Self Studies

Judiciary - Con...

TIME LEFT -
  • Question 1
    1 / -0

    How many High Courts in India have jurisdiction over more than one State (Union Territories not included)?

  • Question 2
    1 / -0

    Consider the following:
    1. Supreme Court's power to issue writs is narrower than that of High Courts.
    2. A citizen is free to approach High Court or Supreme Court as he chooses, whenever his Fundamental Rights are violated.
    3. The law declared by the Supreme Court is binding on all courts throughout India. 

    Which of the above statement(s) is are correct?

  • Question 3
    1 / -0

    Which of the following statements regarding Judiciary in India are correct?
    I. Supreme Court of India is free from the control and influence of Legislature and Executive.
    II. Subordinate courts are at the head of the judicial hierarchy of the State.
    III. The Chief Justice and other Judges of the High Court are appointed by the Governor in consultation with the Chief Justice of India.
    IV. A High Court can withdraw a case from a subordinate court and can deal with the case itself if it is satisfied that the case involves a substantial point of constitutional law.

  • Question 4
    1 / -0

    All the courts in India except ___________ and _____________ are subordinate courts.

  • Question 5
    1 / -0

    The Constitution gives the powers of superintendence over all subordinate courts to the High Courts under Article _____________.

  • Question 6
    1 / -0

    Pre-constitution __________ decisions are binding on the __________ unless overruled by the _________.

  • Question 7
    1 / -0

    Directions For Questions

    Seema is an international wrestler and a member of the Mahabali Akhada in Thane, Maharashtra. The Mahabali Akhada has strict rules against doping and also on possession of Prohibited Substances. It had circulated to each of its members, a list of Prohibited Substances, including the substance Dexamethasone. On Tuesday, Seema caught a severe cold and her doctor prescribed her a cough syrup, Cofdex. Acting on her doctors advice, Seema requested her driver to get Cofdex from the local pharmacy. Naina, who happens to be a rival of Seema and also a member of the Mahabali Akhada, saw Seemas driver purchasing Cofdex from the pharmacy. Naina knew that Cofdex contains Dexamethasone and, on the same day, made an anonymous complaint to the Mahabali Akhada that Seema is in constructive possession of a Prohibited Substance. The next day, Seema took one dose of Cofdex and then checked the ingredients of the medicine. She found out that it contains Dexamethasone. She immediately reported to the Anti-Doping Wing of Mahabali Akhada that she came in possession of the cough syrup and intends to surrender it since it contains Dexamethasone. On Thursday, the Anti-Doping Wing of the Mahabali Akhada requested Seema for her urine samples, which tested positive for the presence of Dexamethasone. 
    The Mahabali Akahadas Anti-Doping Code on Possession of Prohibited Substances states the following: The actual, physical or constructive possession of a Prohibited Substance amounts to a violation of this Anti-Doping Code; provided, however, constructive possession shall only be found if the person knew about the presence of the Prohibited Substance and exercised control to acquire possession of it. Provided, however, there shall be no violation of this Anti-Doping Code on Possession of Prohibited Substances, if, prior to receiving notification of any kind that the person has committed an anti-doping rule violation, the person has taken concrete action demonstrating that the person never intended to have possession of the Prohibited Substance and has renounced its possession by explicitly declaring it to the Anti-Doping Wing of Mahabali Akhada. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this definition, the purchase (including by any electronic or other means) of a Prohibited Substance constitutes possession by the Person who makes the purchase.

    ...view full instructions

    The Mahabali Akhadas Anti-Doping Code on Presence of Prohibited Substances in an Athletes Sample contains a rule that states the following: It is the Athletes personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited Substance enters their bodies. Athletes are responsible for any Prohibited Substance or its metabolites found to be present in their Samples. Has Seema violated this rule? Choose the option with the correct answer as well as the most appropriate explanation for it.

  • Question 8
    1 / -0

    Directions For Questions

    Seema is an international wrestler and a member of the Mahabali Akhada in Thane, Maharashtra. The Mahabali Akhada has strict rules against doping and also on possession of Prohibited Substances. It had circulated to each of its members, a list of Prohibited Substances, including the substance Dexamethasone. On Tuesday, Seema caught a severe cold and her doctor prescribed her a cough syrup, Cofdex. Acting on her doctors advice, Seema requested her driver to get Cofdex from the local pharmacy. Naina, who happens to be a rival of Seema and also a member of the Mahabali Akhada, saw Seemas driver purchasing Cofdex from the pharmacy. Naina knew that Cofdex contains Dexamethasone and, on the same day, made an anonymous complaint to the Mahabali Akhada that Seema is in constructive possession of a Prohibited Substance. The next day, Seema took one dose of Cofdex and then checked the ingredients of the medicine. She found out that it contains Dexamethasone. She immediately reported to the Anti-Doping Wing of Mahabali Akhada that she came in possession of the cough syrup and intends to surrender it since it contains Dexamethasone. On Thursday, the Anti-Doping Wing of the Mahabali Akhada requested Seema for her urine samples, which tested positive for the presence of Dexamethasone. 
    The Mahabali Akahadas Anti-Doping Code on Possession of Prohibited Substances states the following: The actual, physical or constructive possession of a Prohibited Substance amounts to a violation of this Anti-Doping Code; provided, however, constructive possession shall only be found if the person knew about the presence of the Prohibited Substance and exercised control to acquire possession of it. Provided, however, there shall be no violation of this Anti-Doping Code on Possession of Prohibited Substances, if, prior to receiving notification of any kind that the person has committed an anti-doping rule violation, the person has taken concrete action demonstrating that the person never intended to have possession of the Prohibited Substance and has renounced its possession by explicitly declaring it to the Anti-Doping Wing of Mahabali Akhada. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this definition, the purchase (including by any electronic or other means) of a Prohibited Substance constitutes possession by the Person who makes the purchase.

