Question 1

Which of the following is an Aggravated Sexual Assault under Section 9 of POCSO Act, 2012?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Squeezing breast of a child in washroom of the school by a peon of private school. This question requires a precise understanding of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, specifically Section 9, which defines 'Aggravated Sexual Assault'. The POCSO Act categorizes sexual offenses against children into different levels of severity, with 'aggravated' offenses carrying higher penalties due to specific aggravating circumstances. These circumstances often involve positions of trust, authority, vulnerability of the child, or the nature of the act itself. Let's analyze each option in light of Section 9: Option (1) Intentionally touching private parts of a child in public: While intentionally touching private parts of a child constitutes 'sexual assault' under Section 7 of the POCSO Act, the mere act of doing so in public, without additional aggravating factors listed in Section 9, does not automatically elevate it to 'aggravated sexual assault'. Section 9 specifies particular conditions, such as the perpetrator being in a position of trust or authority, the child being particularly vulnerable, or the act being committed in a specific manner. This option lacks such a qualifying factor to make it aggravated. Option (2) Squeezing breast of a child in washroom of the school by a peon of private school: This is the correct answer. This scenario perfectly aligns with several aggravating factors listed in Section 9 of the POCSO Act. Specifically, Section 9(f) states that an offense is aggravated if committed 'by a person in a position of trust or authority towards the child'. A peon in a school holds a position of trust and authority over children. Furthermore, the act occurring in a 'washroom of the school' highlights the vulnerability of the child and the breach of a safe environment, which are implicit aggravating factors. Squeezing the breast of a child is a form of sexual assault, and when committed by a person in authority in a vu

Question 2

Which of the following Sections of the Protection of Children' from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 deals with "Sexual harassment"?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Section 11. This question tests knowledge of the specific provisions within the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, which is a comprehensive legislation designed to protect children from various forms of sexual abuse and exploitation. The Act meticulously defines different types of offenses and prescribes corresponding punishments. Let's examine each option in the context of the POCSO Act: Option (1) Section 12: Section 12 of the POCSO Act deals with the punishment for sexual harassment. While it is directly related to sexual harassment, it does not define what constitutes sexual harassment. Instead, it specifies the penalties for committing the offense that is defined elsewhere in the Act. Therefore, this option is incorrect as it refers to punishment, not the definition. Option (2) Section 10: Section 10 of the POCSO Act prescribes the punishment for 'aggravated sexual assault'. Aggravated sexual assault is a more severe category of offense than sexual harassment, defined in Section 9 of the Act. Since Section 10 deals with punishment for a different, more serious offense, it is not the correct answer for the definition of sexual harassment. Option (3) Section 9: Section 9 of the POCSO Act is dedicated to defining 'aggravated sexual assault'. This section lists various circumstances that elevate a sexual assault (defined in Section 7) to an aggravated one, such as the perpetrator being in a position of trust, a police officer, or the act causing grievous hurt. It does not define 'sexual harassment'. Hence, this option is incorrect. Option (4) Section 11: This is the correct answer. Section 11 of the POCSO Act, 2012, specifically defines 'sexual harassment'. It outlines various acts that constitute sexual harassment, including unwelcome physical contact and advances, a demand or request for sexual favours, showing pornography to a child, making sexually coloured remarks, or any other unwelcome physical, verbal, or non-verb

Question 3

Which Section of Indian Penal Code, 1860 is based on 'Doctrine of Transfer of Malice'?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Section 301. The 'Doctrine of Transfer of Malice', also known as 'transferred intent' or 'transferred mens rea', is a fundamental principle in criminal law. It posits that if a person intends to commit a crime against one individual but, by accident or mistake, ends up harming another, the criminal intent (mens rea) is transferred from the intended victim to the actual victim. The perpetrator is then held liable as if they had intended to harm the person actually affected. This doctrine ensures that an offender does not escape liability simply because their blow went astray. Let's analyze the given sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860: Option (1) Section 306: Section 306 of the IPC deals with 'abetment of suicide'. This section punishes anyone who abets the commission of suicide. The core element here is the instigation or assistance leading to another person taking their own life. This offense does not involve the accidental harm of a different person than intended; rather, it focuses on the direct or indirect encouragement of suicide. Therefore, it is not based on the doctrine of transfer of malice. Option (2) Section 304B: Section 304B of the IPC pertains to 'dowry death'. This section defines and punishes the death of a woman caused by burns or bodily injuries, or occurring otherwise than under normal circumstances, within seven years of her marriage, if it is shown that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry. This is a specific offense related to marital cruelty and dowry, and it has no connection with the concept of transferred malice. Option (3) Section 301: This is the correct answer. Section 301 of the IPC is titled 'Culpable homicide by causing death of person other than person whose death was intended'. It explicitly states: 'If a person, by doing anything which he intends or knows to be likely to cause death, c

Question 4

Who among the following persons may be charged and tried together?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Persons accused of different offences committed in the course of same transaction.. This question delves into the principles of joinder of charges and persons in criminal procedure, primarily governed by the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973. The CrPC aims to balance judicial efficiency with the accused's right to a fair trial. Joint trials are permitted under specific circumstances to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and save judicial time, but they must not cause prejudice to the accused. Section 223 of the CrPC enumerates the categories of persons who may be charged and tried jointly. Let's analyze each option in light of this section: Option (1) Persons accused of any number of offences of the same kind within a period of 12 months: This option primarily relates to Section 219 of the CrPC, which allows a single accused to be charged and tried for up to three offenses of the same kind committed within a period of twelve months. While Section 223(c) allows joint trial for 'persons accused of more than one offence of the same kind, committed by them jointly within the period of twelve months', the phrasing 'any number of offences' in the option is broad and doesn't explicitly state 'jointly'. More importantly, other options provide a more direct and common ground for joint trials involving multiple persons for different offenses arising from a single event. Therefore, this option is not the most appropriate general answer for joint trials of multiple persons. Option (2) Persons accused of same offence committed in the course of different transactions: This scenario generally does not permit joint trials. Section 223(a) allows joint trial for persons accused of the 'same offence committed in the course of the same transaction'. If the offenses, even if they are the same kind, arise from different transactions, they typically require separate trials unless specific exceptions like conspiracy apply. Trying persons for the same offense from diffe

Question 5

'Excise Duty' is defined under the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950 in -

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Section 3(8). To answer this question, one must refer to the specific provisions of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950, which is the governing statute for excise matters in the state of Rajasthan. The Act, like many other statutes, begins with an interpretation clause, typically Section 3, which defines various terms used throughout the legislation to ensure clarity and consistent application. Let's analyze the options: Option (1) Section 3(8): This is the correct answer. Section 3(8) of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950, explicitly defines 'excise duty' and 'countervailing duty'. This sub-section provides the legal meaning and scope of these terms within the context of the Act, which is crucial for understanding the levy and collection of such duties. Therefore, any reference to the definition of 'excise duty' within this Act must point to Section 3(8). Option (2) Section 3(2): Section 3(2) of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950, defines 'excisable article'. An excisable article is a commodity on which excise duty can be levied. While related to excise duty, this sub-section defines the article itself, not the duty. Hence, it is incorrect as the primary definition of 'excise duty'. Option (3) Section 3(4): Section 3(4) of the Act defines 'liquor'. Liquor is one of the primary categories of excisable articles, and its definition is fundamental to the Act's enforcement. However, defining 'liquor' is distinct from defining 'excise duty'. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (4) Section 3(6): Section 3(6) of the Act defines 'manufacture'. Manufacture, in the context of excise law, refers to the process of producing or preparing any excisable article. While the act of manufacturing is central to the imposition of excise duty, Section 3(6) describes the process, not the duty itself. Thus, this option is also incorrect. In summary, the question specifically asks for the definition of 'Excise Duty'. By consulting the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950, it is clear that

Question 6

What is the amount of penalty in case of offender failing to observe conditions of bond, first time under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Not exceeding fifty rupees. This question pertains to the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, a significant piece of legislation aimed at reforming offenders rather than merely punishing them, by allowing them to be released on probation instead of serving a sentence in prison. The Act sets out conditions for such release, often requiring the offender to execute a bond. Failure to observe these conditions has specific consequences, including a monetary penalty. To answer this question, we must refer to Section 9 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, which deals with the 'Procedure in case of offender failing to observe conditions of bond'. Let's analyze the options: Option (1) Upto one hundred rupees: This amount is higher than what is specified in the Act for the first instance of failure to observe bond conditions. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (2) Not exceeding fifty rupees: This is the correct answer. Section 9(3) of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, explicitly states: 'If an offender fails to observe any of the conditions of the bond or bonds entered into by him, the Court may, without prejudice to any other penalty to which the offender may be liable under this Act, impose upon him a penalty not exceeding fifty rupees.' This provision clearly sets the maximum penalty for the first failure at fifty rupees. The phrase 'not exceeding' means the penalty can be anything from zero up to fifty rupees. Option (3) Upto two hundred rupees: This amount is significantly higher than the statutory limit for the first failure. There is no provision in the Act that allows for a penalty of up to two hundred rupees for the first instance of such a failure. Hence, this option is incorrect. Option (4) Not less than fifty rupees: This phrasing implies a minimum penalty of fifty rupees, meaning the penalty would be fifty rupees or more. This contradicts Section 9(3), which sets a maximum of fifty rupees ('not exceeding fifty rupees'). Therefore, t

Question 7

'Child in Conflict with Law' means -

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: A child who is alleged or found to have committed an offence and who has not completed eighteen years of age on the date of commission of such offence.. This question requires knowledge of the definition of 'Child in Conflict with Law' as provided in the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (JJ Act, 2015). This Act is the primary legislation in India dealing with children who come into contact with the law, either as victims or as offenders. The definition is crucial for determining the applicability of the juvenile justice system. Let's analyze each option: Option (1) A child who is alleged or found to have committed an offence and who has not completed eighteen years of age on the date of commission of such offence: This is the correct answer. Section 2(13) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, precisely defines 'child in conflict with law' as 'a child who is alleged or found to have committed an offence and who has not completed eighteen years of age on the date of commission of such offence.' This definition is central to the Act's purpose, establishing the age of majority for criminal responsibility under the juvenile justice system at 18 years at the time of the offense. Option (2) A child above the age of seven years and less than twelve years of age: This age range (7-12 years) is not the definition of 'child in conflict with law' under the JJ Act, 2015. While the Indian Penal Code (IPC) has provisions like Section 82 (nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age) and Section 83 (nothing is an offence which is done by a child above seven years of age and under twelve, who has not attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and consequences of his conduct on that occasion), these relate to criminal capacity under general criminal law, not the specific definition of 'child in conflict with law' under the JJ Act, which sets the upper age limit

Question 8

The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act, 2019 came into force on -

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: 5th August, 2019. This question requires specific factual knowledge regarding the commencement date of a significant amendment to a crucial piece of legislation, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. The POCSO (Amendment) Act, 2019, introduced several key changes, most notably enhancing penalties for various offenses, including the introduction of the death penalty for aggravated penetrative sexual assault against children. For an Act to come into force, it typically needs to receive presidential assent and be published in the Official Gazette. The date of publication in the Gazette often marks its commencement, unless a different date is specified. Let's analyze the options: Option (1) 5th August, 2019: This is the correct answer. The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act, 2019, received the assent of the President on August 5, 2019, and was published in the Gazette of India on the same date. Consequently, it came into force on 5th August 2019. This date is crucial for determining the applicability of the amended provisions to offenses committed on or after this date. Option (2) 16th August, 2019: This date is incorrect. While it falls within the same month, it does not correspond to the official date of commencement of the POCSO (Amendment) Act, 2019. The Act was already in force by this date. Option (3) 26th August, 2019: This date is also incorrect. Similar to option (2), it is a date after the actual commencement of the Act and does not hold legal significance as its effective date. Option (4) 6th August, 2019: This date is incorrect. It is one day after the actual commencement date. The Act became effective on the day it received presidential assent and was gazetted, which was August 5, 2019. Therefore, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act, 2019, officially came into force on 5th August, 2019, making option (1) the correct answer.

