NLSAT Sample Questions with Detailed Solutions
Share this article:
Preparing for the National Law School Admission Test (NLSAT) requires a very different approach compared to conventional law entrance exams. Unlike purely memory-based tests, NLSAT evaluates reading depth, reasoning ability, argumentative clarity, and intellectual honesty. This is precisely why practising with NLSAT sample questions and high-quality NLSAT practice questions becomes the cornerstone of serious preparation.
Check Out NLSAT Online Coaching and Mentorship
This blog brings together authentic NLSAT sample questions, complete with examiner-style solutions and evaluation logic, to help aspirants understand what NLSAT really tests. Whether you are targeting NLSIU Bengaluru’s 3-year LLB programme or aiming to improve your analytical writing, these NLSAT practice questions will show you how to think like an NLSAT evaluator.
Why NLSAT Sample Questions Matter More Than Any Other Resource
Unlike exams that reward formulaic preparation, NLSAT rewards:
Nuanced reading
Structured reasoning
Balanced argumentation
Intellectual independence
Working through NLSAT sample questions allows aspirants to internalise:
The tone of questions
The depth expected in answers
The evaluation logic applied by examiners
High scorers consistently report that repeated exposure to NLSAT practice questions is what separates average attempts from top-rank responses.
Check Out NLSAT Online Coaching and Mentorship
Understanding the Structure of NLSAT Through Sample Questions
Before diving into the questions, it is important to understand how NLSAT sample questions are structured across two distinct parts:
The NLSAT practice questions below reflect this exact structure.
NLSAT 2026 Strategy: Reading, Reasoning & Current Affairs
NLSAT Part A Sample Questions
Passage:
Mob rule: On migrants, rising hate crimes in India
The bogey of infiltration is resulting in hate crimes across India
In the closing weeks of 2025, a series of violent incidents across India exposed a disturbing pattern of mob violence directed at migrants who were labelled foreigners — Bangladeshis and Chinese — by their attackers. In these cases, the three victims were Indian citizens from various parts of the country. Suspicion based on language, region, appearance or presumed nationality is escalating into mob violence in different regions. This is extremely worrying and the police must act strictly. The political leadership in States and the Centre must make it clear that such violence is unacceptable. In Palakkad district, Kerala, Ram Narayan Baghel, a 31-year-old migrant worker from Chhattisgarh was lynched by a mob on December 17. Baghel was accused of theft and repeatedly questioned about his identity, with his attackers allegedly asking him whether he was “Bangladeshi” before beating him to death. Kerala is heavily dependent on migrant labour, and prides itself on its high levels of education and law and order. The lynching is a blot on its reputation. On December 24, in Sambalpur in Odisha, a young migrant worker from West Bengal was beaten to death by a mob that accused him of being a “Bangladeshi”. Juel Sheikh, a daily wage labourer, was confronted at a tea stall by unidentified persons who demanded his identity documents and accused him of being an illegal Bangladeshi immigrant. Two days later, in another incident from Odisha, a Bengali-speaking street vendor from West Bengal was assaulted. In Tamil Nadu, a man from Odisha was attacked while travelling on a train, in Tiruvallur district, by juveniles armed with machetes and sickles. The assault was filmed and circulated on social media. In Dehradun, on December 28, Anjel Chakma, a 22-year-old student from Tripura, was stabbed by a group that had allegedly hurled racial slurs at him and his brother. He died in hospital later. People from the northeastern States are often treated as perpetual outsiders in other parts of India; Chakma was called “Chinese” by his attackers. These are not isolated incidents: they occur amid numerous other cases of mob intimidation, sometimes targeting worshippers of minority communities, at other times, even young students celebrating a friend’s birthday. The police in the States have responded to these horrible crimes by making some arrests, but that is not sufficient. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has turned its incendiary campaign against “illegal infiltration” from Bangladesh as a central plank in the forthcoming Assembly elections in Assam and West Bengal. It is no coincidence that mobs across the country feel emboldened to raise this bogey at random against helpless people. The BJP should realise the dangers of its campaign and restrain itself.
Questions (1–15)
1. Which of the following best captures the central concern of the editorial?
(a) The failure of States to regulate migrant labour effectively
(b) The rise of organised crime networks targeting migrants
(c) The escalation of mob violence against migrants fuelled by political rhetoric
