Judiciary - Constitutional, Civil, Criminal Courts and Processes Test 29

Result

Judiciary - Constitutional, Civil, Criminal Courts and Processes Test 29

Score
-
out of -
Rank
-
out of -

TIME Taken - -

SHARING IS CARING

If our Website helped you a little, then kindly spread our voice using Social Networks. Spread our word to your readers, friends, teachers, students & all those close ones who deserve to know what you know now.

Weekly Quiz Competition

Question 1
1 / -0

LEGAL PRINCIPLE: Acts done by children below 12 years of age are not offences if they are not mature enough to understand the nature and consequences of the acts.
FACTUAL SITUATIONS: Sahil, a child of 10 years of age, finds a gold coin in his uncle's home. He gives the coin to his sister Rachna who is eight years old. The uncle reports the matter to the police. The police conducts a search. During the investigation the police finds the gold coin kept in the toys of Rachna tells the police that Sahil had given the coin to her.
DECISION will be _____.

A
Sahil is guilty of theft

B
Rachna is guilty of theft

C
Both Sahil and Rachna are guilty of theft

D
Neither Sahil nor Rachna is guilty of theft

Solution

Neither Sahil nor Rachna is guilty of theft. Since the legal principle says that any act done by children below 12 years of age are not offences with the exception that they should not be mature enough to understand the nature and consequences of their acts. Clearly, neither Sahil nor Rachna understands the consequences of their act and considers the gold coin as a toy rather than a thing of value. Thus, they do not fall under the exception of the Principle.
Question 2
1 / -0

PRINCIPLE: Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that person's consent moves that property, such taking is said to commit theft.
FACT: Ramu cuts down a tree in Rinku's ground, with the intention of dishonestly taking the tree out of Rinku's possession without Rinku's consent. He could not take the tree away.

A
Ramu can be prosecuted for theft.

B
Ramu cannot be prosecuted for theft.

C
Ramu can be prosecuted for attempt to theft.

D
Ramu has neither committed theft nor attempt to commit thief.
Question 3
1 / -0

LEGAL PRINCIPLES:
(i) Everyone has a right to defend their life and property against criminal harm provided it is not possible to approach public authorities and more harm than is necessary has been caused to avert the danger.
(2) Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence.
FACTUAL SITUATION: The accused found the deceased engaged in sexual intercourse with his 15 year old daughter The accused assaulted the deceased on the head with a spade which resulted in his death. Accused claimed private defence and the prosecution claimed that the sexual intercourse was with the consent of the daughter. Here,
DECISION will be _____.

A
Accused is entitled to the right of private defence since the girl was only 15 years old

B
Accused exceeded the right of private defence

C
Accused is not entitled to private defence as the intercourse was consensual

D
Accused is not entitled to private defence as the right of private defence is available for defending one's life and property only
Question 4
1 / -0

PRINCIPLE: Whoever drives any vehicle, or rides, on any public way in manner so rash or negligent as to endanger human life, or to be likely to cause hurt or injury to any other person, has committed an offence, which shall be punished in accordance with the law
FACTS: 'X', a truck driver, driving his vehicle rashly and negligently at a high speed climbed the footpath and hit 'Y', a pedestrian, from behind causing his death.

A
'X' not guilty of rash and negligent driving

B
'Y' should have taken sufficient care on the footpath

C
'X' is guilty of rash and negligent driving

D
'X' is only in part guilty or rash and negligent

Solution

The legal principle makes rash and negligent driving as an offence. The essential is that such driving must endanger a human life or likely to cause injury or hurt. And must be done on any public way.
X is guilty of rash and negligent driving. Since he killed a pedestrian who was walking on the footpath that means he was driving in a way that'd endanger a human life. in this case the life of 'Y'
Question 5
1 / -0

PRINCIPLE: Whoever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death, commits the offence of culpable homicide.
FACTS: 'A' knows 'Z' to be behind a bush. 'B' does not know it. 'A' , intending to cause, or knowing it to be likely to cause Z's death, induces B to fire at the bush. B fires and kills 'Z'.

