Judiciary - Constitutional, Civil, Criminal Courts and Processes Test 32

Result

Judiciary - Constitutional, Civil, Criminal Courts and Processes Test 32

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

PRINCIPLE: Whoever by words, either spoken or written brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the Government established law in India shall be punished. However, comments expressing disapprobation of the administrative or other action of the Government without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection, do not constitute an offence.
FACTS: A renowned Professor of Economics wrote a critical comment on the economic policies of the Government of India in a National Daily. This piece of writing generated academic debate not only in the print media but also on television and internet. A student of law asked the fellow Indians on a social networking website to assemble at a particular place for peaceful and silent demonstration against the said economic policies on a stipulated date and time. The crowd assembled at that venue and started shouting anti-government slogans. Police arrested the professor.

A
The professor has committed the offence

B
The professor has not committed any offence

C
The student of law has committed the offence

D
The crowd has committed an offence

Solution

The professor has not committed offence. Since his critical comments on the economic policies of Gov. of India were comments expressing disapprobation of the action of Government. His comments did not try to excite or attempt or excite hatred, contempt or disaffection towards the Government. And he could not have reasonably foreseen that his comments will result in anti-government slogans. Sedition is defined under Section 124A of IPC
Question 2
1 / -0

PRINCIPLE: Whoever does not act so rashly or negligently as to endanger human life of the personal safety of others is said to have committed an offence.
FACTS: Mr. Mangeskar owns a Yamaha motorcycle which has a very good pick up and speed. He is in the IV semester of Mechanical Engineering degree course. One day he was getting late for the college as he woke up late in the morning. He got ready and was rushing to the college so that he would not miss the class. He was riding the motor cycle at a speed of 140 km per hour in Bangalore city which was crowded. He was very good in riding the motorcycle. People who were using the road got annoyed/scared with the way Mr. Mangeskar was riding the motortcycle.

A
Mr. Mangeskar has committed an act of rash and negligent driving

B
Mr. Mangeskar is very good at driving, so there is no need for others to be panicky

C
Mr. Mangeskar is a very studious student and he does not want to miss any class in the college

D
None of the above

Solution

Driving at 140 km/ hour on a crowded road endangers life and personal safety of other people driving on the road. Therefore, Mr Mangeskar has committed an act of rash and negligent driving.
Question 3
1 / -0

Is Lucky guilty of criminal damage?

A
No, Lucky is not guilty of criminal damage as he did not intentionally impair the value of the painting

B
Yes, Lucky is guilty of criminal damage as he intentionally stuck the paper on to the painting

C
No, Lucky is not guilty of criminal damage as he does not have the painting in his possession anymore

D
No, Lucky is not guilty of criminal damage as he has not destroyed the painting
Question 4
1 / -0

LEGAL PRINCIPLE: If a person without any authority prevents a person to proceed to any direction and is kept confined, he commits an offence of criminal confinement.
FACTUAL SITUATION: The Municipal Board allowed X to hold a marriage party blocking a part of a public road. The marriage party blocked most of the roads and did not allow A, a passerby, to cross the road. He brings a charge of criminal confinement against the head of the marriage party and other associates. Can A succeed?

A
A cannot succeed because X has got previous permission from the Municipal Board and has blocked part of the public road

B
A can succeed because he has authority to walk on public road

C
A cannot succeed because he must have to wait upto end of marriage party

D
A shall succeed because no one is allowed to use public property for the personal benefits

Solution

The principle clearly states that an act will amount to criminal confinement if the act of preventing a person to proceed to any direction is done without any authority.
Since, X has taken the consent of Municipal Board to block a part of Public road. Therefore X is not guilty of Criminal Confinement.
A is the correct option.
Question 5
1 / -0

The gist of the offence of criminal conspiracy is _____.

A
agreement is necessary between two or more persons to do or cause to be done an illegal act

B
a legal act by illegal means followed by an overt act to be done or cause to be done according to agreement

C
both (a) and (b)

D
none of the above

Solution

Criminal conspiracy as defined under section 120A of IPC seeks to punish the agreement or meeting of minds among the conspirators rather than the act. Therefore, even if there are is overt act actually committing the offence but an agreement to commit an illegal act is proved it is sufficient to constitute the crime of Criminal Conspiracy.
Question 6
1 / -0

Which of the following is the subject matter of the 99th Constitution Amendment Act, 2014, which came into force with effect from 13th April, 2015 ___________.

A
Giving Constitutional Status to the proposed National Judicial Appointments Commission

B
Giving Constitutional status to the Expenditure Management Commission

C
Giving Constitutional status to Juvenile Justice Board

D
None of the above.
Question 7
1 / -0

LEGAL PRINCIPLE: A person is guilty of culpable homicide amounting to murder if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention to cause death.
FACTUAL SITUATION: A was hiding behind a bush to catch some rabbits. B also came to the same place for hunting with his gun. When B noticed some movements behind the bush, he though it was an animal and fired a shot due to which A was killed. Can B be prosecuted for murder?
DECISION will be _____.