(d) The inadequacy of social media regulation in preventing hate crimes
2. According to the passage, migrants are increasingly targeted primarily because of:
(a) Their alleged involvement in theft and petty crime
(b) Their inability to produce identity documents
(c) Suspicions based on language, appearance, or presumed nationality
(d) Their refusal to integrate into local cultures
3. The author describes the lynching incidents in Kerala as particularly disturbing because:
(a) They occurred in economically backward regions
(b) The victims were undocumented foreign nationals
(c) They contradict the States’ self-image of education and lawfulness
(d) They were carried out by organised extremist groups
4. Which of the following most strongly supports the author’s claim that these incidents are not isolated?
(a) The diversity of States in which such incidents have occurred
(b) The use of social media to circulate videos of violence
(c) The lack of immediate police response in many cases
(d) The economic dependence of States on migrant labour
5. The author’s reference to people from the northeastern States being treated as “perpetual outsiders” is meant to highlight:
(a) Long-standing racial and ethnic prejudices within India
(b) The failure of migration laws to protect internal migrants
(c) Cultural differences between northeastern and mainland India
(d) The economic marginalisation of northeastern States
6. Which of the following assumptions underlies the author’s criticism of the BJP’s campaign against “illegal infiltration”?
(a) Voters are incapable of distinguishing rhetoric from reality
(b) Political rhetoric can legitimise or embolden mob violence
(c) Illegal immigration from Bangladesh is negligible
(d) Law enforcement agencies are controlled by political parties
7. Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the author’s argument?
(a) Independent data shows a sharp decline in mob violence against migrants
(b) The accused in the cited incidents were later acquitted by courts
(c) The BJP publicly condemned each incident immediately after it occurred
(d) Migrant labourers increasingly prefer urban employment over rural work
8. The author’s call for the police to “act strictly” most plausibly implies:
(a) Enacting new criminal laws specifically targeting mob violence
(b) Swift investigation, arrests, and deterrent punishment under existing law
(c) Greater surveillance of migrant communities
(d) Deployment of central armed forces in affected regions
9. In the past year, India has witnessed renewed debate around mob violence and hate crimes in the context of elections. Which of the following Indian States had Assembly elections scheduled or held recently, making political rhetoric around migration a key issue?
(a) Himachal Pradesh
(b) Assam
(c) Goa
(d) Telangana
10. The editorial suggests that the circulation of the train assault video on social media primarily serves to:
(a) Help police identify the perpetrators
(b) Act as documentary evidence for courts
(c) Normalise or sensationalise violence
(d) Educate the public about migrant vulnerabilities
11. Which of the following best explains why arrests alone are considered “not sufficient” by the author?
(a) Arrests often lead to prolonged trials
(b) Mob violence is a symptom of deeper political and social failures
(c) Arrested individuals are usually juveniles
(d) Arrests attract adverse international attention
12. If the State governments were to follow the author’s recommendations fully, which of the following actions would be most consistent with the passage?
(a) Increasing border fencing and deportation drives
(b) Issuing public statements condemning vigilantism and hate crimes
(c) Restricting migrant movement during election periods
(d) Creating special identity cards for migrant workers
13. Which of the following logical inferences can be most reasonably drawn from the passage?
(a) Mob violence is more common in States facing elections
(b) Migrants are disproportionately affected by identity-based suspicion
(c) Economic downturns directly cause hate crimes
(d) Social media is the primary cause of communal violence
14. The phrase “raising this bogey at random” most nearly means:
(a) Making legally substantiated accusations
(b) Repeatedly highlighting a real administrative failure
(c) Using a fear-inducing claim without factual basis
(d) Investigating cases of illegal immigration systematically
15. Which of the following developments in the last year has intensified public discussion on internal migration in India?
(a) Release of the Economic Survey highlighting migrant labour contribution
(b) Introduction of a nationwide migrant identity card
(c) Suspension of interstate train services
(d) Abolition of labour contractors across States
Crack NLSAT Logical & Analytical Reasoning With Ease
Answer Key
NLSAT Time Management Strategies: Section-Wise Time Allocation
How to Learn from These NLSAT Part A Sample Questions
These NLSAT sample questions reveal critical insights:
Questions are inference-heavy, not fact-based
Options are closely worded, demanding precision
Current affairs are tested through editorial reasoning, not trivia
To master Part A, aspirants should:
Practise daily with NLSAT practice questions
Analyse why wrong options are wrong
Focus on tone, intent, and structure of arguments
NLSAT 2026 Mock Test Analysis: How to Improve Scores
NLSAT Part B Legal Reasoning Sample Question (Reference Content – Unchanged)
Sandeep was on holiday in a remote island when the Government imposed a ban on inter-state travel and restrictions on public movement, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Consequently, Sandeep and a number of other guests were forced to remain at The Nice Island Hotel, where they had booked rooms for their holiday. The hotel management put up signs throughout the hotel, stating that wearing masks was compulsory for all guests and staff whenever they were outside their rooms. Some guests however, refused to wear masks. The hotel management shut down various amenities in the interests of the guests’ safety, and announce that guests must stay in their rooms from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. The hotel served meals in a communal dining area, since many hotel staff had contracted COVID-19, and there were insufficient staff to deliver meals to guests’ rooms. Sandeep tested negative for COVID-19 on the day the Government’s ban on travel went into effect, but tested positive two weeks thereafter, when he, along with other guests, were still confined to the hotel. Sandeep wants compensation from the hotel management, claiming that he contracted the illness because the hotel management did not enforce the rule about wearing masks strictly, as a result of which guests who moved about without masks, and did have the illness, infected Sandeep. The hotel management defend themselves by saying that Sandeep should ask for compensation from the other guests, since he most likely contracted the illness as a result of their moving around without masks. Will Sandeep succeed? (6 marks)
Answer Key
A. Key Facts to be Identified
Government-imposed travel ban and movement restrictions (force majeure context).
