Each of the following questions give a sentence which has been divided into four parts which might not be in their correct order of narrative. The sentence is then followed by five options, one of which gives the sequence of the rearranged parts to make the sentence meaningful. You must choose the option which gives the correct sequence of the parts. If the sentence is already arranged in the correct sequence or the correct sequence doesn't match with any of the given sequence, mark option " No rearrangement required " as your answer.


(A) attorney why they were
(B) habeas corpus rights meant
(C) holding the prisoner in jail
(D) that the court had to tell the

Correct option is B

The correct sequence for the parts of the sentence is option (b) BDAC. Here's the explanation for why this sequence is the correct arrangement:
Start with part (B) "habeas corpus rights meant" - This introduces the topic of habeas corpus rights, which is a legal term regarding detainment legality.
Follow with part (D) "that the court had to tell the" - This clause connects to the habeas corpus rights by explaining a responsibility of the court concerning these rights.
Next, part (A) "attorney why they were" - Continuing the clause from part (D), it specifies whom the court had to inform and begins to hint at the reason.
Lastly, part (C) "holding the prisoner in jail" - This final part completes the explanation, specifying what the court had to explain to the attorney, which is the reason for holding the prisoner in jail.
When connected, the sentence reads: " Habeas corpus rights meant that the court had to tell the attorney why they were holding the prisoner in jail."
This logical flow demonstrates why (b) BDAC is the correct answer.