You are aspiring to become an IAS officer and you have cleared various stages and now you have been selected for the personal interview. On the day of the interview, on the way to the venue you saw an accident where a mother and child who happen to be your relatives were badly injured. They needed immediate help.
What would you have done in such a situation ? Justify your action.
Approach · directive: “what would you have done / justify”
What it asks · State the course of action you would take when an emergency involving relatives clashes with a career-defining interview, and justify it.
The question has 2 parts — answer each
- State what you would have done when, on the way to the civil services interview, you found your relatives badly injured in an accident
- Justify the action, weighing the duty to save life against the career-defining interview
Open with · The dilemma sets a duty to save life against a once-in-a-career opportunity; both matter, but they are not of equal weight.
Cover
- Stakeholders: the injured mother and child, my family, the interview board, bystanders, the hospital and the police.
- Dilemma: humanity and a duty of care to relatives against personal ambition and the risk of losing the interview.
- Option 1: go on to the interview and leave help to others. Merit: protects the career; demerit: abandons people in need and would leave lasting regret.
- Option 2: stop, call an ambulance and police, take them to hospital if help is late, then inform the board. Merit: saves lives. Demerit: may miss the slot.
- Chosen course: give first aid, call emergency services, get them to the nearest hospital, inform their family, then explain to the board and ask for another slot.
- Justification: life comes before career; civil service exists to serve people, and Save Life Foundation (2016) shields Good Samaritans from harassment.
- Learning: officers face such choices daily; compassion, presence of mind and honest communication are the aptitudes the service looks for.
Close with · Saving life comes first; I would then approach the board honestly, since a career can be recovered but a life cannot.
Add value (verified)
- Save Life Foundation (Supreme Court, 30 March 2016) endorsed guidelines under which a bystander or good Samaritan shall not be liable for any civil and criminal liability. Savelife Foundation & Anr v. Union of India & Anr, Supreme Court, 30 March 2016 — Indian Kanoon ↗“(3) The bystander or good Samaritan shall not be liable for any civil and criminal liability. (4) A bystander or good Samaritan, who makes a phone call to inform the police or emergency services for the person lying injured on the road, shall not be compelled to reveal his name and personal details”
- Section 134A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: a Good Samaritan who in good faith helps an accident victim or takes him to hospital shall not be liable to any civil or criminal action (LiveLaw report on the 2020 rules). Centre Amends Motor Vehicles Rules For Protection Of 'Good Samaritans' — LiveLaw (legal news), 30 September 2020 ↗“is a person, who in good faith, voluntarily and without expectation of any reward or compensation renders emergency medical or non-medical care or assistance at the scene of an accident to the victim or transports such victim to the hospital. As per the said provision, such a Good Samaritan shall not be liable for any civil or criminal action”
- Care ethics holds that there is moral significance in the fundamental elements of relationships and dependencies in human life. Care Ethics — Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy ↗“The moral theory known as “ the ethics of care” implies that there is moral significance in the fundamental elements of relationships and dependencies in human life.”
Question: UPSC's CS (Main) 2017, GS Paper IV — paper ↗. Approach: Minimalist IAS, checked 1 Oct 2026 (how we verify) — UPSC publishes no model answers. ·
Model answer · 347 words (UPSC limit 250) · Minimalist IAS
The situation sets a duty to save two lives against a once-in-a-lifetime career opportunity. Both matter, but they do not weigh the same.
Stakeholders
- The injured mother and child; my family and theirs; the interview board and other candidates; bystanders, the hospital and the police; and I, as a would-be public servant.
The ethical dilemma
- Care against ambition: compassion and a duty of care towards relatives in danger, set against years of preparation.
- Time as the constraint: a delayed response may cost a life; a delayed arrival may cost the interview.
Options, with merits and demerits
| Option | Merit | Demerit |
|---|---|---|
| Go on to the interview | Career protected | Injured abandoned; lifelong guilt |
| Help, then seek another slot | Lives saved; honest | Interview may be lost |
| Help and skip the interview | Humane | Gives up more than needed |
What I would do
- Act at once: give first aid, call an ambulance and the police, and enlist bystanders; if help is late, take the injured to the nearest hospital in any vehicle.
- Hand over: inform their family so that someone takes charge at the hospital.
- Be honest with the board: call the UPSC office, explain the emergency truthfully and request a later slot; reach the venue once the injured are safe.
Why this course is right
- Life before career: a lost interview can be recovered; a lost life cannot.
- Care ethics: it finds moral weight in relationships and dependencies; a mother and child who depend on me now have the first claim.
- No legal excuse: the Supreme Court in Save Life Foundation (2016) endorsed guidelines under which a good Samaritan shall not be liable for any civil and criminal liability; since then, Section 134A of the Motor Vehicles Act has given such rescuers statutory protection.
- The aptitude being tested: compassion, presence of mind and honesty are what the interview seeks; abandoning the injured would betray them.
I would save life first and then face the board honestly. A career can be rebuilt, a life cannot, and an officer who cannot act with compassion in a crisis is not the officer the service needs.
Written by Minimalist IAS from facts checked at source (how we verify) — a little fuller than exam length, so every part of the question is covered; in the hall, keep the structure and trim the detail. UPSC publishes no model answers: compare your structure and coverage with this, then write your own.