bennet and Elinor Dashwood, remain beloved literary figures known for their intelligence and resilience. The Romantic era brought forth poets like William Wordsworth and Samuel Taylor Coleridge, who celebrated * 8 UG the beauty of nature and the emotional intensity of the individual. Wordsworth’s ‘‘I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud’’ and Coleridge’s ‘‘The Rime of the Ancient Mariner’’ are testament to the power of the written words to evoke profound emotions and imagery. Moving towards 20th century, English literature continued to evolve. Virginia Woolf’s ground-breaking novel Mrs. Dalloway explored the inner thoughts and lives of its characters with a modernist narrative style. Dystopian visions, as seen in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four provided stark warnings about the dangers of totalitarianism and the erosion of individual freedom.
Today, English literature is a global phenomenon, transcending borders and languages. Indian authors like Arundhati Roy, with her novel The God of Small Things, have won prestigious international literary awards. The book not only explores intricate family dynamics but also delves into the broader socio-political landscape of India. In summary, English literature is a testament to the enduring power of storytelling and the written word. It encompasses an array of authors, themes, and styles that continue to captivate and inspire readers across the world. - On the evening of the 10th, General Dyer arrived at Amritsar, and the Deputy-Commissioner handed over the civil power to him. He issued a proclamation by word of mouth that no meetings should be held. Two days later, after there had been no sort of riot, nor murder, General Dyer heard that a meeting was to be held at the Jallianwala Bagh. He proceeded there with about fifty troops, half British, half Indian, and a certain number of Ghurkas, armed with their kukris. The Jallianwala Bagh is an open space, half a mile square, which has one entry wide enough for three persons. The troops got in and lined up on a mound of debris. The walls, seven feet high, and the surrounding houses enclosed the people. There were, too, three alleys through which the people might have been able to pass. Within thirty seconds of the troops getting in, General Dyer gave orders to fire, and the crowd of people, estimated at anything from 5,000 to 20,000, who were sitting on the ground peacefully listening to the mob oratory, were fired on. The result of the troops’ fire into the mass of people we do not know. But we do know that Dyer’s own estimate of the casualties resulting from ten minutes continual individual firing, was 400 to 500 killed and 1,500 wounded. The people were not able to escape. They were people who had not offered any violence and who had not been warned. These people were shot down. After ten minutes, the ammunition was exhausted and the troops marched off, and they left 1,500 wounded there. There were men lying there for two days, dying of thirst, eating the ground, bleeding to death and nobody to look after them. Those who lived nearby came and carried away some of the wounded from the heap of dead and dying, but the unfortunate country people died there miserably of their wounds. This is what is done in 1919 in British India…
Centuries hence you will find Indian children brought up to this spot, just as they visit now the Cawnpore Well, and you can imagine the feelings of these Indians for generations over this terrible business.
[Col. Wedgwood, MP, speaking in the British Parliament, 22 December 1919]
View More Questions