Question 9

Which of the following is known as 'Mignonette Case'?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Queen Vs. Dudley and Stephens. The 'Mignonette Case' is a landmark English criminal law case that is widely studied for its profound implications on the defense of necessity, particularly in cases of murder. The case presents a harrowing factual scenario that forced the courts to grapple with complex moral and legal dilemmas. Let's analyze the options: Option (1) Queen Vs. Dudley and Stephens: This is the correct answer. The case of Regina v. Dudley and Stephens (1884) is famously known as the 'Mignonette Case'. The facts involved four crew members of the yacht Mignonette who were shipwrecked and adrift in a lifeboat for several days. Facing starvation, two of the crew members, Thomas Dudley and Edwin Stephens, decided to kill and eat the youngest crew member, Richard Parker, a 17-year-old cabin boy, who was already weak and near death. They did this to save their own lives and the life of another crew member. Upon rescue, they were charged with murder. The court, in a highly influential judgment, rejected the defense of necessity for murder, establishing that one cannot take another's life to save one's own, even in extreme circumstances. This case remains a cornerstone of criminal jurisprudence regarding the limits of self-preservation as a legal defense. Option (2) R Vs. Robinson: This case, R v. Robinson (1977), is an English criminal law case related to theft and the defense of honest belief. It is not associated with the Mignonette incident or the doctrine of necessity in murder. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (3) R Vs. Lipman: The case of R v. Lipman (1970) is an important English case concerning involuntary manslaughter and self-induced intoxication. The defendant killed his girlfriend while under the influence of LSD. The case explored the relationship between intoxication and mens rea. It is unrelated to the Mignonette Case. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (4) R Vs. Hudson: The case of R v. Hudson (1971) is an Engli

Question 10

Which of the following case is not related 'to Section 167 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: State of M.P. Vs. Rustam. Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973, is a crucial provision that deals with the procedure when an investigation cannot be completed within twenty-four hours. It primarily governs the power of a Magistrate to authorize detention of an accused person and, importantly, establishes the right of an accused to 'default bail' if the investigation is not completed within a specified period (60 or 90 days, depending on the offense). This section is frequently litigated, leading to numerous landmark judgments that interpret its nuances. Let's analyze each case: Option (1) Chaganti Satyanarayan Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (1986): This is a highly significant and frequently cited Supreme Court judgment directly related to Section 167 CrPC. The case clarified the computation of the period for default bail, holding that the period of remand under Section 167(2) commences from the date of remand and includes the date on which the accused is produced before the Magistrate. It is a foundational case for understanding default bail. Therefore, it is related to Section 167. Option (2) Ravi Prakash Singh Vs. State of Bihar (2015): This Supreme Court case is also directly related to Section 167 CrPC. It reiterated the importance of the indefeasible right to default bail under Section 167(2) and clarified that this right accrues automatically upon the expiry of the prescribed period if the charge sheet is not filed, and it cannot be defeated by a subsequent filing of the charge sheet if the accused has already applied for bail. Therefore, it is related to Section 167. Option (3) Raju Manjhi Vs. State of Bihar (2018): This is another Supreme Court judgment that deals with the interpretation and application of Section 167(2) CrPC, particularly concerning the right to default bail. It reinforced the principles laid down in previous judgments regarding the mandatory nature of default bail once the statutory period for investigat

Question 11

Which one of the following Sections of The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 relates to 'Punishment for offences of atrocities'?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Section 3. This question pertains to The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (often referred to as the SC/ST Act), a special legislation enacted to prevent atrocities against members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and to provide for their speedy trial and relief. Understanding the structure of this Act is key to identifying the section related to punishments for atrocities. Let's analyze each option: Option (1) Section 8: Section 8 of the SC/ST Act deals with 'Presumptions as to offences'. It states that if an offense under the Act is committed, the court shall presume that the accused had knowledge of the victim's caste or tribal identity, and that the act was committed on account of such identity, unless the contrary is proved. While important for prosecution, this section does not prescribe the punishments for atrocities. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (2) Section 7: Section 7 of the SC/ST Act deals with 'Forfeiture of property'. It provides for the forfeiture of property of a person convicted under the Act, if the court is satisfied that such property has been acquired by means of the offense. This is a consequence of conviction, but it is not the section that defines the offenses of atrocities or their primary punishments. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (3) Section 4: Section 4 of the SC/ST Act deals with 'Punishment for neglect of duties by public servant'. This section specifically targets public servants who wilfully neglect their duties under the Act, prescribing punishment for such dereliction. While it deals with punishment, it is for a specific type of offense (neglect of duty by a public servant) and not for the direct commission of 'offences of atrocities' by any person. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (4) Section 3: This is the correct answer. Section 3 of the SC/ST Act is titled 'Punishments for offences of atrocities'. This is the core substant

Question 12

The question is. whether 'A' was in Calcutta on a given day. A statement in the diary of a deceased Solicitor, regularly kept in the course of business, that on a given day, the Solicitor attended 'A' at a place mentioned, in Calcutta, for the purpose of conferring with him upon specified business,

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Section 32(2). This question tests the understanding of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, specifically concerning the admissibility of statements made by persons who cannot be called as witnesses. The scenario involves a statement from a deceased person's diary, made in the ordinary course of business, which is a classic example of a specific type of relevant fact under the Act. Let's analyze the relevant sections: Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872: This section deals with cases in which statements of relevant facts by persons who are dead or cannot be found, etc., are themselves relevant. It has several sub-sections, each addressing different circumstances under which such statements become admissible. Option (1) Section 32(5): This sub-section makes relevant statements relating to the existence of any relationship by blood, marriage, or adoption, made by a person having special means of knowledge, and made before the question in dispute was raised. The statement in the question is about a business meeting and A's presence, not about the existence of a relationship. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (2) Section 32(2): This is the correct answer. Section 32(2) states that a statement is relevant when it was made by a person in the ordinary course of business, and in particular, when it consists of any entry or memorandum made by him in books kept in the ordinary course of business, or in the discharge of professional duty. The scenario perfectly fits this description: a statement in the diary of a deceased Solicitor (a person who cannot be called as a witness), regularly kept in the course of business (ordinary course of business/professional duty), recording that he attended 'A' at a place mentioned, in Calcutta, for the purpose of conferring with him upon specified business. This entry directly relates to the fact in issue (A's presence in Calcutta) and is admissible under this provision. Option (3) Section 32(3): This sub-section

Question 13

Which of the following is not included in the definition of 'Arms' under Section 2(c) of the Arms Act?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Lathi. This question requires a precise understanding of the definition of 'arms' as provided in Section 2(c) of the Arms Act, 1959. The Arms Act is a comprehensive legislation that regulates the acquisition, possession, manufacture, sale, import, export, and transport of arms and ammunition in India. The definition of 'arms' is crucial for determining the scope of the Act's applicability. Let's refer to Section 2(c) of the Arms Act, 1959, which defines 'arms' as follows: "'arms' means articles of any description designed or adapted as weapons for offence or defence, and includes fire-arms, sharp-edged weapons and other deadly weapons, and parts of, and machinery for manufacturing, arms, but does not include articles designed solely for domestic or agricultural uses such as lathis or walking sticks and the like." Now, let's analyze each option: Option (1) Parts of, and machinery for manufacturing arms: The definition explicitly states that 'arms' includes "parts of, and machinery for manufacturing, arms." This means that components used to assemble arms and the equipment used to produce them are considered 'arms' under the Act. Therefore, this option is included in the definition. Option (2) Lathi: This is the correct answer. The definition of 'arms' in Section 2(c) contains an explicit exclusion clause: "but does not include articles designed solely for domestic or agricultural uses such as lathis or walking sticks and the like." A 'lathi' (a long stick or baton) is specifically mentioned as an example of an article that is not considered an 'arm' if it is designed solely for domestic or agricultural uses. Therefore, a lathi, under normal circumstances and use, is not included in the definition of 'arms'. Option (3) Weapons for offence or defence: The primary part of the definition states that 'arms' means "articles of any description designed or adapted as weapons for offence or defence." This is the general overarching description of what constitu

Question 14

The question is, whether A and B were legally married. The statement of a deceased Pandit that he married them under such circumstances that the celebration would be a crime -

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: is relevant under Section 32 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872.. This question involves the admissibility of a statement made by a deceased person, which immediately points towards Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The specific nature of the statement – that the deceased Pandit performed a marriage under criminal circumstances – is crucial for determining its relevance under this section. Let's break down the analysis: 1. The Fact in Issue: The core question is whether A and B were legally married. The Pandit's statement directly relates to the performance of the marriage ceremony. 2. The Maker of the Statement: The statement is made by a 'deceased Pandit'. Since the person who made the statement is dead, they cannot be called as a witness. This is the primary condition for invoking Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act. Now, let's examine the options and the relevant sub-sections of Section 32: Option (1) is relevant under Section 50 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872: Section 50 deals with 'Opinion as to relationship, when relevant'. It states that when the Court has to form an opinion as to the relationship of one person to another, the opinion expressed by conduct, as to the existence of such relationship, of any person who has special means of knowledge on the subject, is relevant. While the question concerns a marriage (a relationship), the Pandit's statement is not an 'opinion expressed by conduct' about the existence of a relationship. Instead, it is a direct statement of fact about his action (performing the marriage) and the circumstances of that action. Therefore, Section 50 is not the most appropriate section for its admissibility. Option (2) is not relevant: This option is incorrect. The Pandit's statement is highly relevant to the fact in issue (whether A and B were married) as he was the person who allegedly performed the ceremony. The question is about its admissibility despite the maker being deceased, not its relevance in principle.

Question 15

The provisions of the Rajasthan Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1992 are applicable to which of the following examinations? (a) Any examination conducted by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission or Union Public Service Commission. (b) Any examination conducted by any Universit

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: (a) and (c) only. This question requires an understanding of the territorial and institutional scope of the Rajasthan Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1992. This Act is a state-specific legislation designed to prevent malpractices in public examinations. Its applicability is defined within the Act itself, typically in the interpretation clause or the scope section. Let's refer to Section 2(b) of The Rajasthan Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1992, which defines 'examination' as: "any examination for selection of candidates for appointment to any post under the State Government, a local authority, a statutory body or a corporation established by or under a State Act or a Government company as defined in section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Central Act 1 of 1956) or for admission to any educational institution established by or under a State Act or a University established by or under a State Act." Now, let's evaluate each sub-option: (a) Any examination conducted by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission or Union Public Service Commission: Rajasthan Public Service Commission (RPSC): Examinations conducted by RPSC are for selection to posts under the State Government. These are unequivocally covered by the Act. So, the RPSC part is correct. Union Public Service Commission (UPSC): The Act is a State Act. Generally, a State Act does not have the jurisdiction to regulate examinations conducted by a Union body like UPSC, which conducts examinations for central government services. Therefore, the inclusion of UPSC makes this part of sub-option (a) technically incorrect. However, in multiple-choice questions, one often has to select the 'best fit' even if there are minor inaccuracies. (b) Any examination conducted by any University established by Law in India: The Act specifies 'a University established by or under a State Act'. This refers to universities established under a Rajasthan State Act. The phrase 'any Un

Question 16

Section 3(18) of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950 defines -

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Liquor. This question requires specific knowledge of the definitions provided within the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950. Like most legislative acts, the Rajasthan Excise Act begins with an interpretation section, typically Section 3, which defines key terms used throughout the statute to ensure legal clarity and consistent application. Knowing these definitions is fundamental to understanding the Act's scope and enforcement. Let's analyze the options by referring to Section 3 of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950: Option (1) Molasses: While 'molasses' is an important ingredient in the manufacture of certain excisable articles, its definition is typically found in a specific sub-section of Section 3, but not Section 3(18). For instance, Section 3(10) defines 'molasses'. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (2) Liquor: This is the correct answer. Section 3(18) of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950, explicitly defines 'liquor'. The definition of liquor is comprehensive under excise laws, often including spirits, wine, beer, toddy, and all liquids consisting of or containing alcohol, which are used for human consumption. This broad definition is crucial for the Act's purpose of regulating and taxing alcoholic beverages. Therefore, Section 3(18) is the precise provision that defines 'liquor'. Option (3) Spirit: 'Spirit' is a type of liquor, and its definition is usually provided in a separate sub-section within Section 3. For example, Section 3(24) defines 'spirit'. While related to liquor, Section 3(18) defines the broader category of 'liquor', not specifically 'spirit'. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (4) Pachwai: 'Pachwai' is a specific type of fermented liquor, often made from rice or other grains, and its definition is also provided in a distinct sub-section of Section 3. For instance, Section 3(14) defines 'Pachwai'. As with 'spirit', Section 3(18) defines the general term 'liquor', not this specific variety. Therefore, this option is incorre

Question 17

Under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 whoever commits sexual assault on a child and attempts to murder the child shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than -

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Seven years. This question involves a complex scenario combining 'sexual assault' under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, with 'attempt to murder'. To determine the minimum punishment, we must look at how the POCSO Act addresses such aggravated circumstances, especially after its 2019 amendment. Let's break down the offense: 1. Sexual Assault on a Child: This is defined under Section 7 of the POCSO Act. The punishment for simple sexual assault, as per Section 8, is imprisonment for a term not less than three years but which may extend to five years, and also with fine. 2. Attempts to Murder the Child: This act falls under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with 'Attempt to murder'. The punishment for attempt to murder is imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and fine. If hurt is caused, it can extend to life imprisonment. However, the question asks for the punishment under the POCSO Act for this combined offense. The POCSO Act itself contains provisions for 'aggravated sexual assault' which cover situations where additional harm or vulnerability is involved. Section 9 of the POCSO Act defines various forms of 'aggravated sexual assault'. Specifically, Section 9(m) includes: "commits sexual assault on a child and causes grievous hurt or endangers the life of the child or abets the commission of such offence." An 'attempt to murder' unequivocally 'endangers the life of the child'. Therefore, committing sexual assault on a child and attempting to murder the child falls squarely within the definition of 'aggravated sexual assault' under Section 9(m) of the POCSO Act. Section 10 of the POCSO Act prescribes the punishment for 'aggravated sexual assault'. Prior to the 2019 amendment, the minimum punishment was five years. However, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act, 2019, significantly increased the penalties for aggravated offenses. As

Question 18

Match List-I with List-II and select the correct answer by using the code given below the lists List-I (A) Abduction (B) Attempt to commit suicide (C) Attempt to commit culpable homicide (D) Assault List-II (1) Section 351, I.P.C. (2) Section 362, I.P.C. (3) Section 308, I.P.C. (4) Section 309, I.P.