Guests involuntarily confined at the hotel.
Hotel imposed mask mandate for guests and staff.
Non-enforcement of mask rule by hotel management.
Communal dining despite known COVID spread. Sandeep tested negative initially, positive after two weeks.
Causal allegation: infection due to unmasked guests.
Defence: blame lies on other guests, not the hotel.
B. Relevant Principles
Duty of Care owed by occupiers / service providers to guests.
Standard of Reasonable Care in extraordinary circumstances (pandemic).
Causation (factual and proximate cause).
Third-party liability.
Volenti non fit injuria (voluntary assumption of risk) – debated.
Force majeure does not eliminate duty, only modifies expectations.
Principles analogous to negligence and consumer protection.
C. Argument for Sandeep (Possible Conclusion: He Succeeds)
The hotel owed a heightened duty of care due to forced confinement.
Merely putting up signs is insufficient enforcement in a pandemic.
Communal dining increased foreseeable risk.
Hotel exercised control over premises and guest movement → occupier liability.
Infection was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of lax enforcement.
Liability cannot be shifted to individual guests where the hotel had regulatory control.
D. Argument for Hotel (Alternative Conclusion: He Fails)
Hotel took reasonable steps under constrained circumstances.
Government restrictions and staff shortages limited enforcement ability.
Actual infection source is uncertain (difficulty proving causation).
Other guests’ conduct constitutes new intervening actions.
Sandeep knowingly remained in a shared-risk environment.
Pandemic context reduces expectations of absolute safety.
How to Crack NLSAT in First Attempt – Strategy for Working & Regular Students
What This Reveals About NLSAT Part B Practice Questions
This is where NLSAT practice questions differ radically from other exams:
There is no single “correct” answer
Evaluation focuses on:
Issue identification
Logical structure
Persuasiveness
Balance
High-quality responses to NLSAT sample questions:
Clearly separate facts from norms
Address counter-arguments honestly
Reach defensible conclusions
NLSAT Part B Essay Writing Sample Questions
Has India done enough to combat climate change? What is the most important step that India should take in the next five years? (15 marks)
OR
Should Artificial Intelligence-enabled machines and systems make decisions that affect human lives? (15 marks)
OR
Should the state permit large-scale protests even when they affect the rights of non protestors? (15 marks)
Answer Keys
1. Has India done enough to combat climate change? What should it do next?
A. Breadth of Knowledge
India’s NDCs, Paris Agreement commitments.
Renewable energy targets (solar, wind).
Climate vulnerability (heatwaves, floods).
Development–climate trade-offs.
Global equity and historical emissions debate.
B. Engagement with Multiple Perspectives
India’s low per capita emissions vs high absolute emissions.
Developmental imperatives vs environmental responsibility.
Critique of implementation gaps and coal dependence.
C. Core Argument
Possible key steps proposed:
Rapid coal transition with just transition safeguards.
Climate-resilient urban planning.
Strengthening climate finance and adaptation.
Institutional accountability for climate policy.
Clear reasoning linking diagnosis → prescription → impact.
D. Conclusion
Balanced, realistic, forward-looking judgment.
2. Should AI systems take decisions affecting human lives?
A. Breadth of Knowledge
Use of AI in policing (predictive policing), healthcare (diagnostics), hiring, credit scoring, and warfare (autonomous weapons).
Algorithmic bias arising from skewed data sets.
Opacity of AI systems (“black box” decision-making).
Accountability gaps when decisions are automated.
B. Engagement with Multiple Perspectives
Efficiency, speed, and accuracy of AI vs human error and bias.
Automation benefits vs erosion of human moral agency.
Technological inevitability vs ethical restraint.
Private innovation vs public accountability.
Risk of exclusion and discrimination of AI systems.
C. Core Argument
A well-reasoned argument may propose:
Conditional acceptance of AI decision-making, not blanket approval or rejection.
Clear distinction between:
Advisory AI systems (decision-support tools)
Autonomous AI systems (final decision-makers).
Mandatory human-in-the-loop or human-on-the-loop safeguards for life-altering decisions.
Legal frameworks assigning responsibility to human institutions, not machines.
Emphasis on explainability, auditability, and appeal mechanisms.
