Step 1: Understanding the Question:
The question asks to identify the qualities of good prose as described in the passage.
Step 2: Analyzing the Passage:
Let's evaluate each option based on the text:
\[\begin{array}{rl} \bullet & \text{(A) Use of bombastic words: The passage explicitly criticizes this, stating that a writer who uses "bombastic words... is obviously not going to make any impression." So, (A) is a characteristic of bad prose. } \\ \bullet & \text{(B) Matching the requirements of the targeted readership: The passage presents this as a key consideration for writers like journalists ("guided by the requirements of the public") and literary writers ("has a special audience in mind"). This is a characteristic of effective prose. } \\ \bullet & \text{(C) Ease of expression: The passage lists this directly as a positive quality: "Ease of expression is another criterion in this matter." } \\ \bullet & \text{(D) Economy of words: The passage praises this quality, mentioning that a critic uses "economical sentences, without any sense of wasted effort" and that good writing has a "sense of economy." } \\ \end{array}\]
The characteristics of good prose mentioned are (B), (C), and (D).
Step 3: Final Answer:
The correct option is (D), which includes (B), (C), and (D) only.
Match List-I with List-II\[\begin{array}{|c|c|} \hline \textbf{Provision} & \textbf{Case Law} \\ \hline \text{(A) Strict Liability} & \text{(1) Ryland v. Fletcher} \\ \hline \text{(B) Absolute Liability} & \text{(II) M.C. Mehta v. Union of India} \\ \hline \text{(C) Negligence} & \text{(III) Nicholas v. Marsland} \\ \hline \text{(D) Act of God} & \text{(IV) MCD v. Subhagwanti} \\ \hline \end{array}\]
Match List-I with List-II\[\begin{array}{|c|c|} \hline \textbf{List-1} & \textbf{List-II} \\ \hline \text{(A) Hadley v. Baxendale} & \text{(1) Undue Influence} \\ \hline \text{(B) Henkel v. Pape} & \text{(II) Coercion} \\ \hline \text{(C) Manu Singh v. Umadat Pandey} & \text{(III) Quantum of Damages} \\ \hline \text{(D) Chikkam Amiraju v. Seshamma} & \text{(IV) Mistake} \\ \hline \end{array}\]
Match List-I with List-II
\[\begin{array}{|c|c|} \hline \textbf{List-1} & \textbf{List-II} \\ \hline \text{(A) Complete Justice} & \text{(I) Article 137} \\ \hline \text{(B) Special Leave Petition} & \text{(II) Article 131} \\ \hline \text{(C) Review of the Judgments} & \text{(III) Article 142} \\ \hline \text{(D) Original Jurisdiction} & \text{(IV) Article 136} \\ \hline \end{array}\]
Match List-I with List-II
Match List-I with List-II
\[\begin{array}{|c|c|} \hline \textbf{List-1} & \textbf{List-II} \\ \hline \text{(A) Ram Jawaya Kapur v. State of Punjab} & \text{(I) Separation of powers} \\ \hline \text{(B) Delhi Laws Act, 1912} & \text{(II) Delegated legislation} \\ \hline \text{(C) Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India} & \text{(III) Doctrine of proportionality} \\ \hline \text{(D) Om Kumar v. Union of India} & \text{(IV) Post decisional hearing} \\ \hline \end{array}\]