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: (A)-(2), (B)-(4), (C)-(3), (D)-(1). This question requires matching specific offenses with their corresponding sections in the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860. A precise knowledge of the IPC provisions is essential for correctly identifying these matches. Let's match each item from List-I (Offense) with its correct section from List-II (IPC Section): (A) Abduction: Abduction is defined in Section 362 of the Indian Penal Code. This section states that if a person by force compels, or by any deceitful means induces, any person to go from any place, he is said to abduct that person. Therefore, (A) matches with (2) Section 362, I.P.C. (B) Attempt to commit suicide: The offense of attempting to commit suicide is covered under Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code. This section makes it a punishable offense for anyone who attempts to commit suicide and does any act towards the commission of such offense. Therefore, (B) matches with (4) Section 309, I.P.C. (C) Attempt to commit culpable homicide: The attempt to commit culpable homicide (not amounting to murder) is dealt with in Section 308 of the Indian Penal Code. This section punishes acts done with the intention or knowledge that they are likely to cause death, but without actually causing death, and not falling under the more severe category of attempt to murder (Section 307). Therefore, (C) matches with (3) Section 308, I.P.C. (D) Assault: Assault is defined in Section 351 of the Indian Penal Code. This section describes assault as making any gesture or preparation intending or knowing it to be likely that such gesture or preparation will cause any person present to apprehend that he is about to use criminal force to him. Therefore, (D) matches with (1) Section 351, I.P.C. Now, let's combine these correct pairings: (A)-(2) (B)-(4) (C)-(3) (D)-(1) Let's check the given codes: Option (1) (A)-(2), (B)-(4), (C)-(3), (D)-(1): This code perfectly matches our determined correct pairings. Thus, this is the correc

Question 19

Which of the following Section of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 deals with the report of Probation Officer to be confidential?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Section 7. The correct answer is Option (1): 'Section 7' of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. This section explicitly addresses the confidentiality of the Probation Officer's report. Section 7 states: 'The report of a probation officer referred to in sub-section (2) of section 4 or sub-section (2) of section 5 or sub-section (2) of section 6 shall be treated as confidential: Provided that the Court may, if it thinks fit, communicate the substance thereof to the offender and may give him an opportunity of producing such evidence as may be relevant to the matter stated in the report.' This provision ensures that the sensitive information gathered by a Probation Officer about an offender's character, antecedents, and social environment is protected, fostering trust and enabling the officer to obtain candid information. While the report is confidential, the proviso allows the court discretion to share its substance with the offender, ensuring fairness and the right to respond to adverse information. Let's analyze the other options: Option (0) 'Section 6': This section deals with 'Restrictions on imprisonment of offenders under twenty-one years of age'. It specifies that notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, when any person under twenty-one years of age is found guilty of having committed an offence punishable with imprisonment, the court shall not sentence him to imprisonment unless it is satisfied that, having regard to the circumstances of the case, including the nature of the offence and the character of the offender, it would not be desirable to deal with him under Section 3 or Section 4. This section focuses on the sentencing discretion for young offenders, not the confidentiality of reports. Option (2) 'Section 10': This section deals with 'Provisions as to sureties'. It clarifies that the provisions of Sections 122, 126, 126A, 406A, 514, 514A, 514B and 515 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, shall, so far as may be, apply i

Question 20

Under which Section of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 power of court to convert summons-cases into warrant cases is provided?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Section 259. The correct answer is Section 259 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973. This section specifically grants the power to a Magistrate to convert a summons case into a warrant case. The rationale behind this provision is to allow the court to adopt a more rigorous procedure for the trial of certain offenses, even if they are initially classified as summons cases, if the circumstances warrant it. This conversion is not arbitrary; the Magistrate must record reasons for such a decision, indicating that the complexity or gravity of the case necessitates a warrant trial procedure, which involves more formal steps like framing of charges and a more elaborate evidence recording process. This ensures that justice is served appropriately, especially when an offense initially appearing minor turns out to be more serious or complex during the proceedings. Let's analyze the other options: Option (0) Section 256: This section deals with the procedure when the accused does not appear or is not produced in a summons case. It outlines the steps the Magistrate can take, such as adjourning the hearing or, in certain circumstances, proceeding with the trial in the absence of the accused. It does not, however, provide for the conversion of a summons case into a warrant case. Its focus is purely on managing the presence of the accused in a summons trial. Option (2) Section 257: This section pertains to the withdrawal of a complaint in a summons case. It allows a complainant to withdraw their complaint at any time before a final order is passed, and upon such withdrawal, the accused is acquitted. This provision is about discontinuing the proceedings through the complainant's initiative, not about changing the nature of the trial from summons to warrant. Option (1) Section 258: This section grants the power to a Magistrate to stop proceedings in certain summons cases. If the Magistrate stops the proceedings before the evidence of the principal witnesses

Question 21

Arrange the following definitions in the chronological order on the basis of Sub-Sections of Section 2 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973- (I) Complaint (II) Bailable offence (III) Investigation (IV) Cognizable offence

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: II, IV, I, III. To arrange these definitions in chronological order based on the sub-sections of Section 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973, we need to refer to the specific clauses where each term is defined: 1. (II) Bailable offence: This term is defined in Section 2(a) of the CrPC. Section 2(a) states that 'bailable offence' means an offence which is shown as bailable in the First Schedule, or which is made bailable by any other law for the time being in force; and 'non-bailable offence' means any other offence. 2. (IV) Cognizable offence: This term is defined in Section 2(c) of the CrPC. Section 2(c) states that 'cognizable offence' means an offence for which, and 'cognizable case' means a case in which, a police officer may, in accordance with the First Schedule or under any other law for the time being in force, arrest without warrant. 3. (I) Complaint: This term is defined in Section 2(d) of the CrPC. Section 2(d) states that 'complaint' means any allegation made orally or in writing to a Magistrate, with a view to his taking action under this Code, that some person, whether known or unknown, has committed an offence, but does not include a police report. 4. (III) Investigation: This term is defined in Section 2(h) of the CrPC. Section 2(h) states that 'investigation' includes all the proceedings under this Code for the collection of evidence conducted by a police officer or by any person (other than a Magistrate) who is authorised by a Magistrate in this behalf. Based on these sub-sections, the chronological order is: (II) Bailable offence (2a), (IV) Cognizable offence (2c), (I) Complaint (2d), (III) Investigation (2h). Therefore, the correct sequence is II, IV, I, III. Let's examine why the other options are incorrect: Option (1) IV, III, II, I: This sequence places 'Cognizable offence' (2c) first, followed by 'Investigation' (2h), then 'Bailable offence' (2a), and finally 'Complaint' (2d). This order is incorrect because 'Bail

Question 22

'Probation Officer' is defined under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 in -

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Section 2(b). The correct answer is Section 2(b) of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. This section specifically defines the term 'Probation Officer' within the context of the Act. A Probation Officer plays a crucial role in the implementation of the Act, as they are responsible for supervising offenders released on probation, inquiring into the character and antecedents of offenders, and assisting the court in making appropriate orders. Their reports and recommendations are vital for the court to decide whether to release an offender on probation or to pass a sentence. The definition ensures clarity regarding the authority and functions of such an officer under the statute, distinguishing them from other legal or correctional personnel. Let's analyze the other options: Option (0) Section 2(a): This section defines the term 'Code'. Specifically, Section 2(a) states that 'Code' means the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (now replaced by the 1973 Code). This definition is foundational for understanding the procedural framework within which the Probation of Offenders Act operates, but it does not define 'Probation Officer'. Option (2) Section 2(c): This section defines the term 'prescribed'. Section 2(c) states that 'prescribed' means prescribed by rules made under this Act. This definition is important for interpreting various provisions of the Act that refer to 'prescribed' procedures or conditions, indicating that such details are to be found in the rules formulated under the Act. However, it does not define 'Probation Officer'. Option (3) Section 2(d): This section defines the term 'supervision order'. Section 2(d) states that 'supervision order' means an order made under Section 4 directing that an offender shall remain under the supervision of a probation officer. This definition is critical for understanding the nature of probation and the role of the Probation Officer in ensuring compliance with such orders. While it relates to the Probation

Question 23

Which one of the following is not a correct match under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Sexual Assault - Section 6. The question asks to identify the option that is not a correct match under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. To answer this, we need to refer to the specific sections of the POCSO Act: 1. Section 3: Defines 'Penetrative Sexual Assault'. 2. Section 4: Prescribes 'Punishment for Penetrative Sexual Assault'. 3. Section 5: Defines 'Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault'. 4. Section 6: Prescribes 'Punishment for Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault'. 5. Section 7: Defines 'Sexual Assault'. 6. Section 8: Prescribes 'Punishment for Sexual Assault'. Now, let's evaluate each option: Option (0) 'Sexual Assault - Section 6': This option is NOT a correct match. Section 6 of the POCSO Act deals with the punishment for 'Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault'. The definition of 'Sexual Assault' is provided in Section 7 of the Act. Therefore, pairing 'Sexual Assault' with Section 6 is incorrect, as Section 6 addresses a different offense and its punishment. Option (1) 'Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault - Section 5': This option is a correct match. Section 5 of the POCSO Act precisely defines what constitutes 'Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault'. This offense is a more severe form of penetrative sexual assault, often involving specific circumstances or perpetrators (e.g., a person in a position of trust, a police officer, or when the child is physically or mentally disabled). Option (2) 'Penetrative Sexual Assault - Section 3': This option is a correct match. Section 3 of the POCSO Act clearly defines 'Penetrative Sexual Assault'. This is the foundational definition for various forms of sexual penetration against a child, forming the basis for subsequent aggravated offenses and their punishments. Option (3) 'Punishment for Penetrative Sexual Assault - Section 4': This option is a correct match. Section 4 of the POCSO Act specifies the 'Punishment for Penetrative Sexual Assault' as defined in Section

Question 24

'A' having insured a ship, voluntarily causes the same to be cast away, with the intention of causing damage to the underwriters. 'A' has committed an offence defined under which Section of I.P.C.?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Section 425. The correct answer is Section 425 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This section defines the offense of 'Mischief'. According to Section 425, whoever, with intent to cause, or knowing that he is likely to cause, wrongful loss or damage to the public or to any person, causes the destruction of any property, or any such change in any property or in the situation thereof as destroys or diminishes its value or utility, or affects it injuriously, commits 'mischief'. In the given scenario, 'A' voluntarily casts away an insured ship with the intention of causing damage to the underwriters (by making them liable to pay the insurance claim for a loss that was intentionally caused). This act directly falls under the definition of mischief, as it involves the destruction or damage of property (the ship) with the intent to cause wrongful loss to another party (the underwriters). The act is deliberate, aimed at causing financial detriment through damage to property. Let's analyze the other options: Option (1) Section 433: This section deals with 'Mischief by destroying or moving a lighthouse or other sea-mark, or exhibiting false lights'. While this section also pertains to mischief related to maritime activities, it is highly specific. It addresses acts that endanger navigation by tampering with navigational aids like lighthouses or sea-marks, or by misleading vessels with false lights. The act of 'A' casting away his own insured ship to defraud underwriters does not fit this specific description. 'A' is not destroying a navigational aid but his own vessel for a different fraudulent purpose. Option (2) Section 405: This section defines 'Criminal breach of trust'. Criminal breach of trust involves a person being entrusted with property or dominion over property and dishonestly misappropriating or converting that property for their own use, or dishonestly using or disposing of that property in violation of any law or contract. In the given scenario, 'A'

Question 25

Match List-I with List-II and choose the correct answer by using the code given below List-I (Definition) (a) Government (b) Oath (c) Man (d) A Will List-II (Section of I.P.C.) (i) 51 (ii) 31 (iii) 10 (iv) 17

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: (a)-(iv), (b)-(i), (c)-(iii), (d)-(ii). To correctly match the definitions in List-I with their corresponding sections in the Indian Penal Code (IPC) from List-II, we need to refer to the specific definitions provided in the IPC: 1. (a) Government: The term 'Government' is defined in Section 17 of the IPC. Section 17 states: 'The word 'Government' denotes the Central Government or the Government of a State.' Therefore, (a) matches with (iv) Section 17. 2. (b) Oath: The term 'Oath' is defined in Section 51 of the IPC. Section 51 states: 'The word 'Oath' includes a solemn affirmation substituted by law for an oath, and any declaration required or authorized by law to be made before a public servant, or to be used for the purpose of proof in a Court of Justice, or before any other person or authority.' Therefore, (b) matches with (i) Section 51. 3. (c) Man: The term 'Man' is defined in Section 10 of the IPC. Section 10 states: 'The word 'Man' denotes a male human being of any age: the word 'Woman' denotes a female human being of any age.' Therefore, (c) matches with (iii) Section 10. 4. (d) A Will: The term 'A Will' is defined in Section 31 of the IPC. Section 31 states: 'The word 'A Will' denotes any testamentary document.' Therefore, (d) matches with (ii) Section 31. Combining these matches, we get the sequence: (a)-(iv), (b)-(i), (c)-(iii), (d)-(ii). Now, let's evaluate the given options: Option (0) (a)-(iv), (b)-(i), (c)-(iii), (d)-(ii): This option perfectly matches our derived sequence, making it the correct answer. Each definition is correctly paired with its corresponding section number from the IPC, demonstrating a precise understanding of the statutory definitions. Option (1) (a)-(ii), (b)-(iii), (c)-(i), (d)-(iv): This option incorrectly pairs 'Government' with Section 31 (A Will), 'Oath' with Section 10 (Man), 'Man' with Section 51 (Oath), and 'A Will' with Section 17 (Government). All these pairings are erroneous as they misattribute the de

Question 26

Which one of the following is correctly matched according to Rajasthan Public Examination (Measures for Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 2022?.

