This is the Vocab24 daily quiz of 30 May 2025, the same 30 questions the app served that day, on the day's vocabulary and editorial. One mark for a right answer, minus 0.25 for a wrong one; the explanation opens as soon as you tap.
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Reciprocal
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Truce
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Fragile
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Apparently
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Harnessing
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Curated
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Seemed
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Deceptive
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
The practice of exchanging things, actions, or services for mutual benefit, often based on the principle of fairness and balance.
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
To control and make use of (natural resources or energy), especially to produce power or to utilize for a specific purpose.
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
Give the impression of being something or having a particular quality.
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
Not being what it purports to be
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
If you pass this difficult examination, it will be a feather in your cap.
Explanation: feather in your cap: an achievement to be proud of.
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
You cannot throw dust into my eyes.
Explanation: throw dust into my eyes: To mislead or deceive someone by presenting or introducing distracting or obfuscating information.
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
Our school is within a stone's throw of the railway station.
Explanation: within a stone's throw: very close.
Out of given alternatives select the word which is correctly spelt.
Choose the Correct Spelling.
Out of given alternatives select the word which is correctly spelt.
Choose the Correct Spelling.
Out of given alternatives select the word which is correctly spelt.
Choose the Correct Spelling.
Out of given alternatives select the word which is correctly spelt.
Choose the Correct Spelling.
Which of phrases given below each sentence should replace the phrase printed in bold type to make the grammatically correct? If the sentence is correct as it is, mark 'd' as the answer.
Historian agree that (a)/ at the outbreak of the war, neither Lincoln nor most members of the Republican Party (b)/ was primarily concerned with the abolition of slavery (c)/ No error (d)
Explanation: were primarily
Which of phrases given below each sentence should replace the phrase printed in bold type to make the grammatically correct? If the sentence is correct as it is, mark 'd' as the answer.
Hari among the very few individuals (a)/ who critics regard as genuinely significant in both (b)/ the history of art and history of literature. (c)/ No error (d)
Explanation: whom
Which of phrases given below each sentence should replace the phrase printed in bold type to make the grammatically correct? If the sentence is correct as it is, mark 'd' as the answer.
Having broken with Freud, (a)/ Jung's later writings never the less bore signs of the continued influence (b)/ of Fredian doctraine and theories. (c)/ No error (d)
Explanation: Although Jung had broken with Freud
Which of phrases given below each sentence should replace the phrase printed in bold type to make the grammatically correct? If the sentence is correct as it is, mark 'd' as the answer.
The person who conducts sales at which goods are sold to the persons making the highest bid or offer is called ____
Explanation: None of the above
Which of phrases given below each sentence should replace the phrase printed in bold type to make the grammatically correct? If the sentence is correct as it is, mark 'd' as the answer.
If ____ I would not lose temper.
Explanation: If I were you is the correct usage because it follows the rule of the subjunctive mood. <br> The subjunctive mood is used when talking about hypothetical or imaginary situations, and 'If I were' is a standard phrase for expressing unreal or contrary-to-fact conditions. <br> 'If I were you' means imagining oneself in the other person's position. <br> The other options, such as 'I was you' and 'I am you', do not convey the hypothetical meaning, and 'I am not you' is incorrect in this context.
Which of phrases given below each sentence should replace the phrase printed in bold type to make the grammatically correct? If the sentence is correct as it is, mark 'd' as the answer.
Imam Husian died ____ a noble cause.
Explanation: die of (disease): He died of cholera. <br> die from (effect ): He died from snake bite/ over eating. <br> die for (shake / cause): He died for his country . <br> die by ( accident): He died by an accident. <br> die in ( place / month / year): He died in 1950./ He died in London. / He died in a hospital in Dhaka. <br> die in (accident ): He died in a train accident. <br> die on ( name of day /spot death): He died on the spot./ He died on Monday. <br> die at( time): He died at 9-30 a m. <br> die between ( time): He died between 9 a m to 9-30 a m. <br> die within (time ): He died within five minutes. <br> Imam Husian died for a noble cause.