A
'B' has committed the offence of culpable homicide

B
'A' has no intention to use criminal force to 'Z'

C
'A' has used force with the consent of 'Z'

D
None of the above

Solution

Questions like these can be very confusing and tricky. The correct option, in this case, is Option A that 'B' has committed the offence of Culpable Homicide.
There are two ways to answer this question- first is to apply the principle- the legal proposition given is that whoever causes death by an act with either intention or with the knowledge that he is likely to cause death.
'B' though did not have any intention of causing the death of 'Z' but he had the knowledge that his actions are likely to cause the death of a person. therefore, in such a manner the legal principle is satisfied making 'B' guilty of commission of the offence of culpable Homicide.
If in the legal principle the word 'and' is used instead of 'or' then in that case intention will be essential with the knowledge that the act is likely to cause death.
The second approach to solve such problems is to rule out the options and to see what should not be the answer. Options B and C will not be the answer because the legal principle is in relation to Culpable Homicide and not on criminal force or use of force with consent. therefore, Option A is the correct option.
Question 6
1 / -0

PRINCIPLE: Nothing is an offence by reason that it causes, or that it is intended to cause, or that it is known to be likely to cause, any harm, if that harm is so slight that no person of ordinary sense and temper would complain of such harm.
FACTS: 'X' takes a plain sheet of paper from 'Y's drawer without 'Y's consent to write a letter to his friend.

A
'X' has committed an offence in the above context

B
'X' has committed no offence in the above context

C
'Y' can sue 'X' for an offence in the above context

D
None of the above

Solution

Option B is correct since taking up of a simple plain sheet from someone's drawer will cause no harm to a person of ordinary sense and temper.
Question 7
1 / -0

PRINCIPLE: 'Wrongful gain' is gain by unlawful means of poverty to which the person gaining is not legally entitled. 'Wrongful loss' is the loss by unlawful means of property to which the person losing it is legally entitled.
FACTS: 'X' takes away 'Y's watch out of Y's possession, without 'Y's consent and with the intention of keeping it.

A
'X' causes 'wrongful gain' to 'Y'

B
'Y' causes 'wrongful gain' to 'X'

C
'X' causes 'wrongful loss' to 'Y'

D
'Y' causes 'wrongful loss' to 'X'

Solution

X has caused wrongful loss to Y by depriving him of his property that is his watch without his permission and by unlawful means. X has also caused wrongful gain to himself by transferring the watch to himself to which he has absolutely no legal entitlement. Gain and loss may not only mean monetary gain or monetary loss, non-enjoyment of the property or unlawful enjoyment of the property are also examples of wrongful loss and wrongful gain.
Question 8
1 / -0

PRINCIPLE: Whoever intentionally uses force to any person, without that person's consent, in order to the committing of any offence, or intending by the use of such force to cause, or knowing it to be likely that by the use of such force he will , cause injury, fear or annoyance to the person to whom the force is used, is said to use criminal force to the other.
FACTS: 'Z' is riding in a palanquin. A intending to rob 'Z', seizes the pole and stops the palanquin. Here A has caused cessation of motion to 'Z', and A has done this by his own bodily power.

A
'A' has used criminal force to 'Z'

B
'A' has no intention to use criminal force to 'Z'

C
'A' has used force with the consent of 'Z'

D
None of the above

Solution

The legal principle can be divided into 2 parts, i.e. in order to commit criminal force one must-
Firstly, there should be intentional use of force against person without his consent.
Secondly, such use of force is done intentionally or with the knowledge that it will cause injury, fear or annoyance to the other person.
Applying principle to the facts- A has intentionally used forced against Z by stopping the palanquin. Such force was used with the intention to rob Z. i.e. in order to commit a crime. Such act of Z is likely to cause injury, fear or annoyance.
Therefore, A has used criminal force. Since, both the conditions given in the principle is satisfied.
Question 9
1 / -0

PRINCIPLE: Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that person's consent, moves that property in order to such taking, is said to commit theft.
FACTS: 'Z' going on a journey, entrusts his plate to the possession of 'A', the keeper of a warehouse, till 'Z' shall return. Then, 'A' carries the plate to a goldsmith and sells it.