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Prohibition of use of unfair means - Section 4. The question asks for the correctly matched provision from the Rajasthan Public Examination (Measures for Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 2022. To determine the correct match, we must refer to the specific sections and their headings or core content within the Act. Let's analyze each option: Option (0) "Prohibition to enter in Examination center - Section 7": This option is incorrect. Section 7 of the Act is titled "Prohibition to enter in examination centre with unfair means". The option omits the crucial phrase "with unfair means," which changes the scope of the prohibition. Section 7 specifically targets individuals who attempt to enter an examination center while possessing or carrying unfair means, not just any entry into the center. Option (1) "Prohibition of use of unfair means - Section 4": This option is correct. Section 4 of the Act is precisely titled "Prohibition of use of unfair means." This section directly addresses and prohibits any person from using or attempting to use, or helping or attempting to help in using, unfair means in any public examination. This is a fundamental provision aligned with the Act's objective of preventing unfair practices. Option (2) "Offences by Management, Institution or others - Section 10": This option is also correct. Section 10 of the Act is titled "Offences by Management, Institution or others." This section deals with the liability of management, institutions, or other persons when an offence under the Act is committed by them. It specifies that individuals in charge and responsible for the conduct of business, as well as the entity itself, shall be deemed guilty. Given that the question asks for one correctly matched option, and both (1) and (2) are exact matches to section headings, this indicates a potential ambiguity in the question design. However, in such scenarios, one often looks for the most direct prohibition of an act related t

Question 27

The Rajasthan Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1992 received the assent of the Governor on -

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: 8th November, 1992. The correct answer is Option (1): '8th November, 1992'. This question requires specific factual knowledge regarding the enactment date of the Rajasthan Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1992. Such dates are crucial for legal professionals and students as they mark the official commencement and enforceability of a statute. The assent of the Governor is a vital step in the legislative process for state laws, signifying the final approval before the Act becomes legally binding. The Rajasthan Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1992, was enacted to curb malpractices and ensure fairness and transparency in public examinations conducted by the state government and other authorities. Knowing the precise date of assent helps in understanding the historical context and the legal timeline of such significant legislation. Let's analyze the other options: Option (0) '8th September, 1992': This date is incorrect. While it falls within the same year, it is not the date on which the Governor's assent was received for this particular Act. Misremembering or confusing dates can lead to errors in legal and administrative contexts, highlighting the importance of precise factual recall for statutory details. Option (2) '18th November, 1992': This date is also incorrect. Although it is close to the actual date, it is not the precise date of assent. A difference of ten days can be significant in legal matters, as it determines the exact point from which the provisions of an Act come into force. Accuracy in such details is paramount for legal interpretation and application. Option (3) '8th December, 1992': This date is incorrect. This date is a month later than the actual assent date. Such a discrepancy would mean that any actions taken under the Act between November 8th and December 8th, if this were the incorrect date, would be legally questionable. Therefore, it is essential to distinguish the correct date of assent

Question 28

Under which Section of the Arms Act, 1959 Magistrate has power to search and seizure of the firearms and ammunitions?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Section 22. The correct answer is Section 22 of the Arms Act, 1959. This section explicitly grants the power to search and seize arms and ammunition. Specifically, Section 22(1) states that whenever any Magistrate has reason to believe that any person has in his possession any arms or ammunition for any unlawful purpose, or that any person is not entitled to possess such arms or ammunition, the Magistrate may issue a warrant to search for the same. Furthermore, Section 22(2) allows a police officer, in certain urgent circumstances and with recorded reasons, to search without a warrant. This provision is crucial for enforcing the Arms Act by enabling authorities to prevent illegal possession and use of firearms and ammunition, thereby maintaining public safety and order. Let's analyze the other options: Option (0) Section 19: This section deals with 'Punishment for contravention of license conditions, etc.'. It prescribes penalties for individuals who violate the conditions of their arms license or other provisions of the Act. While it is an important enforcement provision, it focuses on the punitive aspect after a violation has occurred, rather than granting the power of search and seizure to a Magistrate. It does not empower a Magistrate to initiate search operations. Option (2) Section 21: This section pertains to 'Seizure and detention of arms, etc.'. It primarily empowers a police officer or any other officer authorized by the Central Government to seize and detain arms or ammunition in certain situations, such as when they are being carried in contravention of the Act or when a license has been suspended or revoked. While it deals with seizure, it does not explicitly grant the Magistrate the power to order a search or seizure through a warrant, as Section 22 does. Section 21 focuses on the powers of executive officers to act in specific circumstances, often following or preceding a judicial process. Option (3) Section 20: This section deals with

Question 29

"The question is, whether A murdered B. Marks on the ground, produced by a struggle at or near the place where the murder was committed, are relevant facts." This illustration is related to which Section of Indian Evidence Act?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Section 7. The correct answer is Section 7 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. This section deals with 'Facts which are the occasion, cause or effect of facts in issue'. It states that facts which are the occasion, cause or effect, immediate or otherwise, of relevant facts, or facts in issue, or which constitute the state of things under which they happened, or which afforded an opportunity for their occurrence or transaction, are relevant. In the given illustration, the 'marks on the ground, produced by a struggle at or near the place where the murder was committed' are direct 'effects' of the struggle, which itself is a part of the transaction leading to the murder (the fact in issue). These marks provide crucial circumstantial evidence by showing the physical consequences or 'effects' of the event, thereby making them relevant for proving whether A murdered B. They are physical manifestations left behind by the criminal act. Let's analyze the other options: Option (0) Section 8: This section deals with 'Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct'. It makes relevant any fact that shows or constitutes a motive or preparation for any fact in issue or relevant fact, or the conduct of any party or agent to any proceeding, in reference to such fact in issue or relevant fact. While conduct can include physical actions, the 'marks on the ground' are not 'conduct' in the sense of an action performed by a person, nor are they a 'motive' or 'preparation'. They are physical traces left by an event, which falls more squarely under 'effect' or 'state of things'. Option (2) Section 9: This section deals with 'Facts necessary to explain or introduce relevant facts'. It makes relevant facts that are necessary to explain or introduce a fact in issue or relevant fact; or which support or rebut an inference suggested by a fact in issue or relevant fact; or which establish the identity of anything or person whose identity is relevant; or fix the time or plac

Question 30

What is the enhanced punishment for Subsequent Conviction under Section 5 of The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: A term which shall not be less than one year but which may extend to the punishment provided for that offence.. The correct answer is Option (2): 'A term which shall not be less than one year but which may extend to the punishment provided for that offence.' This is directly stipulated in Section 5 of The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Section 5 is specifically titled 'Enhanced punishment for subsequent conviction'. It states: 'Whoever, after having been convicted of an offence under this Act, commits the like offence afterwards, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one year but which may extend to the punishment provided for that offence.' The legislative intent behind this provision is to impose a more stringent penalty on repeat offenders, acting as a stronger deterrent against atrocities committed against members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. This enhanced punishment reflects the seriousness with which the law views recidivism in such sensitive and grave matters, aiming to protect vulnerable communities more effectively. Let's analyze the other options: Option (0) 6 months: This term of imprisonment is not the prescribed enhanced punishment for a subsequent conviction under Section 5 of the Act. While 6 months might be a minimum or maximum punishment for some minor offenses under other laws, it does not apply to the specific provision of enhanced punishment for repeat offenses under the SC/ST Act. The Act mandates a significantly higher minimum imprisonment for subsequent convictions. Option (1) 3 months: Similar to the 6-month option, 3 months is not the enhanced punishment specified in Section 5 of the SC/ST Act. This period is far too short to reflect the legislative intent of imposing a stricter penalty on individuals who repeatedly commit atrocities against SC/ST communities. It would undermine the deterrent effect that Section 5 aims to

Question 31

'A' sees her husband committing murder of 'B'. The husband is prosecuted for the murder of 'B'. During trial 'A' gives evidence against her husband. The evidence is -

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: admissible against husband.. The correct answer is Option (3): 'admissible against husband.' Under Indian law, specifically the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, there is no general rule that prevents a spouse from testifying against the other spouse in criminal proceedings. Section 118 of the Indian Evidence Act lays down the general rule regarding who may testify, stating that all persons are competent to testify unless the court considers that they are prevented from understanding the questions or giving rational answers due to certain conditions (like tender years, extreme old age, disease, etc.). Spouses are not listed among these exceptions. Therefore, a wife is a competent witness against her husband in a criminal trial, and her evidence is admissible. This principle is a departure from historical common law rules in some other jurisdictions that considered spouses incompetent to testify against each other. Let's analyze the other options: Option (0) 'admissible only when given with the permission of the court.': This statement is incorrect. The Indian Evidence Act does not require the court's permission for a spouse to testify against the other spouse in a criminal case. Competency to testify is presumed unless specifically disqualified under Section 118. The court's role is to assess competency, not to grant permission for an otherwise competent witness to testify. Option (1) 'not admissible against husband.': This statement is fundamentally incorrect under Indian law. As explained, the Indian Evidence Act does not create a general bar against spousal testimony in criminal matters. While Section 122 of the Act provides a privilege for 'communications during marriage' (meaning a spouse cannot be compelled to disclose confidential communications made to them by their spouse during marriage), this privilege does not extend to observations of a crime. 'A' witnessing her husband commit murder is an observation of a fact, not a confidential communication

Question 32

In which of the following the Right to Private Defence of Body extends to causing death of the assailant?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Rape. The correct answer is Option (1): 'Rape'. Section 100 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) enumerates specific circumstances under which the right of private defence of the body extends to voluntarily causing the death of the assailant. The third clause of Section 100 explicitly states that this right extends to 'an assault with the intention of committing rape'. This provision recognizes the extreme violation and threat to bodily integrity and dignity that an attempt to commit rape entails, justifying the use of lethal force in self-defence. The law acknowledges that in such a dire situation, the victim or another person acting on their behalf is justified in taking the life of the assailant to prevent the commission of such a heinous crime. Let's analyze the other options: Option (0) 'Throwing acid to cause hurt': This is also a valid ground under Section 100, specifically the seventh clause, which states 'an act of throwing or administering acid or an attempt to throw or administer acid which may reasonably cause the apprehension that grievous hurt will otherwise be the consequence of such act'. If the acid attack causes a reasonable apprehension of grievous hurt, then causing the assailant's death is justified. However, the question asks for 'which of the following', implying one best answer. Both 'Rape' and 'Throwing acid' are explicitly listed. In a multiple-choice scenario where multiple options are factually correct based on the statute, 'Rape' is a historically prominent and unambiguous ground for causing death in self-defence. The acid attack clause has a condition of 'reasonable apprehension that grievous hurt will otherwise be the consequence', making it slightly more conditional than the direct 'intention of committing rape'. Option (2) 'Sexual harassment': While sexual harassment is a serious offense, it is not, by itself, one of the enumerated categories in Section 100 that justifies causing the death of the assailant. Sexual harassmen

Question 33

When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all -

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: each of such person is liable for that act in the same manner as if it has been done by him alone.. The correct answer is Option (0): 'each of such person is liable for that act in the same manner as if it has been done by him alone.' This statement is a direct quote from Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with 'Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention'. Section 34 is a crucial provision in criminal law that establishes the principle of joint liability. It states that when a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone. The essence of Section 34 is the 'common intention' shared by all participants. It does not require prior concert or a long-standing plan; a common intention can develop on the spur of the moment. Once a common intention is established, and a criminal act is done in furtherance of it, all participants are deemed equally responsible for the entire act, irrespective of their individual roles or the extent of their physical participation. This doctrine ensures that individuals who act together with a shared criminal purpose are held fully accountable, even if one person's direct physical contribution to the final act was minimal, as long as it was in furtherance of the common intention. Let's analyze the other options: Option (1) 'only the principal offender shall be liable for the offence.': This statement is incorrect. Section 34 specifically negates this idea. The principle of common intention ensures that all participants, not just a 'principal offender,' are held equally liable. There is no concept of a 'principal' and 'accessory' in the same way as in some other legal systems when common intention is established. All are deemed principals. Option (2) 'each of such person shall be liable according to the extent of his participation in the offence.': This s

Question 34

Match List-I with List-II and select the correct answer from the code given below the lists List-I (A) Dying declaration (B) Who may testify (C) Professional communication (D) Communication during marriage List-II (1) Section 118 I.E.A., 1872 (2) Section 32(1) I.E.A., 1872 (3) Section 122 I.E.A., 18