Directions: Read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside it. <br><br> Paragraph 1: While there is general acceptance that the Indian judicial system suffers from case delay and the use of antiquated methods, the discourse on judicial reform remains focussed on areas such as appointments and vacancies. It is time that organisational barriers and court processes that also contribute to case delay are studied. We focus on two areas that greatly affect court efficiency: case listing practices and court infrastructure. <br><br> Paragraph 2: The need to scientifically determine how many cases should be listed per day cannot be stressed enough. It is not uncommon to see over 100 matters listed before a judge in a day. When a judge is pressed for time, not only does the quality of adjudication suffer but it also means that several cases will inevitably go unheard. Matters listed towards the end (usually cases near the final stage of hearing) tend to be left over at disproportionate rates and often end up getting stuck in the system. <br><br> Paragraph 3: The second issue is infrastructure: from inadequate support staff for judges to the dearth of basic courtroom facilities. Without research and secretarial support, judges are unable to perform their functions in a timely manner. For instance, in a private interview, a judge said that even though he managed to hear close to 70 cases in a day, it took two days for the stenographers to finish typing the orders. A 2016 report published by the Supreme Court showed that existing infrastructure could accommodate only 15,540 judicial officers against the all-India sanctioned strength of 20,558. The lack of infrastructure also raises serious concerns about access to justice. A recent Vidhi study on district courts in the National Capital Region found that even basic needs such as drinking water, usable washrooms, seating and canteen facilities are often not available in court complexes. Solutions for such challenges will require a fundamental shift in how courts are administered. <br><br> Paragraph 4: Courts must become more open to applying management principles to optimise case movement and judicial time. In this, external support agencies competent in strategic thinking should be allowed to work with judicial officers to understand and help the institution function better. This is already a widely-adopted practice in executive departments across the country. Courts have partially realised this need and created dedicated posts for court managers (MBA graduates) to help improve court operations. But more often than not, court managers are not utilised to their full potential, with their duties restricted to organising court events and running errands.
Which of the following is/are synonyms of dearth? <br> I. Prompt<br> II. Tardy<br> III. Inefficient<br> IV. Scarcity
Explanation: Dearth: a scarcity or lack of something. <br> Eg: There is a dearth of evidence. <br> Tardy means delayed. <br> Prompt means on time<br> Inefficient means incompetent. <br> Only Scarcity matches well. <br> Hence, option A is correct.
Directions: Read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside it. <br><br> Paragraph 1: While there is general acceptance that the Indian judicial system suffers from case delay and the use of antiquated methods, the discourse on judicial reform remains focussed on areas such as appointments and vacancies. It is time that organisational barriers and court processes that also contribute to case delay are studied. We focus on two areas that greatly affect court efficiency: case listing practices and court infrastructure. <br><br> Paragraph 2: The need to scientifically determine how many cases should be listed per day cannot be stressed enough. It is not uncommon to see over 100 matters listed before a judge in a day. When a judge is pressed for time, not only does the quality of adjudication suffer but it also means that several cases will inevitably go unheard. Matters listed towards the end (usually cases near the final stage of hearing) tend to be left over at disproportionate rates and often end up getting stuck in the system. <br><br> Paragraph 3: The second issue is infrastructure: from inadequate support staff for judges to the dearth of basic courtroom facilities. Without research and secretarial support, judges are unable to perform their functions in a timely manner. For instance, in a private interview, a judge said that even though he managed to hear close to 70 cases in a day, it took two days for the stenographers to finish typing the orders. A 2016 report published by the Supreme Court showed that existing infrastructure could accommodate only 15,540 judicial officers against the all-India sanctioned strength of 20,558. The lack of infrastructure also raises serious concerns about access to justice. A recent Vidhi study on district courts in the National Capital Region found that even basic needs such as drinking water, usable washrooms, seating and canteen facilities are often not available in court complexes. Solutions for such challenges will require a fundamental shift in how courts are administered. <br><br> Paragraph 4: Courts must become more open to applying management principles to optimise case movement and judicial time. In this, external support agencies competent in strategic thinking should be allowed to work with judicial officers to understand and help the institution function better. This is already a widely-adopted practice in executive departments across the country. Courts have partially realised this need and created dedicated posts for court managers (MBA graduates) to help improve court operations. But more often than not, court managers are not utilised to their full potential, with their duties restricted to organising court events and running errands.
