A second full descriptive mock for CAPF Paper II: Part A essay prompts with one model essay, a Part B comprehension passage with model answers, and a precis exercise with a model precis
Authored mock for this wiki, not a verbatim previous-year paper. CAPF Paper II is descriptive, carries 200 marks, and runs for three hours. Part A (Essay) is 80 marks, in English or Hindi. Part B (Comprehension, precis and other communication skills) is 120 marks, English only.
Sit this paper a week after practice paper 01 so you can measure improvement on the same four signals. Attempt the essay first, then the comprehension, then the precis. Mark yourself with evaluation rubric. The themes here lean toward economy, the freedom struggle and human rights, to spread your practice across the syllabus.
Suggested time split: Essay about 40 minutes, Comprehension about 60 minutes, Precis about 40 minutes, with the rest for planning and proof-reading.
Write an essay of about 500 to 800 words on any ONE of the following.
Below is a worked model essay on prompt 1. Draft your own first, then compare structure and the level of fact.
When India debates internal security, the conversation usually turns to forces, weapons and operations. These matter, but they treat the surface of the problem. Beneath most durable internal conflicts, from left-wing extremism in the mineral-rich tribal districts to discontent in regions left behind by development, lies a common root: large numbers of people who feel they have no fair share in the nation's growth. The surest and cheapest foundation of internal security is therefore inclusive growth, that is, growth whose benefits reach the poorest, the most remote and the most marginalised. Policing manages disorder; inclusion prevents it.
The link between deprivation and unrest is not a slogan but an observable pattern. The areas worst affected by left-wing extremism have long overlapped with districts that rank low on literacy, health, connectivity and land security, and high on tribal displacement by mining and large projects. Where the state appears only as a collector of taxes or a remover of people, and never as a provider of schools, clinics and fair courts, an armed group offering rough justice and a sense of dignity finds ready recruits. The Indian Constitution anticipated this risk: the Directive Principles in Part IV, especially Articles 38 and 39, direct the State to minimise inequalities and secure an adequate livelihood, precisely because the framers understood that a republic of vast inequality is an unstable one.
Inclusive growth attacks this root in a way that force cannot. A young person with a school place, a skill, a job and a stake in a functioning local economy has something to lose and little reason to take up arms. Programmes that guarantee rural work, that extend banking and direct benefit transfers to the unbanked, that bring roads, electricity and mobile connectivity to remote blocks, and that protect tribal land and forest rights under instruments such as the Forest Rights Act, 2006 and PESA, 1996, do more for long-run security than any number of additional battalions. Growth that creates broad employment, rather than jobless growth concentrated in a few hands, converts potential adversaries into stakeholders. This is why "development as security" has become a recognised strand of India's internal-security doctrine.
The honest counter-argument is that development is slow while threats are immediate, and that some violence is driven by ideology or external sponsorship that no amount of inclusion will dissolve. A hardened extremist leader or a cross-border terrorist will not lay down arms because a road reaches the next village. This is fair, and it means inclusive growth cannot replace lawful, capable security forces; the two must run together. But the objection actually reinforces the case. Even against an irreconcilable core, it is inclusive growth that shrinks the surrounding pool of sympathy, shelter and recruits on which that core depends. Force defeats the hardened few; inclusion ensures they are not constantly replaced.
There is also a moral dimension a future officer should not miss. A state that secures peace by inclusion governs by consent; a state that secures it only by force governs by fear, and fear is the most brittle foundation of order. Inclusive growth aligns the nation's security with its justice, so that the same policy that calms a restive district also honours the constitutional promise of equality.
Internal security, in the end, is not a wall to be built but a condition to be grown. Battalions can hold a line for a season, but only a fair share in the nation's progress can keep a people loyal across a generation. For India, with its scale and diversity, the wisest security strategy is also the most just one: to make growth reach the last citizen, so that fewer ever have reason to turn against the state that includes them. The forces guard the result; inclusive growth secures the cause.
(Approximately 640 words.)
A self-check against evaluation rubric: the stand is declared in the first paragraph, the body moves from the deprivation-unrest link to the mechanism of inclusion, a full counter-view paragraph concedes the limits before answering them, the facts are checkable (Articles 38 and 39, Forest Rights Act 2006, PESA 1996, "development as security"), and the conclusion ties security to justice without raising a new point.