Clear reasoning should link:
Problem (automation risks) → Principle (human dignity & accountability) → Prescription (regulated, supervised AI use).
D. Conclusion
Reflects a cautious, principled, future-oriented stance.
3. Should the state permit large-scale protests even when they affect the rights of non-protestors?
A. Breadth of Knowledge
Constitutional protections of free speech and assembly.
Democratic role of protests in social and political reform.
Impact of protests on daily life, economy, and public order.
Judicial doctrines such as proportionality and reasonable restrictions.
Examples of large-scale protests in India and globally.
International human rights standards on peaceful assembly.
B. Engagement with Multiple Perspectives
Protest as a democratic necessity vs inconvenience to non-protestors.
Minority voices vs majoritarian disruption.
Public order concerns vs suppression of dissent.
State neutrality vs coercive regulation.
Short-term disruption vs long-term democratic accountability.
C. Core Argument
A persuasive core argument may propose:
Protests should be permitted as a rule, not as an exception.
Regulation should follow time–place–manner restrictions rather than content-based bans.
State’s role as a neutral facilitator, not an adversarial suppressor.
Use of negotiated spaces, decentralised protest zones, and dialogue mechanisms.
Proportional response to disruption, avoiding blanket prohibitions.
Logical flow:
Rights conflict → Democratic balancing → Proportionate regulation.
D. Conclusion
Ends with a principled, rights-respecting, and pragmatic stance.
How Essays Are Evaluated in NLSAT
From these NLSAT sample questions, it is clear that essays are assessed on:
Practising essay-based NLSAT practice questions weekly is non-negotiable for top ranks.
Why Prioritise NLSAT Sample Questions & Previous Year Papers?
As highlighted in the reference content (reproduced unchanged), NLSAT sample questions and NLSAT practice questions help aspirants:
Understand the real exam pattern
Identify recurring themes
Benchmark preparation
Improve speed and accuracy
Reduce exam anxiety
Top performers do not merely read answers—they reverse-engineer examiner expectations.
Sectional Warm-Ups: 10-Minute Daily Drills for NLSAT
How to Use NLSAT Sample Questions Strategically
1. Alternate Between Part A and Part B
Balanced exposure to objective and subjective NLSAT practice questions prevents skewed preparation.
2. Maintain an Error Log
Track:
Misread questions
Weak arguments
Time mismanagement
3. Simulate Exam Conditions
Timed practice with NLSAT sample questions builds stamina and confidence.
4. Peer & Mentor Review
Discussing Part B answers improves clarity and exposes blind spots.
FAQs: NLSAT Sample Questions
1. What are NLSAT sample questions and why are they important?
NLSAT sample questions are model questions designed to mirror the structure, difficulty, and reasoning depth of the actual NLSAT exam. They are important because NLSAT does not reward rote learning; instead, it evaluates comprehension, logical inference, legal reasoning, and argumentative clarity. Practising authentic NLSAT practice questions helps aspirants understand examiner expectations and avoid mechanical answering.
2. How are NLSAT sample questions different from other law entrance questions?
Unlike CLAT-style or CUET-style questions, NLSAT sample questions are inference-heavy, close-text based, and reasoning-driven. Even objective questions require deep engagement with passages. NLSAT practice questions also test how well candidates can eliminate subtly incorrect options rather than recall facts.
3. What makes NLSAT Part B legal reasoning sample questions unique?
NLSAT Part B sample questions do not have a single correct answer. Instead, candidates are evaluated on identification of legally relevant facts, application of appropriate legal principles, logical consistency, and the ability to argue alternative conclusions. High-quality NLSAT practice questions for Part B reward reasoning quality, not doctrinal recall.
4. How are essay-based NLSAT sample questions evaluated?
Essay-based NLSAT sample questions are evaluated on breadth of current affairs and legal awareness, engagement with competing viewpoints, logical flow of arguments, and originality of conclusions. Regular essay-focused NLSAT practice questions help aspirants internalise this evaluation framework.
5. Are NLSAT sample questions enough for preparation, or are previous year papers necessary?
While NLSAT sample questions are essential for skill-building and exposure to new formats, they should be used alongside previous year papers. Together, they form the most effective set of NLSAT practice questions for understanding both historical patterns and evolving examiner focus.
Final Takeaway: Mastery Comes from Practice, Not Memorisation
NLSAT is not an exam you can “crack” by shortcuts. It rewards those who think clearly, write honestly, and reason rigorously. Regular exposure to NLSAT sample questions and reflective engagement with NLSAT practice questions is the single most reliable path to success.
If you consistently practise, analyse deeply, and refine your reasoning using authentic NLSAT sample questions, you are already thinking like an NLSAT topper.
Get In Touch
Have questions? We'd love to hear from you. Send us a message and we'll respond as soon as possible.