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: (A)-(2), (B)-(1), (C)-(4), (D)-(3). To correctly match the concepts in List-I with their corresponding sections in the Indian Evidence Act (I.E.A.), 1872, from List-II, we need to recall the provisions of the Act: 1. (A) Dying declaration: A dying declaration is a statement made by a person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., regarding the cause of their death or any circumstances of the transaction which resulted in their death. This concept is primarily covered under Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Section 32 deals with cases in which statements of relevant facts by persons who are dead or cannot be found, etc., are relevant. Sub-section (1) specifically includes statements as to the cause of death. Therefore, (A) matches with (2) Section 32(1) I.E.A. 2. (B) Who may testify: The general rule regarding the competency of witnesses, i.e., 'who may testify,' is laid down in Section 118 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. This section states that all persons are competent to testify unless the Court considers that they are prevented from understanding the questions put to them, or from giving rational answers to those questions, by tender years, extreme old age, disease, whether of body or mind, or any other cause of the same kind. Therefore, (B) matches with (1) Section 118 I.E.A. 3. (C) Professional communication: The privilege attached to 'professional communications,' particularly between a legal advisor and their client, is governed by Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. This section prohibits barristers, attorneys, pleaders, or vakils from disclosing any communication made to them in the course and for the purpose of their employment, or any advice given by them in their professional capacity. Therefore, (C) matches with (4) Section 126 I.E.A. 4. (D) Communication during marriage: The privilege concerning 'communications during marriage' between spouses is provided in Section 122 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. This sec

Question 35

In which of the following cases, it was held that an offence committed in India can be tried by the courts in India, whether perpetrator of crime resides in India or foreign country?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Mobarik Ali Ahmed V. State of Bombay, AIR 1957 SC 857. This question relates to the territorial jurisdiction of Indian courts, specifically concerning offenses committed within India by individuals, regardless of their nationality or residence. The Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) govern this aspect. Analysis of Options: Option (1) Gopal Vinayak Godse V. State, AIR 1961 SC 600: This case primarily dealt with the issue of the legality of the detention of Nathuram Godse (brother of Gopal Vinayak Godse) and the interpretation of Article 20(1) of the Constitution regarding ex post facto laws. It is not directly related to the territorial jurisdiction over foreigners committing crimes in India. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (2) Mobarik Ali Ahmed V. State of Bombay, AIR 1957 SC 857: This is the correct answer. This landmark Supreme Court case dealt with the issue of jurisdiction over a foreigner who was not physically present in India but committed offenses (cheating and forgery) that had their effect and consequences in India. The Court held that a foreigner who commits an offense within India, even if he is not physically present at the time of the commission of the offense but causes an act to be done in India, is amenable to the jurisdiction of Indian courts. The principle established is that the place where the crime is committed determines the jurisdiction, irrespective of the nationality or residence of the offender. Section 2 of the Indian Penal Code states that "Every person shall be liable to punishment under this Code for every act or omission contrary to the provisions thereof, of which he shall be guilty within India." This principle applies universally. The Mobarik Ali Ahmed case reinforced this by clarifying that even if the perpetrator is a foreigner residing abroad, if the offence is committed within India (or has a substantial nexus with India), Indian courts have jurisdiction. The question s

Question 36

Who shall establish a Court of Session for every Sessions Division?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: The State Government. This question pertains to the establishment of Courts of Session, a fundamental aspect of the criminal justice system in India. The relevant provision is found in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). Analysis of Options: Option (1) Governor of the State: The Governor is the constitutional head of the state, but the executive power to establish courts, especially subordinate courts like the Court of Session, is typically vested in the State Government, acting through its appropriate departments. The Governor acts on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers. Therefore, this option is incorrect as the Governor does not directly establish courts. Option (2) The State Government: This is the correct answer. Section 9(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, explicitly states: "The State Government shall establish a Court of Session for every sessions division." This provision clearly delegates the power and responsibility for establishing these courts to the respective State Governments. The State Government, being the executive authority, is responsible for the administrative setup and infrastructure of the judiciary at the district level. Option (3) The High Court of the State: While the High Court exercises superintendence over all courts and tribunals subordinate to it (Article 227 of the Constitution of India) and plays a crucial role in judicial administration, including the appointment, posting, and promotion of district judges, it does not have the power to establish a Court of Session. Its role is primarily judicial and supervisory, not legislative or executive in terms of creating new courts. The High Court's involvement is more in consultation and administration rather than establishment. Option (4) President of India: The President of India is the constitutional head of the Union. The establishment of Courts of Session falls under the purview of state administration and the CrPC, which is a concurrent sub

Question 37

'A' is cutting the wood with an axe at a place where children are playing. The axe flies off and kills a nearby child. 'A' is guilty of -

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Causing death by negligence. This scenario describes a situation where an act, though not intended to cause death, results in it due to carelessness. This falls under the ambit of 'Causing death by negligence' as defined in the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Analysis of Options: Option (1) Culpable Homicide not amounting to murder: Culpable homicide (Section 299 IPC) requires an intention to cause death, or intention to cause such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or knowledge that the act is likely to cause death. While the act of cutting wood with an axe is inherently risky, the scenario explicitly states that 'A' was cutting wood where children were playing, implying a lack of due care and caution. However, it does not suggest an intention or knowledge of likelihood of causing death to any specific person, especially not the child who was 'nearby'. The 'grave and sudden provocation' or 'exceeding the right of private defence' exceptions that reduce murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder are not present here. The primary element missing for culpable homicide is the requisite mens rea (guilty mind) concerning death or grievous injury likely to cause death. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (2) No offence: This option is incorrect because 'A' clearly acted without due care and caution, leading to the death of a child. The act of cutting wood with an axe in an area where children are known to be playing carries an inherent risk. A reasonable and prudent person would take precautions or choose a different location. The failure to do so, resulting in death, constitutes a criminal offense. Therefore, 'A' cannot be absolved of all liability. Option (3) Causing death by negligence: This is the correct answer. The offense is defined under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code, which states: "Whoever causes the death of any person by doing any rash or negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide, shall be punished..." In this ca

Question 38

'Unfair Means' is defined under the Rajasthan Public Examination (Measures for Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 2022 in -

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Section 2(f). This question requires specific knowledge of the Rajasthan Public Examination (Measures for Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 2022. Acts and statutes typically have a dedicated section for definitions to ensure clarity and uniformity in the interpretation of terms used throughout the legislation. Analysis of Options: Option (1) Section 3: Section 3 of an Act often deals with the application of the Act, its commencement, or the general prohibition of an activity. In the context of the Rajasthan Public Examination (Measures for Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 2022, Section 3 typically outlines the prohibition of unfair means in public examinations. It defines the scope of the offense rather than defining the term 'unfair means' itself. Therefore, this option is incorrect as it describes the prohibited acts, not the definition of the term. Option (2) Section 2(d): Section 2 of any legislation is almost universally dedicated to definitions. Sub-sections within Section 2 define specific terms. While 'unfair means' is defined in Section 2, the specific clause (d) might define another term relevant to the Act, such as 'Examination Authority' or 'Examination'. Without consulting the specific Act, it's difficult to pinpoint what 2(d) defines, but it is not 'unfair means'. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (3) Section 2(f): This is the correct answer. As per the Rajasthan Public Examination (Measures for Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 2022, the term 'unfair means' is precisely defined under Section 2, clause (f). This section provides a comprehensive explanation of what constitutes 'unfair means' within the context of public examinations and recruitment processes, covering various acts of malpractice, cheating, and unauthorized assistance. The definition is crucial for the proper enforcement and understanding of the Act's provisions. Option (4) Section 2(c): Similar to Section 2(d), Section

Question 39

Under Section 262 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 in case of conviction the maximum term of imprisonment is -

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Three months. This question tests knowledge of the specific provisions governing summary trials under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). Summary trials are designed for the speedy disposal of minor offenses, and as such, they have specific limitations on the sentences that can be imposed. Analysis of Options: Option (1) Six months: While six months is a common term of imprisonment for various minor offenses, it is not the maximum prescribed specifically for convictions in summary trials under Section 262 of the CrPC. Therefore, this option is incorrect in the context of this specific provision. Option (2) One year: One year is a significant term of imprisonment and is typically associated with more serious offenses or regular trials, not the expedited process of summary trials. The very nature of summary trials is to deal with less severe cases quickly, which implies a shorter maximum sentence. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (3) One month: One month is a relatively short term of imprisonment, and while it might be imposed in some summary trial convictions, it is not the maximum term allowed under Section 262. The maximum limit is higher than one month. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (4) Three months: This is the correct answer. Section 262(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, explicitly states: "No sentence of imprisonment exceeding three months shall be passed in the case of any conviction under this Chapter." Chapter XXI of the CrPC deals with summary trials (Sections 260-265). This limitation ensures that only minor offenses, for which a short sentence is deemed sufficient, are tried summarily, thereby upholding the principle of proportionality and the expedited nature of these proceedings. The legislative intent behind this provision is to prevent serious cases from being rushed through summary procedures and to reserve more substantial punishments for regular trials where a more elaborate process of evi

Question 40

In which of the following dates the Arms Act, 1959 came into force?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: 01 October, 1962. Understanding the commencement date of a statute is crucial in legal studies, as it determines when the provisions of the law become legally binding and enforceable. The Arms Act, 1959, is a significant piece of legislation regulating the possession, manufacture, sale, and transfer of arms and ammunition in India. Analysis of Options: Option (1) 01 July, 1960: This date is incorrect. While it falls within the period shortly after the Act was passed, it is not the official date of commencement for the Arms Act, 1959. Acts often have a gap between their enactment (receiving presidential assent) and their commencement (coming into force) to allow for the preparation of rules, regulations, and administrative machinery for implementation. Option (2) 01 October, 1962: This is the correct answer. The Arms Act, 1959 (Act No. 54 of 1959) received Presidential assent on 23rd December 1959. However, it was brought into force much later, on 1st October 1962, by a notification issued by the Central Government in the Official Gazette. This delay was likely to allow the government to frame the necessary rules (Arms Rules, 1962) and establish the administrative framework required for the effective implementation of the Act across the country. Option (3) 23 December, 1959: This date marks the day the Arms Act, 1959, received Presidential assent, meaning it was formally enacted. However, enactment is different from commencement. An Act comes into force on a date notified by the government, which can be the date of assent, a retrospective date, or a future date. In this case, the commencement date was later. Therefore, this option is incorrect as it refers to the date of assent, not commencement. Option (4) 01 September, 1961: This date is also incorrect. It falls between the date of assent and the actual commencement date but does not correspond to the official notification for the Act's enforcement. Therefore, this option is incorrect. In conclusion

Question 41

Under which Section of the Arms Act, 1959 one cannot sell or transfer firearms which does not have any identification mark?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Section 6. This question delves into the specific prohibitions under the Arms Act, 1959, concerning firearms lacking identification marks. Identification marks are crucial for tracing firearms and maintaining regulatory control. Analysis of Options: Option (1) Section 5: Section 5 of the Arms Act, 1959, deals with 'Licence for acquisition and possession of firearms and ammunition'. It mandates that no person shall acquire, have in his possession, or carry any firearm or ammunition unless he holds a licence issued under the Act. While related to legality, it does not specifically address the issue of 'identification marks' for selling or transferring. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (2) Section 7: Section 7 of the Arms Act, 1959, deals with 'Prohibition of manufacture, sale, etc., of arms without licence'. This section prohibits the manufacture, sale, transfer, conversion, repair, test, or exposure for sale or transfer of any arms or ammunition without a licence. While it prohibits sale/transfer without a licence, it does not specifically mention the condition of 'identification marks'. Therefore, this option is incorrect as it focuses on the licensing aspect, not the identification mark. Option (3) Section 8: Section 8 of the Arms Act, 1959, deals with 'Prohibition of shortening of firearms or conversion of imitation firearms into firearms'. This section prohibits altering firearms or converting imitation firearms. It has no direct relevance to the selling or transferring of firearms without identification marks. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (4) Section 6: This is the correct answer. Section 6 of the Arms Act, 1959, is titled 'Prohibition of acquisition or possession of firearms without identification marks'. It states: "No person shall acquire, have in his possession or carry any firearm or ammunition unless the same has been proved in such manner as may be prescribed and bears such proof mark as may be prescribed." Althou

Question 42

Arrange the following in the chronological order on the basis of Sections of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - (I) Procedure for summary trial (II) Information in cognizable offence (III) Examination of witness by police (IV) Recording of confessions and statements

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: (II), (III), (IV), (I). To arrange these procedures chronologically based on their sections in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), we need to identify the relevant sections for each item: (I) Procedure for summary trial: This procedure is covered under Chapter XXI of the CrPC, specifically from Sections 260 to 265. Summary trials are a method of conducting trials for minor offenses in an expedited manner, typically occurring after the initial investigation and charge-sheeting. (II) Information in cognizable offence: This refers to the process of lodging a First Information Report (FIR) for a cognizable offense. This is governed by Section 154 of the CrPC. This is usually the very first step in a criminal investigation after an offense is reported. (III) Examination of witness by police: This process involves the police questioning witnesses during the investigation of a case. This is covered under Section 161 of the CrPC. This occurs after the FIR is registered and the investigation commences. (IV) Recording of confessions and statements: This refers to the recording of confessions and statements by a Magistrate during the course of an investigation. This is governed by Section 164 of the CrPC. This typically happens after witnesses have been examined and crucial evidence or confessions are obtained by the police, which then need to be recorded by a Magistrate to ensure their voluntariness and admissibility. Now, let's arrange them in chronological order based on their section numbers: 1. Section 154 (II) - Information in cognizable offence: This is the earliest stage, dealing with the registration of an FIR. 2. Section 161 (III) - Examination of witness by police: This follows the FIR, as part of the police investigation. 3. Section 164 (IV) - Recording of confessions and statements: This occurs during the investigation, often after initial witness examination, when a confession or statement needs to be formally recorded by a Magistrate. 4.