Which of the following is/are antonyms of antiquated? <br> I. Outdated<br> II. Primitive<br> III. Modern<br> IV. Mossy
Explanation: Antiquated means old-fashioned or outdated. <br> Eg: This antiquated central heating system. <br> I, II and IV are synonyms are incorrect. <br> Only III is the antonym. <br> Hence, option C is correct.
Directions: Read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside it. <br><br> Paragraph 1: While there is general acceptance that the Indian judicial system suffers from case delay and the use of antiquated methods, the discourse on judicial reform remains focussed on areas such as appointments and vacancies. It is time that organisational barriers and court processes that also contribute to case delay are studied. We focus on two areas that greatly affect court efficiency: case listing practices and court infrastructure. <br><br> Paragraph 2: The need to scientifically determine how many cases should be listed per day cannot be stressed enough. It is not uncommon to see over 100 matters listed before a judge in a day. When a judge is pressed for time, not only does the quality of adjudication suffer but it also means that several cases will inevitably go unheard. Matters listed towards the end (usually cases near the final stage of hearing) tend to be left over at disproportionate rates and often end up getting stuck in the system. <br><br> Paragraph 3: The second issue is infrastructure: from inadequate support staff for judges to the dearth of basic courtroom facilities. Without research and secretarial support, judges are unable to perform their functions in a timely manner. For instance, in a private interview, a judge said that even though he managed to hear close to 70 cases in a day, it took two days for the stenographers to finish typing the orders. A 2016 report published by the Supreme Court showed that existing infrastructure could accommodate only 15,540 judicial officers against the all-India sanctioned strength of 20,558. The lack of infrastructure also raises serious concerns about access to justice. A recent Vidhi study on district courts in the National Capital Region found that even basic needs such as drinking water, usable washrooms, seating and canteen facilities are often not available in court complexes. Solutions for such challenges will require a fundamental shift in how courts are administered. <br><br> Paragraph 4: Courts must become more open to applying management principles to optimise case movement and judicial time. In this, external support agencies competent in strategic thinking should be allowed to work with judicial officers to understand and help the institution function better. This is already a widely-adopted practice in executive departments across the country. Courts have partially realised this need and created dedicated posts for court managers (MBA graduates) to help improve court operations. But more often than not, court managers are not utilised to their full potential, with their duties restricted to organising court events and running errands.
Which of the following is/are true as per the passage? <br> I. The existing court infrastructure is adequate for the current sanctioned strength at all-India levels. <br> II. It is not uncommon to see over 100 matters listed before a judge in a day. <br> III. The Indian Judiciary needs to be modernized.
Explanation: 'A 2016 report published by the Supreme Court showed that existing infrastructure could accommodate only 15,540 judicial officers against the all-India sanctioned strength of 20,558.' <br> I is incorrect. <br> 'The need to scientifically determine how many cases should be listed per day cannot be stressed enough. It is not uncommon to see over 100 matters listed before a judge in a day.' II is correct. <br> The entire passage corroborates statement III and is correct. <br> Only II and III are correct. <br> Hence, option B is correct.
Directions: Read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside it. <br><br> Paragraph 1: While there is general acceptance that the Indian judicial system suffers from case delay and the use of antiquated methods, the discourse on judicial reform remains focussed on areas such as appointments and vacancies. It is time that organisational barriers and court processes that also contribute to case delay are studied. We focus on two areas that greatly affect court efficiency: case listing practices and court infrastructure. <br><br> Paragraph 2: The need to scientifically determine how many cases should be listed per day cannot be stressed enough. It is not uncommon to see over 100 matters listed before a judge in a day. When a judge is pressed for time, not only does the quality of adjudication suffer but it also means that several cases will inevitably go unheard. Matters listed towards the end (usually cases near the final stage of hearing) tend to be left over at disproportionate rates and often end up getting stuck in the system. <br><br> Paragraph 3: The second issue is infrastructure: from inadequate support staff for judges to the dearth of basic courtroom facilities. Without research and secretarial support, judges are unable to perform their functions in a timely manner. For instance, in a private interview, a judge said that even though he managed to hear close to 70 cases in a day, it took two days for the stenographers to finish typing the orders. A 2016 report published by the Supreme Court showed that existing infrastructure could accommodate only 15,540 judicial officers against the all-India sanctioned strength of 20,558. The lack of infrastructure also raises serious concerns about access to justice. A recent Vidhi study on district courts in the National Capital Region found that even basic needs such as drinking water, usable washrooms, seating and canteen facilities are often not available in court complexes. Solutions for such challenges will require a fundamental shift in how courts are administered. <br><br> Paragraph 4: Courts must become more open to applying management principles to optimise case movement and judicial time. In this, external support agencies competent in strategic thinking should be allowed to work with judicial officers to understand and help the institution function better. This is already a widely-adopted practice in executive departments across the country. Courts have partially realised this need and created dedicated posts for court managers (MBA graduates) to help improve court operations. But more often than not, court managers are not utilised to their full potential, with their duties restricted to organising court events and running errands.
