Question:

Given below is a pair of events I and II. You have to decide their nature of relationship. Assume that the given information is correct and final.

I. More and more students are opting for legal education
II. Bar Council of India has introduced Bar Examination

Show Hint

The Bar Council regulates entry into practice. Ask whether a regulator's new screening test is more likely to be a response to rising numbers or the reason for them.
Updated On: Jul 17, 2026
  • I is the main cause and II is the main effect
  • I is effect but II is not the main cause
  • II is the main cause and I is the main effect
  • II is an effect but I is not the main cause
Show Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is A

Solution and Explanation

Step 1: Understanding the Question:
Event I is a rise in the number of students choosing legal education. Event II is the Bar Council of India bringing in the Bar Examination. We must find which one caused the other.

Step 2: Key Approach:
Check both directions for a working mechanism, and also check whether the direction makes sense in terms of what each body wants.

Step 3: Detailed Explanation:
The Bar Council of India is the regulator of the legal profession. Its job is to keep the standard of practising advocates acceptable.
Test direction I to II. If more and more students take up law, the number of law graduates entering the profession every year grows sharply. With a much larger intake, the regulator worries about quality, since not every graduate from every college will be fit to appear in court. A screening test at the entry point is the natural response. That is exactly what the Bar Examination is, a filter placed between the law degree and the licence to practise. So the surge in law students is the reason the Bar Council put the examination in place. I causes II.
Test direction II to I. Would introducing a Bar Examination make more students choose law? An extra hurdle after the degree adds cost and risk. If anything it would discourage some students rather than attract them. So this direction does not work.
Only the first direction holds. I is the main cause and II is the main effect, which is option (A).

Step 4: Why the other options fail:
(B) says I is an effect. But a change in what students choose to study is a decision students make, not a consequence of the Bar Exam.
(C) makes the Bar Examination the cause of the rush into law, which reverses the sensible order and ignores that a new exam is a barrier, not an attraction.
(D) says I is not the main cause of II, which cuts the one link that actually explains why the regulator acted.

Step 5: Final Answer:
The answer is option (A): I is the main cause and II is the main effect.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0

Top CLAT Logical Reasoning Questions

View More Questions

Top CLAT Statements and Inferences Questions

View More Questions

Top CLAT Questions

View More Questions