Read the following passage and answer the questions in your own words, in English. Do not copy whole sentences.
Every profession claims to have its discipline, but few are tested by it as a uniformed service is. In most work, an error is corrected at leisure and the cost is paper. In a force, an undisciplined act can take a life, lose a battle, or stain the honour of thousands who were nowhere near it. This is why discipline in a service is not the same as mere obedience. Obedience is doing what one is told; discipline is doing what one ought, especially when no one is telling, no one is watching, and the easier course is to do otherwise.
It is tempting to picture discipline as a cold thing, the suppression of feeling in favour of the rule. The truth is nearly the reverse. The disciplined soldier is not the one who feels nothing, but the one who feels fear, anger and fatigue as keenly as anyone and acts well in spite of them. The recruit who has never been afraid has learned nothing about courage; courage is precisely the discipline of acting rightly while afraid. In the same way, restraint under provocation is not weakness of feeling but mastery of it. The officer who does not strike the prisoner who has just insulted him is not a man without anger; he is a man whose discipline is stronger than his anger, and it is that strength, not the absence of feeling, that the law and the public are entitled to expect.
This is why training a force is so much more than teaching drill and marksmanship. Those can be taught in months. Discipline of the deeper kind is built slowly, by habit, by example, and by a culture in which the right action is the normal action and the wrong one is unthinkable rather than merely punishable. A force that relies only on punishment to keep order has already half failed, for it has admitted that, without the threat, its members would behave otherwise. The truly disciplined force is one whose members would behave the same way if every rule book were burned, because the rules have become part of who they are.
The author distinguishes the two by saying that obedience is simply doing what one is ordered to do, whereas discipline is doing what one ought to do, particularly when no one is giving the order, no one is watching, and the easier choice would be to act otherwise. Discipline is therefore internal and self-driven, while obedience is external and command-driven.
It can be inferred that courage, in the author's view, is not the absence of fear but acting rightly in spite of it. A recruit who has never felt fear has had no occasion to overcome it, so he has had no chance to learn or display courage. Courage can only be learned by feeling fear and still doing the right thing, which is why fearlessness teaches nothing about it.
The example shows that real discipline is the mastery of strong feeling, not the lack of it. The officer who is insulted by a prisoner does feel anger, but his discipline is stronger than that anger, so he does not strike. The point is that restraint under provocation is not coldness or weakness of feeling; it is control over feeling, and it is exactly this self-control that the law and the public are entitled to expect from a force.
A force that depends only on punishment to keep order has half failed because, by relying on the threat, it has effectively admitted that without that threat its members would behave wrongly. True discipline means right conduct is internal and automatic, so a reliance on fear of punishment shows that the deeper discipline has not been built and order rests only on coercion.
In the author's view, the mark of a truly disciplined force is that its members would behave the same way even if every rule book were destroyed, because the right conduct has become part of who they are rather than something imposed from outside. A suitable title is "Discipline Is More Than Obedience" or "The Discipline That Survives the Rule Book".
Write a precis of the following passage in about one-third of its length, that is roughly 65 words, in your own words, in one connected paragraph. Give it a title and state the word count. Report the author's view neutrally.
The right to information has quietly changed the relationship between the Indian citizen and the state. For most of the country's history, official records were treated as the property of the government, disclosed as a favour and withheld as a right, so that a citizen seeking the reason for a decision that affected his own life was often turned away. The Right to Information Act, which came into force in 2005, reversed this presumption. It made openness the rule and secrecy the exception, allowing any citizen to ask for information held by a public authority and obliging that authority to answer within a fixed period, with only narrow grounds for refusal. The effect has been larger than the volume of applications suggests. The mere knowledge that a file may be opened changes how officials write in it, because a decision that must be explained is a decision taken with more care. The law has its limits and its critics, and its machinery is uneven, but its central achievement is not in doubt: it has shifted the default of Indian governance from secrecy toward accountability, treating information as the citizen's entitlement rather than the state's gift.
Title: From Official Secrecy to the Citizen's Right to Know
The Right to Information Act, in force from 2005, reversed India's old presumption that official records belonged to the government and were disclosed only as a favour. It made openness the rule and secrecy a narrow exception, letting any citizen demand information within a fixed period. Beyond the applications themselves, the knowledge that files may be opened makes officials decide more carefully. Despite limits, the law has shifted governance from secrecy toward accountability. (72 words)