Revision summary
Sanjeev made truth an absolute and identified a hideout to an armed mob. The mob was not a court; the “thief” label was untested. Foreseeable beating-to-death made pointing a causal share in homicide. Silence, misdirection, or police was the ethical path; a life-saving lie was justified. Idealism without ranking life is not virtue; it is brittle dogma.
Model answer
Introduction
Sanjeev treated truth as a single absolute and handed a hunted person to a stick-and-stone crowd. The comment is that honesty without regard to life became cooperation with a killing.
Body
The clash of values
- Truth-telling is a high virtue; it is not the only virtue when a mob is already armed.
- The competing duties are ahimsa, rescue, and non-complicity in murder.
- Kantian “never lie” meets a consequence that was obvious: pointing was a death sentence.
- Virtue ethics would rank courage and compassion beside truth; a virtue that produces a corpse has failed practical wisdom (phronesis).
What Sanjeev did wrong
- He answered the mob as if it were a court. A lynch gathering has no right to a witness statement.
- He did not verify that the runner was a “thief”; the mob’s label is not a fact.
- He offered no delay, misdirection, or call to lawful authority before the beating.
- After pointing, he became a causal link in a foreseeable homicide, not a neutral reporter.
What he should have done
- Refuse the question, stay silent, or send the crowd the wrong way long enough for the person to live.
- Call police or a magistrate; truth belongs in a recorded statement, not in a street hunt.
- If possible, stand between the person and the crowd or hide him; that is truth to the Constitution, not to the roar.
- A lie that prevents murder is ethically defensible here; a truth that enables murder is not saintly.
Law and public ethics
- Lynching is crime; assisting it by identification can attract liability in spirit even if a court later parses sections.
- The officer-citizen parallel: a civil servant who “tells the truth” to a communal crowd about a hideout fails the same test.
On idealism
- Idealism that cannot rank life above a maxim is brittle. Truth remains great; it is not a weapon to be handed to stones.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD M[Armed mob] --> Q[Where is he] Q --> T[Sanjeev points] T --> D[Death] Q --> A[Silence delay police] A --> L[Life]
Conclusion
Sanjeev’s conduct was sincere and ethically failed. He owed the hunted person silence, delay, or a lie, and he owed the mob nothing but a call to lawful process. Truth never required him to point a killing.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Must one always lie to a mob?
One must not help a killing. Silence or delay may suffice. A communal lie that sends the mob to another innocent is not allowed.
-
If the runner was truly a thief?
Theft is for police and trial. It never authorises a public beating to death.
Same topic · past papers
UPPSC has asked this before
These previous-year questions sit on the same topic. Open one to practise the earlier ask.
More from this paper
Q1 · UPSC Mains 2022 · UPGS4 · 8 marks · Solution
Differentiate between democratic attitude and bureaucratic attitude of public servants.
Attitude
Democratic attitude treats the citizen as the source of authority and shows as courtesy, speaking orders, and inspectable criteria. Bureaucratic attitude is Weber’s hierarchy, rules, and impersonality; its virtue is fairness, its vice is delay-as-power. Merton’s trained incapacity is when the file becomes the purpose. The Second ARC asked for citizen-centric skill inside a rule-bound office. Public service ethics keeps impersonality against favour and drops contempt of the counter.
Q2 · UPSC Mains 2022 · UPGS4 · 8 marks · Solution
Explain the role of persuasion in relation to public protest with proper argument.
Attitude
Protest is often an Article 19 voice; persuasion is public reason before coercion. Ethos, pathos, logos and Cialdini’s tools explain how a trusted, factual, felt message works. Naming the grievance and offering an auditable next step convert heat into a file. Gandhi’s satyagraha is persuasion plus discipline, not vandalism. Force is last when life or another’s right is hit; empty persuasion is deceit.
Q3 · UPSC Mains 2022 · UPGS4 · 8 marks · Solution
Define impartiality and discuss the role of impartiality in solving problems of weaker section.
Civil Service aptitude and values
Impartiality decides by statute, evidence and need, not by caste, party, gift or fear. Nolan, Kant and Rawls give the same test: a noting that survives a hidden name. For the weaker section it applies Articles 14–17 and 46 instead of selling the free entitlement. Speaking orders, social audit and protection of the honest officer are the method. Ambedkar and field officers like Sankaran show impartiality as social democracy in the file.