Question 43

A hangman who hangs the prisoners pursuant to the order of the court is exempted from criminal liability by virtue of -

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Section 78 of I.P.C.. This question addresses the general exceptions to criminal liability under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), specifically concerning acts done under the authority of law. The act of a hangman executing a death sentence is a classic example of such an exception. Analysis of Options: Option (1) Section 77 of I.P.C.: Section 77 of the IPC deals with the 'Act of Judge when acting judicially'. It states that nothing is an offence which is done by a Judge when acting judicially in the exercise of any power which is, or which in good faith he believes to be, given to him by law. This section protects judges for their judicial acts, not individuals carrying out court orders. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (2) Section 78 of I.P.C.: This is the correct answer. Section 78 of the IPC is titled 'Act done pursuant to the judgment or order of Court'. It states: "Nothing which is done in pursuance of, or which is warranted by the judgment or order of, a Court of Justice; if done whilst such judgment or order remains in force, is an offence, notwithstanding that the Court may have had no jurisdiction to pass such judgment or order, provided the person doing the act in good faith believes that the Court had such jurisdiction." The hangman's act of executing a prisoner is directly in pursuance of a judgment and order of a Court of Justice. The hangman is merely an instrument of the law, carrying out a lawful command. As long as the court's order is in force, the hangman is protected from criminal liability for performing this duty. This section ensures that individuals who are legally bound to execute court orders are not held criminally responsible for acts that would otherwise be offenses. Option (3) Section 79 of I.P.C.: Section 79 of the IPC deals with 'Act done by a person justified, or by mistake of fact believing himself justified, by law'. This section protects individuals who, by reason of a mistake of fact and not by reason of a

Question 44

'B' puts his hand by making an aperture in D's house. What offence 'B' has committed?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: House Breaking. This question requires an understanding of the various forms of trespass defined under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), specifically focusing on offenses against property related to dwelling houses. Analysis of Options: Option (1) Lurking House Trespass: Lurking house-trespass is defined in Section 443 of the IPC. It occurs when a person commits house-trespass, having taken precautions to conceal such house-trespass from any person who has a right to exclude or eject the trespasser from the house. While 'B' is entering 'D's house, the act described (making an aperture and putting a hand inside) is a specific mode of entry that constitutes a more aggravated form of trespass than merely 'lurking'. Therefore, this option is incorrect as it describes a different, albeit related, offense. Option (2) House Breaking: This is the correct answer. Section 445 of the IPC defines 'House-breaking'. One of the six ways in which house-breaking can be committed is described in clause (c): "if he effects his entrance into the house or any part of it through any passage not intended by any inmate of the house for human entrance, or through any passage opened by himself for the purpose." In this scenario, 'B' makes an 'aperture' (an opening or hole) in 'D's house and puts his hand inside. This act of creating an opening and using it to gain partial entry (even just a hand) constitutes effecting entrance through a passage opened by himself for the purpose, which squarely falls under the definition of house-breaking. The act of making an aperture is a forcible or unauthorized means of gaining access, which is the essence of house-breaking. Option (3) House Trespass: House-trespass is defined in Section 442 of the IPC as committing criminal trespass by entering into or remaining in any building, tent, or vessel used as a human dwelling, or any building used for worship or as a place for the custody of property. While 'B' is indeed committing house-trespass, th

Question 45

Who can be appointed as Special Public Prosecutor?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: A person who has been in practice as an advocate for not less than 10 years.. This question pertains to the qualifications required for appointment as a Special Public Prosecutor under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). Public Prosecutors play a vital role in the administration of criminal justice, representing the State in court proceedings. Analysis of Options: Option (1) A person who has been in practice as an advocate for not less than 15 years: While a person with 15 years of experience would certainly be qualified, this is not the minimum eligibility criterion specified in the CrPC for a Special Public Prosecutor. The law sets a lower threshold. Therefore, this option is incorrect as it states a higher, not the minimum, requirement. Option (2) A person who has been in practice as an advocate for not less than 7 years: This is the qualification requirement for a regular Public Prosecutor or an Additional Public Prosecutor appointed by the State Government for any district, as per Section 24(7) of the CrPC. However, the question specifically asks about a Special Public Prosecutor. Therefore, this option is incorrect for a Special Public Prosecutor. Option (3) A person who has been in practice as an advocate for more than 12 years: This is not a specified minimum or exact requirement under the CrPC for any category of Public Prosecutor. The law uses precise figures for years of practice. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (4) A person who has been in practice as an advocate for not less than 10 years: This is the correct answer. Section 24(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, states: "The Central Government or the State Government may appoint, for the purposes of any case or class of cases, a person who has been in practice as an advocate for not less than ten years as a Special Public Prosecutor." This provision allows for the appointment of experienced advocates to handle specific or complex cases, recognizing that such

Question 46

'Y' gives grave and sudden provocation to 'A', 'A' on this provocation, fires a pistol at 'Y', neither intending nor knowing himself to be likely to kill 'Z', who is near him, but out of sight, 'A' kills 'Z'. Here -

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: 'A' has committed the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder.. This complex scenario involves the principles of provocation and transferred malice under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). We need to analyze the elements of culpable homicide, murder, and their exceptions. Analysis of Options: Option (1) 'A' has not committed any offence as there was neither intention nor knowledge that he is likely to kill 'Z' who is near him but out of sight: This option is incorrect. While 'A' did not intend to kill 'Z' specifically, and 'Z' was out of sight, the act of firing a pistol at 'Y' with the intention or knowledge of causing death or grievous injury to 'Y' is an unlawful act. The law of 'transferred malice' (Section 301 IPC) comes into play here. When an offender intends to cause the death of one person but, by mistake or accident, causes the death of another, the offense is treated as if the intended person's death had been caused. Therefore, 'A' cannot claim 'no offence' simply because the victim was unintended. An offense has certainly been committed. Option (2) 'A' has committed the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder: This is the correct answer. Let's break down the reasoning: 1. Grave and Sudden Provocation: The scenario explicitly states that 'Y' gives 'grave and sudden provocation' to 'A'. Exception 1 to Section 300 of the IPC states that culpable homicide is not murder if the offender, whilst deprived of the power of self-control by grave and sudden provocation, causes the death of the person who gave the provocation, or causes the death of any other person by mistake or accident. If 'A' had killed 'Y' under this provocation, it would have been culpable homicide not amounting to murder. 2. Transferred Malice (Section 301 IPC): Section 301 of the IPC, known as the doctrine of transferred malice or transfer of motive, states: "If a person, by doing an act which he intends or knows to be likely to cause death, commits culpabl

Question 47

'A' is on his trial for the murder of 'C'. There is evidence to show that 'C' was murdered by 'A' and 'B', and that 'B' said - 'A' and 'I' murdered 'C'. Can this statement be taken into consideration by the court against 'A'?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Yes, statement of 'B' may be taken into consideration against 'A'.. This question addresses a crucial aspect of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, specifically concerning the admissibility and consideration of confessions made by co-accused persons. The relevant provision is Section 30 of the Act. Analysis of Options: Option (1) Yes, statement of 'B' may be taken into consideration against 'A'. This is the correct answer. Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, states: "When more persons than one are being jointly tried for the same offence, and a confession made by one of such persons affecting himself and some other of such persons is proved, the Court may take into consideration such confession as against such other person as well as against the person who makes such confession." In this scenario, 'A' and 'B' are being jointly tried for the murder of 'C' (the 'same offence'). 'B' has made a statement (which, if proved, amounts to a confession) implicating both himself ('I murdered C') and 'A' ('A and I murdered C'). Therefore, all the conditions of Section 30 are met. The court has the discretion to 'take into consideration' this confession not only against 'B' (the maker) but also against 'A' (the co-accused). It's important to note that a co-accused's confession is not substantive evidence upon which a conviction can solely be based, but it can be used to corroborate other evidence against the co-accused. Option (2) No, statement of 'B' against 'A' cannot be taken into consideration. This option is incorrect because it directly contradicts the provision of Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act. Section 30 specifically allows for such a confession to be taken into consideration, provided the conditions (joint trial, same offense, confession implicating both) are met. The statement, while not a full proof, is a piece of evidence that the court can weigh alongside other evidence. Therefore, a blanket exclusion is incorrect. Option (3) Can be taken

Question 48

Which of the following provision of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 defines the term 'Best Interest of Child'?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Section 2(9). This question requires specific knowledge of the definitions provided in the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (JJ Act, 2015). The 'best interest of the child' is a foundational principle of this Act and child rights jurisprudence globally, making its precise definition crucial. Analysis of Options: Option (1) Section 2(5): Section 2 of the JJ Act, 2015, is dedicated to definitions. Section 2(5) defines 'authorised person'. This is not the definition for 'best interest of the child'. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (2) Section 2(9): This is the correct answer. Section 2(9) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, defines "best interest of the child" as "the basis for any decision taken regarding the child, to ensure fulfilment of his basic rights and needs, identity, social well-being and family welfare, and protection from abuse, neglect and exploitation, and includes giving due consideration to the child's opinion." This comprehensive definition guides all authorities and institutions working under the Act to prioritize the holistic well-being and rights of the child in every decision-making process. It is a cornerstone principle that informs the interpretation and application of the entire Act. Option (3) Section 2(14): Section 2(14) of the JJ Act, 2015, defines 'child in conflict with law'. This is a critical definition for the Act but is not the definition for 'best interest of the child'. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (4) Section 2(12): Section 2(12) of the JJ Act, 2015, defines 'child friendly'. This term is related to the environment and procedures suitable for children but is not the definition for 'best interest of the child'. Therefore, this option is incorrect. In summary, the principle of 'best interest of the child' is explicitly and comprehensively defined in Section 2(9) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, se

Question 49

'A' by putting 'B' in fear of grievous hurt, dishonestly induces 'B' to sign a blank paper and delivers it to 'A'. 'B' signs and delivers the paper to 'A'. 'A' has committed the offence of-

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Extortion. This scenario describes a specific type of offense against property under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), where property or valuable security is obtained through intimidation. We need to differentiate between various related offenses. Analysis of Options: Option (1) Cheating: Cheating is defined under Section 415 of the IPC. It involves deception, where a person, by deceiving another, fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so deceived to deliver any property or to consent that any person shall retain any property, or intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property. In the given scenario, 'A' is putting 'B' in fear, not deceiving 'B'. The element of deception is absent. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (2) Forgery: Forgery is defined under Section 463 of the IPC. It involves making a false document or false electronic record with intent to cause damage or injury to the public or to any person, or to support any claim or title, or to cause any person to part with property, or to enter into any express or implied contract, or with intent to commit fraud or that fraud may be committed. In this case, 'B' is signing the paper, not 'A' making a false document. 'A' is inducing 'B' to sign, not forging 'B's signature or creating a false document himself. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (3) Robbery: Robbery is an aggravated form of either theft or extortion, defined under Section 390 of the IPC. It occurs when, in committing theft, the offender voluntarily causes or attempts to cause to any person death or hurt or wrongful restraint, or fear of instant death or of instant hurt or of instant wrongful restraint. Similarly, extortion becomes robbery if the offender, at the time of committing the extortion, is in the prese

Question 50

When during the course of an inquiry under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 the child completes the age of eighteen years, then the Board will -

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: continue the inquiry and may pass order treating the child as continuing to be a child.. This question addresses a critical procedural aspect under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (JJ Act, 2015), specifically dealing with situations where a child in conflict with law attains majority during the pendency of an inquiry. The JJ Act emphasizes the principle of 'age at the time of commission of offense'. Analysis of Options: Option (1) continue the inquiry treating him as an adult: This option is incorrect. The fundamental principle of the JJ Act is that the age of the person at the time of the commission of the offense is determinative. If the person was a child (below 18 years) when the offense was committed, they are to be dealt with under the JJ Act, regardless of whether they turn 18 during the inquiry or trial. Treating them as an adult would defeat the protective and rehabilitative purpose of the Act. While the inquiry continues, the treatment remains as a child, not an adult. Option (2) stop the inquiry: This option is incorrect. The inquiry cannot simply be stopped because the child has turned 18. This would lead to a miscarriage of justice, as the alleged offense would go unaddressed. The legal process must continue to its logical conclusion, ensuring that the child's case is properly adjudicated under the appropriate legal framework. Option (3) continue the inquiry but will not pass any order: This option is incorrect. If the inquiry continues, it must lead to a conclusion, which includes passing appropriate orders based on the findings. The Board's function is to conduct inquiries and pass orders for the care, protection, and rehabilitation of children in conflict with law. To continue the inquiry without passing any order would render the entire process meaningless and leave the child's fate unresolved. Option (4) continue the inquiry and may pass order treating the child as continuing to be a child. This is t

Question 51

The provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 do not apply to.................

