Which of the following is identified as Bentham's fundamental axiom underlying utilitarianism?

All social morals and government legislation should aim for producing the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.

Ethics must be empirical, quantifiable, and reproducible.

Utility must be used to reject religious authority.

The character of the actor is the most important aspect of an ethical act.

Under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, oral evidence as to the contents of documents:

Generally cannot be admitted except when admissible as secondary evidence under Section 65, Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Generally can be admitted except when barred by the rule against hearsay

Generally can be admitted except when considered unreliable due to impeachment of the witness

In Pakala Narayanaswami v. King Emperor (1939), the Privy Council held that a statement is a confession if:

Admitted the commission of the offence in the terms of the offence

Admitted the commission of the ingredients for the commission of the offence.

In Indian evidence law, the proof of the contents of documents must necessarily follow a sequence of procedure; this sequence can be illustrated as:

Marking the document, authenticating the document, receiving the document as evidence

Admitting the document, marking the document, authenticating the document

Authenticating the document, receiving evidence of its contents, marking the document

Proving the contents of the document, authenticating the document, marking the document

The Supreme Court in Anvar v. Basheer, (2014) 10 SCC 473, overruled State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu (2005) 11 SCC 600. Which holding was overruled?

That irrespective of compliance with Section 65B, contents of electronic documents could be proved through Sections 62–65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

That in cases of criminal conspiracy, the method of proof of the conspiracy is controlled by Section 10, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and not Section 65B.

That electronic documents, being a special class of general documents, had to be proved through expert opinion under Section 45, Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

That the document sought to be proved must first be marked and then admitted into evidence for its contents, and that this sequence may not be reversed.

Law of Evidence — CLAT Previous Year Questions

129 solved PYQs · 2016–2026 · Legal Reasoning

Solved PYQs: 129
Years covered: 2016–2026
Avg / year: ~12
Subject: Legal Reasoning

How many CLAT questions come from Law of Evidence?

Law of Evidence has contributed 129 questions to Common Law Admission Test papers between 2016 and 2026 — an average of about 12 questions a year. That count is measured from EByAi’s bank of 19,890 CLAT questions, not estimated from a syllabus. Every one of the 129 questions carries a written, step-by-step solution, and each is tagged to Law of Evidence within Legal Reasoning, so you can drill this chapter across every year at once instead of hunting through paper PDFs. Practising a chapter’s full PYQ history is the fastest way to learn the patterns examiners reuse.

Sample Law of Evidence questions from real CLAT papers

These are 5 real questions from the bank — exactly as asked, with the answer one tap away. All 129 Law of Evidence questions (with full written solutions) are available in practice.

Question 1 · CLAT 2026
Which of the following is identified as Bentham's fundamental axiom underlying utilitarianism?
1. (A) $Ethics must be empirical, quantifiable, and reproducible.$
2. (B) $Utility must be used to reject religious authority.$
3. (C) $All social morals and government legislation should aim for producing the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.$
4. (D) $The character of the actor is the most important aspect of an ethical act.$
Show answerAnswer
$Answer: (C) All social morals and government legislation should aim for producing the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.$
Question 2 · CLAT 2023
Under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, oral evidence as to the contents of documents:
1. (A) $Cannot be admitted$
2. (B) $Generally cannot be admitted except when admissible as secondary evidence under Section 65, Indian Evidence Act, 1872$
3. (C) $Generally can be admitted except when barred by the rule against hearsay$
4. (D) $Generally can be admitted except when considered unreliable due to impeachment of the witness$
Show answerAnswer
$Answer: (B) Generally cannot be admitted except when admissible as secondary evidence under Section 65, Indian Evidence Act, 1872$
Question 3 · CLAT 2023
In Pakala Narayanaswami v. King Emperor (1939), the Privy Council held that a statement is a confession if:
1. (A) $Admitted the commission of the offence in the terms of the offence$
2. (B) $Admitted the commission of the ingredients for the commission of the offence.$
3. (C) $Either (A) or (B)$
4. (D) $Both (A) and (B)$
Show answerAnswer
$Answer: (C) Either (A) or (B)$
Question 4 · CLAT 2023
In Indian evidence law, the proof of the contents of documents must necessarily follow a sequence of procedure; this sequence can be illustrated as:
1. (A) $Admitting the document, marking the document, authenticating the document$
2. (B) $Authenticating the document, receiving evidence of its contents, marking the document$
3. (C) $Proving the contents of the document, authenticating the document, marking the document$
4. (D) $Marking the document, authenticating the document, receiving the document as evidence$
Show answerAnswer
$Answer: (D) Marking the document, authenticating the document, receiving the document as evidence$
Question 5 · CLAT 2023
The Supreme Court in Anvar v. Basheer, (2014) 10 SCC 473, overruled State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu (2005) 11 SCC 600. Which holding was overruled?
1. (A) $That in cases of criminal conspiracy, the method of proof of the conspiracy is controlled by Section 10, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and not Section 65B.$
2. (B) $That irrespective of compliance with Section 65B, contents of electronic documents could be proved through Sections 62-65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.$
3. (C) $That electronic documents, being a special class of general documents, had to be proved through expert opinion under Section 45, Indian Evidence Act, 1872.$
4. (D) $That the document sought to be proved must first be marked and then admitted into evidence for its contents, and that this sequence may not be reversed.$
Show answerAnswer
$Answer: (B) That irrespective of compliance with Section 65B, contents of electronic documents could be proved through Sections 62-65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.$

Law of Evidence questions by year

Year	Questions	Share of chapter questions
2026	4
2025	13
2024	11
2023	15
2022	11
2021	11
2020	14
2019	7
2018	22
2017	12
2016	9

Practise these 129 questions with solutions

Free to start — 25 past-year questions a day with full written solutions, no card needed.

Start Law of Evidence practice free

FAQs

How many CLAT questions have been asked from Law of Evidence?

EByAi's bank holds 129 real CLAT questions from Law of Evidence, asked between 2016 and 2026 — about 12 per year on average. Every count is measured from actual papers, not estimated.

Is Law of Evidence important for CLAT?

129 questions over 11 papers make Law of Evidence a moderate-weightage chapter in CLAT Legal Reasoning. The year-wise table above shows exactly how often it appears.

Can I solve Law of Evidence PYQs online for free?

Yes. EByAi lets you solve CLAT past-year questions in the browser with written solutions — free daily practice, no card needed.

More CLAT Legal Reasoning chapters

All CLAT Legal Reasoning chapters →CLAT overview →