    ...view full instructions

    A precedent is either binding on or persuasive when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts. Which of the following would not be a valid precedent for deciding on Nainas complaint against Seema?

  • Question 9
    1 / -0

    Directions For Questions

    The law on prevention of cruelty to animals makes it an offence if a person does any of the following:
    • Beats, kicks, overrides, or tortures an animal or, being the owner, knowingly permits, any animal to be so treated (Type 1 Offence);
    • Fails to provide any animal with sufficient food, drink, or shelter being the owner of such animal (Type 2 Offence);
    • Without reasonable cause, abandons any animal in circumstances which render it likely to suffer pain, starvation, or thirst (Type 3 Offence);
    • Solely with a view to providing entertainment incites any animal to fight or bait any other animal (Type 4 Offence)
    Exception for Experiments - The law, however, makes an exception to the above offences by stating that it is not unlawful to perform experiments (including experiments involving operations) on animals for the purpose of advancement by new discovery of knowledge which will be useful for saving or for prolonging life or alleviating suffering or for combating any disease, whether of human beings, animals or plants.
    Ameena leaves her pup with her friend Nisha and requests Nisha to take good care of the pup until she returns from a 10-day business trip that she cannot avoid. Ameena mentions that she would pay Nisha for the food and any other expense that Nisha incurs in taking care of the pet. Ameena also asks Nisha to promise that she would call her if there was any problem with the pup, and Nisha agrees. Nisha takes the pup to the beach on a walk without letting Ameena know and feeds him a large family-pack of ice-cream. This causes the pup to have a gastrointestinal upset and he starts to growl - attracting the attention of several aggressive stray dogs in the vicinity eager to attack the pup. To punish the pup for his misbehaviour despite feeding him her favourite ice-cream, Nisha abandons the pup at the beach and takes a rickshaw back to her house. Soon after, the bigger stray dogs surround and attack the pup. A passer-by who sees this, urges and exhorts the pup to stand up for himself and fight the bigger dogs. The children playing cricket on the beach find this entertaining and line up to watch the fight. Meanwhile, Aaron, who is meditating at the beach, gets disturbed by the commotion created by the dogs and decides to stuff large stones in the mouths of the dogs to prevent them from barking. Many of the dogs, unable to get the stones out, die of starvation.

    ...view full instructions

    Aaron is charged with a Type 3 Offence and he defends the charge by saying that his actions are saved by the Experiments Exception under law. Which of the following statements is true in relation to Aarons actions?

  • Question 10
    1 / -0

    Directions For Questions

    The law on prevention of cruelty to animals makes it an offence if a person does any of the following:
    • Beats, kicks, overrides, or tortures an animal or, being the owner, knowingly permits, any animal to be so treated (Type 1 Offence);
    • Fails to provide any animal with sufficient food, drink, or shelter being the owner of such animal (Type 2 Offence);
    • Without reasonable cause, abandons any animal in circumstances which render it likely to suffer pain, starvation, or thirst (Type 3 Offence);
    • Solely with a view to providing entertainment incites any animal to fight or bait any other animal (Type 4 Offence)
    Exception for Experiments - The law, however, makes an exception to the above offences by stating that it is not unlawful to perform experiments (including experiments involving operations) on animals for the purpose of advancement by new discovery of knowledge which will be useful for saving or for prolonging life or alleviating suffering or for combating any disease, whether of human beings, animals or plants.
    Ameena leaves her pup with her friend Nisha and requests Nisha to take good care of the pup until she returns from a 10-day business trip that she cannot avoid. Ameena mentions that she would pay Nisha for the food and any other expense that Nisha incurs in taking care of the pet. Ameena also asks Nisha to promise that she would call her if there was any problem with the pup, and Nisha agrees. Nisha takes the pup to the beach on a walk without letting Ameena know and feeds him a large family-pack of ice-cream. This causes the pup to have a gastrointestinal upset and he starts to growl - attracting the attention of several aggressive stray dogs in the vicinity eager to attack the pup. To punish the pup for his misbehaviour despite feeding him her favourite ice-cream, Nisha abandons the pup at the beach and takes a rickshaw back to her house. Soon after, the bigger stray dogs surround and attack the pup. A passer-by who sees this, urges and exhorts the pup to stand up for himself and fight the bigger dogs. The children playing cricket on the beach find this entertaining and line up to watch the fight. Meanwhile, Aaron, who is meditating at the beach, gets disturbed by the commotion created by the dogs and decides to stuff large stones in the mouths of the dogs to prevent them from barking. Many of the dogs, unable to get the stones out, die of starvation.

    ...view full instructions

    Which of the following, if true, is a good defence from Nishas perspective?

Submit Test
Self Studies
User
Question Analysis
  • Answered - 0

  • Unanswered - 10

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
Submit Test
Self Studies Get latest Exam Updates
& Study Material Alerts!
No, Thanks
Self Studies
Click on Allow to receive notifications
Allow Notification
Self Studies
Self Studies Self Studies
To enable notifications follow this 2 steps:
  • First Click on Secure Icon Self Studies
  • Second click on the toggle icon
Allow Notification
Get latest Exam Updates & FREE Study Material Alerts!
Self Studies ×
Open Now