A
B would not be liable for murder because he did not have the intention to kill A

B
B shall be liable for murder because he should have taken care to find out the target before shooting

C
B shall not be liable for murder because B was not expected to identify the target before shooting

D
B shall be liable for murder because for whatever reasons A was killed

Solution

Culpable Homicide is when there is intention of causing death. Since didn't intend to kill A neither did he fire to cause the death of A. Therefore, by direct application of principle. B would not be liable for murder.
Question 8
1 / -0

LEGAL PRINCIPLE: Any act done in the exercise of right of private defence shall not be an offence. The right to private defence in no case extends to the inflicting of more harm than it is necessary to inflict for the purpose or private defence.
FACTUAL SITUATION: Rajan saw a thief jumping the boundary wall and entering his house in the night. He picked up the sword and hid in a corner. The moment the person entered the house, he hit the person with sword and cut his head. Did Rajan commit the offence of killing the thief?
DECISION will be ______.

A
Yes, because he exceeded the right or private defence

B
No, he has not committed any offence because he exercised his right of private defence

C
Yes, because the thief should have been given an opportunity to run away from there

D
No, criminals should not be dealt with any leniency

Solution

No person in the name of private defence is allowed to use more force than is required. According to the principle of private defence one is allowed to use reasonable force to save his life and property Rajan has clearly used unwanted force. He waited till the Thief entered the house and without any act of the thief he cut his head off. This shows the use of excessive force than what was necessary to.
Question 9
1 / -0

LEGAL PRINCIPLE: A person can be benefited under private defence in case of intoxication.
FACTUAL SITUATION: Ram Lal got drunk voluntarily and on his way to his house, he assaulted a policeman.
Which of the following is correct?

A
Ram Lal cannot be liable because he was drunk

B
Ram Lal cannot be liable because he get benefit under private defence

C
Ram Lal can be liable because he got drunk voluntarily

D
None of the above

Solution

The principle restates general exceptions given under section 76-106 of IPC. Nothing is an offence done by a person who was intoxicated and did the alleged act in intoxication.
Therefore, even though Ram lal was intoxicated while committing the offence. he is liable since he was voluntarily intoxicated.
Question 10
1 / -0

Suppose X and Y were apprehended before administering poison to Z. What is the offence committed by X and Y?

A
X and Y are not guilty of conspiracy as they did not cause death of Z

B
Liability of X comes to an end and Y is only liable

C
As no offence is committed and none of them are responsible

D
X and Y are to be punished as it is immaterial whether illegal act is the ultimate object of the agreement or merely incidental to that object

Solution

2 people are said to have criminally conspired when an act is done in furtherance of a common object, given that there was common intention to commit such criminal act and it is immaterial whether the illegal act is the ultimate object or merely incidental to that object. X procured poison in furtherance of their conspiracy therefore, X and Y would still be liable and will be punished even if they were apprehended before administering the poison to Z.

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 32

Result

Judiciary - Constitutional, Civil, Criminal Courts and Processes Test 32

Score

-

Rank

-

SHARING IS CARING

Question 1

The professor has committed the offence

The professor has not committed any offence

The student of law has committed the offence

The crowd has committed an offence

Solution

Question 2

Mr. Mangeskar has committed an act of rash and negligent driving

Mr. Mangeskar is very good at driving, so there is no need for others to be panicky

Mr. Mangeskar is a very studious student and he does not want to miss any class in the college

None of the above

Solution

Question 3

No, Lucky is not guilty of criminal damage as he did not intentionally impair the value of the painting

Yes, Lucky is guilty of criminal damage as he intentionally stuck the paper on to the painting

No, Lucky is not guilty of criminal damage as he does not have the painting in his possession anymore

No, Lucky is not guilty of criminal damage as he has not destroyed the painting

Question 4

A cannot succeed because X has got previous permission from the Municipal Board and has blocked part of the public road

A can succeed because he has authority to walk on public road

A cannot succeed because he must have to wait upto end of marriage party

A shall succeed because no one is allowed to use public property for the personal benefits

Solution

Question 5

agreement is necessary between two or more persons to do or cause to be done an illegal act

a legal act by illegal means followed by an overt act to be done or cause to be done according to agreement

both (a) and (b)

none of the above

Solution

Question 6

Giving Constitutional Status to the proposed National Judicial Appointments Commission

Giving Constitutional status to the Expenditure Management Commission

Giving Constitutional status to Juvenile Justice Board

None of the above.

Question 7

B would not be liable for murder because he did not have the intention to kill A

B shall be liable for murder because he should have taken care to find out the target before shooting

B shall not be liable for murder because B was not expected to identify the target before shooting

B shall be liable for murder because for whatever reasons A was killed

Solution

Question 8

Yes, because he exceeded the right or private defence

No, he has not committed any offence because he exercised his right of private defence

Yes, because the thief should have been given an opportunity to run away from there

No, criminals should not be dealt with any leniency

Solution

Question 9

Ram Lal cannot be liable because he was drunk

Ram Lal cannot be liable because he get benefit under private defence

Ram Lal can be liable because he got drunk voluntarily

None of the above

Solution

Question 10

X and Y are not guilty of conspiracy as they did not cause death of Z

Liability of X comes to an end and Y is only liable

As no offence is committed and none of them are responsible

X and Y are to be punished as it is immaterial whether illegal act is the ultimate object of the agreement or merely incidental to that object

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.