A
A has committed theft

B
A has not committed theft

C
A lawfully sold the plate to the goldsmith

D
None of the above

Solution

A has not committed theft. Since, as per the legal Principle theft is committed when an immovable property is taken dishonestly from the possession of any person without his consent.
As per the facts, even though Z was the owner of the property but he had transferred the possession of the property to A and therefore the person whose consent to move the property was required is A himself. Since he had the possession of Z's property. Therefore, A has not committed theft.

Question 10

1 / -0

PRINCIPLE: No communication made in good faith is an offence by reason of any harm to the person, to whom it is made, if it is made for the benefit of that person. FACT: A, a surgeon, in good faith, communicates to a patient his opinion that he cannot live. The patient dies in consequences of the shock.

A has committed the offence of causing death of his patient

A has not committed the offence of causing death of his patient

A has only partially committed the offence of causing death of his patient

None of the above

Solution

Legal principle says that any communication made by a person for the benefit of another person will not amount to an offence by reason of any harm caused to that person.

A communicated his opinion to the patient in the patient's benefit and in good faith. He did not have the malice of causing him any injury or harm. Therefore applying the legal principle to the facts A has not committed the offence of causing the death of his patient.

Hence, B is the correct option.

User

Question Analysis

Correct -
Wrong -
Skipped -

My Perfomance

Score
-
out of -
Rank
-
out of -

Re-Attempt Weekly Quiz Competition

Judiciary - Constitutional, Civil, Criminal Courts and Processes Test 29

Result

Judiciary - Constitutional, Civil, Criminal Courts and Processes Test 29

Score

-

Rank

-

SHARING IS CARING

Question 1

Sahil is guilty of theft

Rachna is guilty of theft

Both Sahil and Rachna are guilty of theft

Neither Sahil nor Rachna is guilty of theft

Solution

Question 2

Ramu can be prosecuted for theft.

Ramu cannot be prosecuted for theft.

Ramu can be prosecuted for attempt to theft.

Ramu has neither committed theft nor attempt to commit thief.

Question 3

Accused is entitled to the right of private defence since the girl was only 15 years old

Accused exceeded the right of private defence

Accused is not entitled to private defence as the intercourse was consensual

Accused is not entitled to private defence as the right of private defence is available for defending one's life and property only

Question 4

'X' not guilty of rash and negligent driving

'Y' should have taken sufficient care on the footpath

'X' is guilty of rash and negligent driving

'X' is only in part guilty or rash and negligent

Solution

Question 5

'B' has committed the offence of culpable homicide

'A' has no intention to use criminal force to 'Z'

'A' has used force with the consent of 'Z'

None of the above

Solution

Question 6

'X' has committed an offence in the above context

'X' has committed no offence in the above context

'Y' can sue 'X' for an offence in the above context

None of the above

Solution

Question 7

'X' causes 'wrongful gain' to 'Y'

'Y' causes 'wrongful gain' to 'X'

'X' causes 'wrongful loss' to 'Y'

'Y' causes 'wrongful loss' to 'X'

Solution

Question 8

'A' has used criminal force to 'Z'

'A' has no intention to use criminal force to 'Z'

'A' has used force with the consent of 'Z'

None of the above

Solution

Question 9

A has committed theft

A has not committed theft

A lawfully sold the plate to the goldsmith

None of the above

Solution

Question 10

A has committed the offence of causing death of his patient

A has not committed the offence of causing death of his patient

A has only partially committed the offence of causing death of his patient

None of the above

Solution

User

Question Analysis

My Perfomance

Score

-

Rank

-

Results Announcement on: coming Monday

Stay Tuned: We’ll update you on your result via email or SMS.