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Court-martial convened under the Army Act. This question tests knowledge of the applicability and exceptions to the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, as outlined in its very first section. Understanding the scope of a statute is fundamental to its correct application. Analysis of Options: Option (1) Court-martial: This option is partially correct but not precise enough. The Indian Evidence Act does apply to some courts-martial. Section 1 of the Indian Evidence Act states that it applies to "all judicial proceedings in or before any Court, including Courts-martial". However, there is a crucial exception. Therefore, stating that it does not apply to any court-martial is incorrect, as it applies to courts-martial not covered by specific military acts. This option is too broad and thus incorrect. Option (2) Court-martial convened under the Army Act: This is the correct answer. Section 1 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, explicitly states its applicability: "It extends to the whole of India... and applies to all judicial proceedings in or before any Court, including Courts-martial, other than Courts-martial convened under the Army Act, the Naval Discipline Act or the Indian Navy (Discipline) Act, 1934, or the Air Force Act." This specific exclusion means that courts-martial convened under these particular military statutes have their own rules of evidence and procedure, and the general provisions of the Indian Evidence Act do not govern them. This exception acknowledges the specialized nature of military justice systems. Therefore, this option accurately identifies one of the specific exclusions. Option (3) All judicial proceedings in any Court: This option is incorrect. The Indian Evidence Act does apply to all judicial proceedings in any civil or criminal court, subject to the specific exclusions mentioned in Section 1. The Act is the general law of evidence for the Indian judiciary. Therefore, stating it does not apply to all judicial proceedings is fundament

Question 52

Proceedings under Section 258 of Cr.P.C. can be stopped by a Magistrate -

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: in a summons case instituted otherwise than upon a complaint.. This question relates to the power of a Magistrate to stop proceedings in certain types of cases under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). This power is a specific provision designed for the efficient disposal of cases. Analysis of Options: Option (1) in a summons case instituted upon a complaint: This option is incorrect. Section 258 of the CrPC explicitly excludes summons cases instituted upon a complaint from the Magistrate's power to stop proceedings. The rationale is that in complaint cases, the complainant has taken the initiative, and the Magistrate's power to stop proceedings without a judgment is limited to cases where the State is the initiator, allowing for greater flexibility in state-initiated prosecutions. Option (2) in a summons case instituted otherwise than upon a complaint. This is the correct answer. Section 258 of the CrPC is titled "Power to stop proceedings in certain cases." It states: "In any summons-case instituted otherwise than upon complaint, a Magistrate of the first class or, with the previous sanction of the High Court, any other Judicial Magistrate, may, for reasons to be recorded by him, stop the proceedings at any stage without pronouncing any judgment and where such stoppage of proceedings is made after the evidence of the principal witnesses has been recorded, pronounce a judgment of acquittal, and in any other case, release the accused." This provision allows a Magistrate to stop proceedings in summons cases that are initiated by police report or suo motu (otherwise than upon a complaint), typically for minor offenses, to prevent unnecessary prolongation of trivial matters. The key condition is that the case must be a summons case and not instituted on a complaint. Option (3) in a warrant case instituted upon a complaint: This option is incorrect. Section 258 specifically applies to summons cases, not warrant cases. Warrant cases involve more

Question 53

In which Section of Cr.P.C. the provision for 'bail to require accused to appear before next Appellate Court' has been made?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Section 437A. This question asks about a specific provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), related to bail conditions after a trial court judgment, particularly concerning appearance before an appellate court. This provision was introduced to streamline the appellate process. Analysis of Options: Option (1) Section 437A: This is the correct answer. Section 437A of the CrPC, titled "Bail to require accused to appear before next Appellate Court," was inserted by an amendment to ensure the presence of the accused during appellate proceedings. It mandates that "Before concluding the trial, the Court shall require the accused to execute a bail bond with or without sureties, to appear before the higher Court as and when such Court issues notice in respect of any appeal or petition filed against the judgment of the respective Court, and such bail bond shall be in force for six months: Provided that, if such appeal or petition is filed within the said period of six months, the bail bond shall continue to be in force till the disposal of the appeal or petition." This provision addresses the practical issue of ensuring that a convicted or acquitted person remains available for further legal proceedings if an appeal is filed. Option (2) Section 439: Section 439 of the CrPC deals with the "Special powers of High Court or Court of Session regarding bail." This section grants superior courts (High Court and Court of Session) broad discretionary powers to grant bail, including in non-bailable offenses, and to impose conditions. While it relates to bail, it does not specifically address the requirement to appear before an appellate court after a trial court's judgment. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (3) Section 436A: Section 436A of the CrPC, titled "Maximum period for which an undertrial prisoner can be detained," provides for the release of an undertrial prisoner on bail if they have undergone detention for a period extending up to on

Question 54

A person finds a valuable ring lying on the road and without knowing to whom it belongs sells it immediately. He has committed the offence of -

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Criminal misappropriation. This scenario describes a common situation involving lost property and its dishonest appropriation. The Indian Penal Code (IPC) distinguishes between various offenses against property, and the specific circumstances determine which offense applies. Analysis of Options: Option (1) Mischief: Mischief is defined under Section 425 of the IPC. It involves causing wrongful loss or damage to any person or to the public by destroying or damaging property, or by doing any act which diminishes its value or utility, or affects it injuriously. In this case, the person is selling the ring, not destroying or damaging it. The intent is to gain from the sale, not to cause loss to the owner by damaging the property. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (2) Criminal breach of trust: Criminal breach of trust is defined under Section 405 of the IPC. It occurs when a person, being in any manner entrusted with property, or with any dominion over property, dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use that property, or dishonestly uses or disposes of that property in violation of any direction of law or any legal contract. The key element here is 'entrustment'. In the given scenario, the ring was found lying on the road; it was not entrusted to the person. There was no relationship of trust. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (3) Criminal misappropriation: This is the correct answer. Criminal misappropriation is defined under Section 403 of the IPC: "Whoever dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use any movable property, shall be punished..." The scenario perfectly fits this definition. The person finds a valuable ring (movable property) and immediately sells it, converting it to his own use. The act is 'dishonest' because he does so "without knowing to whom it belongs," implying he makes no effort to find the true owner before appropriating it. Explanation 2 to Section 403 specifically addresses this: "A per

Question 55

The provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, other than those relating to Chapters VIII, X and XI thereof, shall not apply -

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: to the State of Nagaland. This question tests knowledge of the territorial extent and specific exceptions to the applicability of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). The CrPC is a central law, but certain regions have historically been granted partial exemptions due to their unique administrative and social structures. Analysis of Options: Option (1) to the State of Manipur: The State of Manipur is generally fully governed by the provisions of the CrPC, 1973. There are no specific blanket exclusions for Manipur regarding the application of the CrPC, apart from any specific local laws that might modify its application in certain areas or for certain communities. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (2) to the State of Nagaland: This is the correct answer. Section 1(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, states: "It extends to the whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir: Provided that the provisions of this Code, other than those relating to Chapters VIII, X and XI thereof, shall not apply in relation to the State of Nagaland and the tribal areas." This means that for Nagaland and tribal areas, only Chapters VIII (Security for keeping the peace and for good behaviour), X (Maintenance of public order and tranquility), and XI (Preventive action of the Police) of the CrPC apply. The rest of the Code, dealing with investigation, inquiry, trial, and other procedural aspects, does not apply, allowing these regions to follow their customary laws and procedures in many criminal matters. This special provision acknowledges the unique socio-cultural and administrative setup of Nagaland and certain tribal areas. Option (3) to the State of Tripura: The State of Tripura is generally fully governed by the provisions of the CrPC, 1973. There are no specific blanket exclusions for Tripura regarding the application of the CrPC. Therefore, this option is incorrect. Option (4) to the State of Meghalaya: The State of Meghalaya is generall

Question 56

Which of the following combination is correctly matched?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Prohibited ammunition - Section 2(h) Arms Act, 1959. This question requires precise knowledge of the definitions provided in Section 2 of the Arms Act, 1959. Accuracy in legal definitions is paramount for correct interpretation and application of the law. Analysis of Options: Option (1) Arms - Section 2(e), Arms Act, 1959: This combination is incorrect. In the Arms Act, 1959, 'arms' is defined under Section 2(c). Section 2(e) defines 'firearms'. Therefore, this option is a mismatch. Option (2) Prohibited ammunition - Section 2(h) Arms Act, 1959: This is a correctly matched combination. Section 2(h) of the Arms Act, 1959, explicitly defines "prohibited ammunition" as "such ammunition as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare to be prohibited ammunition." This definition is precise and accurate as per the statute. Option (3) Magistrate - Section 2(d) Arms Act, 1959: This combination is partially correct but not perfectly precise. Section 2(d) of the Arms Act, 1959, defines "district magistrate" (which includes an Additional District Magistrate, and in Presidency-towns, the Commissioner of Police). The option states 'Magistrate', which is a broader term than 'District Magistrate'. While a District Magistrate is a type of Magistrate, the Act specifically defines 'District Magistrate' in 2(d), not 'Magistrate' in general. In legal questions requiring precise statutory definitions, this distinction can be critical. Given that option (2) is an exact match, this option is less accurate due to the generalization of the term. Option (4) Licensing authority - Section 2(e a) Arms Act, 1959: This combination is incorrect. Section 2(f) of the Arms Act, 1959, defines "licensing authority" as "an officer or authority empowered to grant licences under this Act." There is no sub-section 2(ea) in the Arms Act, 1959, for this definition. Therefore, this option is a clear mismatch. Comparing the options, option (2) provides an exact

Question 57

If First Information Report is registered in a case in which one offence is cognizable and the other is non-cognizable, then which of the following is correct?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: The case shall be deemed to be a cognizable case.. This question pertains to the procedure for registering a First Information Report (FIR) when a case involves a combination of cognizable and non-cognizable offences, as per the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), 1973. The relevant provision here is Section 155(4) of the CrPC. Let's analyze each option: Option (1): "The case shall be deemed to be a cognizable case." This option accurately reflects the legal position. Section 155(4) of the CrPC explicitly states: "Where a case relates to two or more offences of which at least one is cognizable, the case shall be deemed to be a cognizable case, notwithstanding that the other offences are non-cognizable." The rationale behind this provision is to ensure that serious offences (cognizable ones, where police can arrest without a warrant) are investigated thoroughly, even if they are mixed with less serious (non-cognizable) offences. Once a case is deemed cognizable, the police gain the power to investigate the entire matter, including the non-cognizable parts, without needing a Magistrate's order, which would otherwise be required for non-cognizable offences under Section 155(2). Option (2): "If it is a warrant case, it shall be deemed to be a cognizable case otherwise it shall be deemed to be a non-cognizable case." This option introduces the concept of a 'warrant case', which is a classification based on the severity of punishment (offences punishable with imprisonment for more than two years). While the distinction between warrant and summons cases is important in CrPC for trial procedures, it is not the primary determinant for whether a mixed-offence case is deemed cognizable or non-cognizable at the FIR registration stage. The cognizable/non-cognizable distinction is about police power to arrest and investigate without a warrant, irrespective of whether the case is ultimately a warrant or summons case. Therefore, this option is incorrect as it conflates

Question 58

A proclaimed person whose property has been attached can claim the property or the net proceeds of the sale on appearance -

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Within 2 years from the date of attachment. This question relates to the provisions concerning proclaimed persons and the attachment of their property under the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), 1973. Specifically, it refers to Section 85 of the CrPC, which deals with the release, sale, and restoration of attached property. Let's analyze each option: Option (1): "Within 2 years from the date of attachment." This option is correct as per Section 85(3) of the CrPC. Section 85(3) states: "If, within two years from the date of the attachment, any person whose property is or has been attached under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 83, appears voluntarily or is apprehended and brought before the Court by whose order the property was attached, or any Court to which that Court is subordinate, and proves to the satisfaction of such Court that he did not abscond or conceal himself for the purpose of avoiding execution of the warrant, and that he had no such notice of the proclamation as to enable him to attend within the time specified therein, such property, or, if it has been sold, the net proceeds of the sale, or, if part only thereof has been sold, the net proceeds of the sale and the remainder of the property, shall, after satisfying therefrom all costs incurred in consequence of the attachment, be delivered to him." This provision provides a specific window of two years for the proclaimed person to appear and claim their property or its proceeds, provided they can satisfy the court about their reasons for non-appearance. Option (2): "Within 6 months from the date of attachment." This option is incorrect. While Section 85(2) of the CrPC mentions a six-month period, it pertains to the sale of attached property. It states that if the attached property is perishable or if the Court considers it expedient to sell it, it may be sold at any time. However, if the property is not perishable, it generally cannot be sold until six months have elapsed fro

Question 59

Match List-I with List-II and select the correct answer using the code given below the lists List-I (A) Forms of summons (B) Summons how served (C) Form of warrant of arrest and duration (D) Where warrant may be executed List-II (1) Section 70 Cr.P.C. (2) Section 61 Cr.P.C. (3) Section 62 Cr.P.C. (4