As per paragraph 1, which among the following are the focus areas of judicial reforms? <br> I. Framework for filling vacancies<br> II. Case Listing procedure<br> III. Infrastructure of courts
Explanation: Refer to: ', the discourse on judicial reform remains focussed on areas such as appointments and vacancies.' <br> As per the statement above, only I is correct. The other two are areas where there should be more focus. <br> Hence, option C is correct.
Directions: Read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside it. <br><br> Paragraph 1: While there is general acceptance that the Indian judicial system suffers from case delay and the use of antiquated methods, the discourse on judicial reform remains focussed on areas such as appointments and vacancies. It is time that organisational barriers and court processes that also contribute to case delay are studied. We focus on two areas that greatly affect court efficiency: case listing practices and court infrastructure. <br><br> Paragraph 2: The need to scientifically determine how many cases should be listed per day cannot be stressed enough. It is not uncommon to see over 100 matters listed before a judge in a day. When a judge is pressed for time, not only does the quality of adjudication suffer but it also means that several cases will inevitably go unheard. Matters listed towards the end (usually cases near the final stage of hearing) tend to be left over at disproportionate rates and often end up getting stuck in the system. <br><br> Paragraph 3: The second issue is infrastructure: from inadequate support staff for judges to the dearth of basic courtroom facilities. Without research and secretarial support, judges are unable to perform their functions in a timely manner. For instance, in a private interview, a judge said that even though he managed to hear close to 70 cases in a day, it took two days for the stenographers to finish typing the orders. A 2016 report published by the Supreme Court showed that existing infrastructure could accommodate only 15,540 judicial officers against the all-India sanctioned strength of 20,558. The lack of infrastructure also raises serious concerns about access to justice. A recent Vidhi study on district courts in the National Capital Region found that even basic needs such as drinking water, usable washrooms, seating and canteen facilities are often not available in court complexes. Solutions for such challenges will require a fundamental shift in how courts are administered. <br><br> Paragraph 4: Courts must become more open to applying management principles to optimise case movement and judicial time. In this, external support agencies competent in strategic thinking should be allowed to work with judicial officers to understand and help the institution function better. This is already a widely-adopted practice in executive departments across the country. Courts have partially realised this need and created dedicated posts for court managers (MBA graduates) to help improve court operations. But more often than not, court managers are not utilised to their full potential, with their duties restricted to organising court events and running errands.
What could be some possible consequences of the issues mentioned in paragraph 2? <br> I. There is uncertainty about when the cases would come up for hearing next and hampers the efficacy of lawyers in preparing for their cases in a better manner. <br> II. There is a better chance of winning the case in case of frequent changes in the hearing dates. <br> III. Frequent re-listing impacts the efficiency of the court administrative staff.
Explanation: I is correct. The uncertainty around which cases will come up for hearing means neither judges nor lawyers can plan their preparation and this also compels lawyers to waste time waiting in court. <br> III is correct as the administrative staff must manage the task of re-listing leftover matters in an already bulging docket, instead of streamlining case flow. <br> II is incorrect. There is no logic and guarantee that court cases would be won if there are frequent changes in hearing dates. <br> Hence, option D is correct.
One Prime for the website and the app, same login. Videos play in the app.
30 questions in 15 minutes, All India rank, streak and explanations. Free: play it here after logging in, or in the app.
Free. Mobile number + OTP, no password.
