Judiciary Exam — Interview & Viva Preparation

What the Interview Panel Evaluates

High Court judges conducting the interview look for:

•Legal knowledge: Quick recall of sections, judgments, principles

•Communication: Clear, structured articulation in English and/or Hindi

•Temperament: Calmness, reasonableness, absence of bias

•Current awareness: Recent judgments, legislative changes, social issues

•Integrity signals: How you handle ethical dilemmas posed

50 Viva Questions with Answers

Constitutional Law:

Q1: What is the difference between judicial review and appeal?

A: Judicial review tests the constitutional validity of legislation or executive action. An appeal challenges the correctness of a court's decision on facts and law. Judicial review is a constitutional power of SC/HCs; appeal is a statutory right. In judicial review, court does not re-examine facts — only looks at whether power was exercised constitutionally.

Q2: Can the Supreme Court review its own judgment?

A: Yes, under Art 137 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has power to review any judgment or order made by it, subject to provisions of any law made by Parliament and rules made under Art 145. Review petition must be filed within 30 days of judgment, usually in chambers without oral hearing.

Q3: What is the doctrine of proportionality?

A: A state action must be proportionate to the goal sought to be achieved. If the restriction on a right is disproportionate to the legitimate aim, it is unconstitutional. Increasingly applied in Art 14, 19, 21 challenges. Example: K.S. Puttaswamy judgment applied proportionality test to privacy restrictions.

Criminal Law:

Q4: What is the McNaghten rule?

A: Test for legal insanity under Sec 22 BNS (old Sec 84 IPC). An accused is not criminally responsible if, at the time of the act, he suffered from such a defect of reason from disease of mind that he did not know the nature and quality of the act, or did not know what he was doing was wrong. Legal insanity ≠ medical insanity. Must be at the time of the act.

Q5: Define anticipatory bail and its conditions.

A: Anticipatory bail (Sec 482 BNSS / old Sec 438 CrPC) is bail in anticipation of arrest — applied for before arrest. Sessions Court or HC can grant it if the applicant shows: (i) reasonable apprehension of arrest for a non-bailable offence, (ii) the arrest would be unjust. Conditions imposed: must make self available for interrogation, not leave country without permission, not tamper with evidence.

Q6: What is plea bargaining?

A: Chapter XXIX BNSS (old Chapter XXI-A CrPC) allows plea bargaining in cases where the maximum punishment is 7 years or less (not heinous offences). Accused pleads guilty voluntarily, all parties (complainant, accused, prosecution) mutually agree on a satisfactory disposition. Court then passes judgment — sentence may be less than minimum prescribed.

Civil Law:

Q7: What is the difference between a decree and an order?

A: A decree (Sec 2(2) CPC) is the formal expression of adjudication determining the rights of the parties in a suit — it is conclusive. A decree can be a preliminary decree (to be made final) or a final decree. An order (Sec 2(14) CPC) is the formal expression of any decision of a civil court that is not a decree. Every decree is appealable as a matter of right (Sec 96 CPC); orders are only appealable if specifically enumerated in Order 43.

Q8: What is the distinction between natural justice and procedural fairness?

A: Natural justice has two pillars: (i) Audi alteram partem — hear the other side, (ii) Nemo judex in causa sua — no one should be a judge in their own cause. Procedural fairness is a broader concept encompassing statutory procedures + natural justice + legitimate expectations. Where statute excludes natural justice expressly, courts may still apply procedural fairness.

Q9: Explain ubi jus ibi remedium.

A: "Where there is a right, there is a remedy." Every legal right has a corresponding remedy. If a right is violated, the law will provide a means to enforce it. This maxim underpins the existence of courts and the concept of justiciable rights. Applied in Ashby v White (1703). In India, Art 32 and Art 226 give constitutional basis to this principle.

Procedure & Practice:

Q10: A witness refuses to answer a question claiming privilege. How will you rule?

A: Examine the basis of privilege claimed:

•Professional communication (Sec 126 BSA — advocate-client): Protected. Cannot compel disclosure.

•Official communication (Sec 123 BSA — state documents): Court inspects document. If disclosure would injure public interest, uphold privilege.

•Confidential communication between spouses (Sec 122 BSA): Protected during and after marriage.

•If no valid privilege basis: Witness must answer or face contempt.

Rule: "I examine the nature of privilege claimed. If it falls within Sec 122–126 BSA, I shall uphold the privilege. If not, I shall direct the witness to answer and, upon refusal, may hold them in civil contempt."

Quick Reference — Judiciary Exams

Key Points for Revision

•Review the overview section for core architecture and fundamentals

•Practice commands/configurations from the cheatsheet section

•Use interview Q&A for active recall before exams or interviews

•Cross-reference with related tools in the law academy

Practice Approach

1.Read the overview to understand what and why

2.Work through fundamentals for how

3.Attempt hands-on labs or configurations

4.Test yourself with interview questions

5.Keep cheatsheet accessible for quick reference during work

Further Learning

Connect this topic to the broader law ecosystem.

Each tool in this academy is designed to work with others —

understanding the integration points is what separates intermediate from senior practitioners.

Judiciary Exams (Civil Judge/HJS) — Practice Q&A