question_answer

Direction: Question numbers 1-35 consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to s 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. In other words, in wiring these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles those are given herein below for every question. Further, you must not assume any facts other than those stated in the question. The objective of this section is to test your interest towards study of law, research aptitude and problem solving ability, even if the 'most reasonable conclusion' arrived at may be absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law. Therefore, to were a question, principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option.

Principle: When a person falsifies something with the intent to deceive another person or entity is forgery and is a criminal act. Changing or adding the signature on a document, deleting it, using    I or possessing the false writing is also considered forgery. In the case of writing/painting to fall under the definition, the material included must have been fabricated or altered significantly in order to represent something it is actually not.

Facts: David made a living traveling from city to city; selling paintings that he claimed were done by great artists. Since the artists' signatures were in place, many people fell for them and purchased the paintings. One of these artists saw three of his alleged paintings in a City gallery containing his name. He knew these were not his works and he complained to the police. Police traced David and initiated legal proceedings. Is David guilty of any offence?

A) David is guilty of forgery as the addition of the signature was with an intention to make people believe that those were the paintings of the great artists.

B) There is no point in taking legal action against David as the signature has not done any alteration to the art work.

C) Those who buy the art pieces from David ought to have been careful in checking it and ensuring that they were originals before purchasing it.

D) David is not guilty of any offence as he was selling the art pieces for his living.