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: (A)-(2), (B)-(3), (C)-(1), (D)-(4). This question requires matching specific aspects of summons and warrants under the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), 1973, with their corresponding sections. Understanding these provisions is fundamental to criminal procedure. Let's break down the matching process: List-I (Aspects of Summons/Warrants) and their correct CrPC Sections: (A) Forms of summons: This refers to the prescribed format or content of a summons. Section 61 of the CrPC deals with the form of summons, stating that every summons shall be in writing, in duplicate, signed by the presiding officer of the Court or by such other officer as the High Court may, from time to time, by rule direct, and shall bear the seal of the Court. Therefore, (A) matches with (2) Section 61 Cr.P.C. (B) Summons how served: This concerns the procedure for delivering a summons to the person it is addressed to. Section 62 of the CrPC specifies how summons are to be served, typically by a police officer or an officer of the Court, by delivering or tendering a copy of the summons to the person summoned personally. Therefore, (B) matches with (3) Section 62 Cr.P.C. (C) Form of warrant of arrest and duration: This relates to the format of an arrest warrant and its validity period. Section 70 of the CrPC outlines the form of a warrant of arrest and its duration. It states that every warrant of arrest issued by a Court under this Code shall be in writing, signed by the presiding officer, and shall bear the seal of the Court, and shall remain in force until it is cancelled by the Court which issued it, or until it is executed. Therefore, (C) matches with (1) Section 70 Cr.P.C. (D) Where warrant may be executed: This specifies the territorial limits or locations where an arrest warrant can be carried out. Section 77 of the CrPC provides that a warrant of arrest may be executed at any place in India. Therefore, (D) matches with (4) Section 77 Cr.P.C. Now, let's combine these matches:

Question 60

Explanation of which Section of Indian Penal Code states that mere pecuniary benefit is not benefit within the meaning of Section 88, 89 and 92 of the Code?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Section 92, I.P.C.. This question delves into the general exceptions provided in the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860, specifically concerning acts done for a person's benefit. Sections 88, 89, and 92 deal with acts not intended to cause death, done by consent, or done in good faith for the benefit of a person without consent. The question asks which section's explanation clarifies that 'mere pecuniary benefit' does not constitute 'benefit' under these provisions. Let's analyze the relevant sections and their explanations: Option (1): "Section 89, I.P.C." Section 89 deals with acts done in good faith for the benefit of a child or insane person by or by consent of guardian. While it uses the term 'benefit', its explanation does not contain the specific clarification about 'mere pecuniary benefit'. The section focuses on the guardian's consent for the minor or insane person's benefit, excluding acts causing death or grievous hurt without intent. Option (2): "Section 92, I.P.C." This is the correct option. Section 92 deals with acts done in good faith for the benefit of a person without consent. This section applies when a person acts for another's benefit in an emergency, where obtaining consent is impossible or the person is incapable of giving consent. Crucially, the 'Explanation' appended to Section 92 explicitly states: "Mere pecuniary benefit is not benefit within the meaning of sections 88, 89 and 92." This clarification is vital because it prevents individuals from claiming protection under these sections for actions that primarily serve financial gain rather than genuine welfare or health, especially in situations where consent is absent or given by a guardian. The legislative intent is to ensure that the 'benefit' considered under these exceptions is substantive, relating to life, health, or safety, and not merely financial advantage. Option (3): "Section 90, I.P.C." Section 90 defines 'consent' for the purposes of the IPC. It specifies when cons

Question 61

Which one of the following is NOT correctly matched according to Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Attempt to commit offences punishable under this Act - Section 64. This question asks to identify the option that is not correctly matched with respect to the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950. This requires specific knowledge of the sections and their corresponding subject matter within that Act. Upon reviewing the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950, and its provisions, it becomes apparent that all the options provided appear to be correctly matched with their respective sections. This suggests a potential flaw in the question itself, as it asks for an incorrectly matched option when all seem accurate. However, in the context of a multiple-choice question, if forced to choose, one might look for the most subtle or least direct match, or a common point of confusion. Let's examine each option based on the actual provisions of the Act: Option (1): "What things are liable to confiscation - Section 69". This is a correct match. Section 69 of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950, is titled "Things liable to confiscation" and enumerates various articles, such as excisable articles, vessels, vehicles, animals, materials, and implements, that are subject to confiscation under the Act if used in the commission of an offence. Option (2): "Power of Excise Officer to compound offences - Section 70". This is also a correct match. Section 70 of the Act grants the Excise Commissioner or any Excise Officer specially empowered by the State Government the authority to accept a sum of money by way of composition for certain offences committed under the Act, thereby allowing for an administrative resolution instead of judicial prosecution. Option (3): "Attempt to commit offences punishable under this Act - Section 64". This is also a correct match. Section 64 of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950, is titled "Penalty for attempt to commit offences" and prescribes punishment for anyone who attempts to commit any offence punishable under the Act, or to cause such an offence to be committed, and in

Question 62

Which of the following Section provides the 'Penalty for Criminal Conspiracy' under the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950?

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Section 54 - A. This question asks to identify the specific section within the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950, that deals with the 'Penalty for Criminal Conspiracy'. This requires precise knowledge of the Act's structure and content. Let's analyze each option: Option (1): "Section 54 - B". Section 54B of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950, typically deals with the penalty for unlawful possession of excisable articles in excess of the prescribed quantity. It does not specifically address criminal conspiracy. Option (2): "Section 54 - C". Section 54C of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950, usually pertains to the penalty for certain acts by licensees or their servants, such as selling excisable articles to minors or intoxicated persons, or permitting drunkenness on licensed premises. It does not cover criminal conspiracy. Option (3): "Section 54 - A". This is the correct option. Section 54A of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950, is specifically titled "Penalty for criminal conspiracy". This section was introduced to address the issue of organized crime and conspiracies related to excise offences, providing for punishment for those who conspire to commit any offence punishable under the Act. The inclusion of this specific section highlights the legislative intent to tackle not just individual acts but also planned and coordinated illegal activities in the excise sector. Therefore, this section directly provides for the penalty for criminal conspiracy within the framework of the Act. Option (4): "Section 54 - D". Section 54D of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950, typically deals with the penalty for consumption of excisable articles in public places in contravention of rules. It does not relate to criminal conspiracy. In summary, only Section 54A of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950, explicitly addresses and prescribes penalties for criminal conspiracy related to excise offences. The other sections listed deal with different types of offences and penalties within the Act, none

Question 63

Match List-I with List-II and select the correct answer using the code given below the lists List-I (A) Local Jurisdiction of Executive Magistrates (B) Special Executive Magistrate (C) Public Prosecutor (D) Subordination of Executive Magistrate List-II (I) Section 21 Cr.P.C. (II) Section 22 Cr.P.C.

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: (A)-(II), (B)-(I), (C)-(IV), (D)-(III). This question requires matching various roles and jurisdictional aspects of the Executive Magistracy and Public Prosecutors under the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), 1973, with their corresponding sections. This is a fundamental aspect of understanding the administrative and prosecutorial framework in India. Let's break down the matching process: List-I (Roles/Jurisdiction) and their correct CrPC Sections: (A) Local Jurisdiction of Executive Magistrates: This refers to the geographical area over which Executive Magistrates can exercise their powers. Section 22 of the CrPC deals with the local jurisdiction of Executive Magistrates, stating that the District Magistrate may, by order, define the local limits of the areas within which Executive Magistrates may exercise all or any of the powers with which they may be invested under this Code. Therefore, (A) matches with (II) Section 22 Cr.P.C. (B) Special Executive Magistrate: This refers to the appointment of individuals as Special Executive Magistrates for particular areas or for particular functions. Section 21 of the CrPC provides for the appointment of Special Executive Magistrates by the State Government, empowering them to exercise such powers as the State Government may direct. Therefore, (B) matches with (I) Section 21 Cr.P.C. (C) Public Prosecutor: This refers to the appointment and role of Public Prosecutors. Section 24 of the CrPC deals with Public Prosecutors, outlining their appointment by the Central or State Government for conducting prosecutions in various courts. Therefore, (C) matches with (IV) Section 24 Cr.P.C. (D) Subordination of Executive Magistrate: This concerns the hierarchy and reporting structure of Executive Magistrates. Section 23 of the CrPC specifies the subordination of Executive Magistrates, stating that all Executive Magistrates, other than the District Magistrate, shall be subordinate to the District Magistrate, and every Executi

Question 64

In the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 ‘Child' means a person who has not completed -

Accepted Answer

Correct Option: Eighteen years of age. This question asks for the definition of 'child' as per the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The age criterion is a fundamental aspect of this legislation, determining who falls under its protective and rehabilitative framework. Let's analyze each option: Option (1): "Twelve years of age." This option is incorrect. While age 12 might be relevant in some other legal contexts (e.g., for consent in certain matters), it is not the defining age for a 'child' under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. The Act aims to protect and rehabilitate a broader age group of individuals who are considered minors. Option (2): "Eighteen years of age." This is the correct option. Section 2(12) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, explicitly defines a 'child' as "a person who has not completed eighteen years of age." This definition is crucial as it sets the upper age limit for individuals to be considered juveniles under the Act, ensuring that anyone below this age receives the special care, protection, and rehabilitation provisions outlined in the law, rather than being subjected to the adult criminal justice system. This age aligns with international standards for the definition of a child, such as those set by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Option (3): "Fifteen years of age." This option is incorrect. Prior to the 2015 Act, some older laws or specific provisions might have used different age cut-offs, but under the current Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, fifteen years is not the age that defines a 'child'. The Act specifically raised the age to eighteen to provide more comprehensive protection. Option (4): "Sixteen years of age." This option is incorrect. While the 2015 Act introduced provisions for children in conflict with the law between the ages of 16 and 18 to be tried as adults for heinous offences in certain circumstances (Section 15), the definition of a 'child' itself r

Rajasthan APO 2024 Prelims Paper

100 Questions Available

Rajasthan APO 2024 Prelims Paper

100 Questions Available

Question 1: Which of the following is an Aggravated Sexual Assault under Section 9 of POCSO Act, 2012?

Question 2: Which of the following Sections of the Protection of Children' from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 deals with "Sexual harassment"?

Question 3: Which Section of Indian Penal Code, 1860 is based on 'Doctrine of Transfer of Malice'?

Question 4: Who among the following persons may be charged and tried together?

Question 5: 'Excise Duty' is defined under the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950 in -

Question 6: What is the amount of penalty in case of offender failing to observe conditions of bond, first time under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958?

Question 7: 'Child in Conflict with Law' means -

Question 8: The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act, 2019 came into force on -

Question 9: Which of the following is known as 'Mignonette Case'?

Question 10: Which of the following case is not related 'to Section 167 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973?

Question 11: Which one of the following Sections of The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 relates to 'Punishment for o

Question 12: The question is. whether 'A' was in Calcutta on a given day. A statement in the diary of a deceased Solicitor, regularly kept in the course of busines

Question 13: Which of the following is not included in the definition of 'Arms' under Section 2(c) of the Arms Act?

Question 14: The question is, whether A and B were legally married. The statement of a deceased Pandit that he married them under such circumstances that the celeb

Question 15: The provisions of the Rajasthan Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1992 are applicable to which of the following examinations? (a) A

Question 16: Section 3(18) of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950 defines -

Question 17: Under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 whoever commits sexual assault on a child and attempts to murder the child shall be pu

Question 18: Match List-I with List-II and select the correct answer by using the code given below the lists List-I (A) Abduction (B) Attempt to commit suicide (C)

Question 19: Which of the following Section of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 deals with the report of Probation Officer to be confidential?

Question 20: Under which Section of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 power of court to convert summons-cases into warrant cases is provided?

Question 21: Arrange the following definitions in the chronological order on the basis of Sub-Sections of Section 2 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973- (I) Compla

Question 22: 'Probation Officer' is defined under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 in -

Question 23: Which one of the following is not a correct match under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012?

Question 24: 'A' having insured a ship, voluntarily causes the same to be cast away, with the intention of causing damage to the underwriters. 'A' has committed an

Question 25: Match List-I with List-II and choose the correct answer by using the code given below List-I (Definition) (a) Government (b) Oath (c) Man (d) A Will L

Question 26: Which one of the following is correctly matched according to Rajasthan Public Examination (Measures for Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act

Question 27: The Rajasthan Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1992 received the assent of the Governor on -

Question 28: Under which Section of the Arms Act, 1959 Magistrate has power to search and seizure of the firearms and ammunitions?

Question 29: "The question is, whether A murdered B. Marks on the ground, produced by a struggle at or near the place where the murder was committed, are relevant

Question 30: What is the enhanced punishment for Subsequent Conviction under Section 5 of The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)

Question 31: 'A' sees her husband committing murder of 'B'. The husband is prosecuted for the murder of 'B'. During trial 'A' gives evidence against her husband. T

Question 32: In which of the following the Right to Private Defence of Body extends to causing death of the assailant?

Question 33: When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all -

Question 34: Match List-I with List-II and select the correct answer from the code given below the lists List-I (A) Dying declaration (B) Who may testify (C) Profe

Question 35: In which of the following cases, it was held that an offence committed in India can be tried by the courts in India, whether perpetrator of crime resi

Question 36: Who shall establish a Court of Session for every Sessions Division?

Question 37: 'A' is cutting the wood with an axe at a place where children are playing. The axe flies off and kills a nearby child. 'A' is guilty of -

Question 38: 'Unfair Means' is defined under the Rajasthan Public Examination (Measures for Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 2022 in -

Question 39: Under Section 262 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 in case of conviction the maximum term of imprisonment is -

Question 40: In which of the following dates the Arms Act, 1959 came into force?

Question 41: Under which Section of the Arms Act, 1959 one cannot sell or transfer firearms which does not have any identification mark?

Question 42: Arrange the following in the chronological order on the basis of Sections of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - (I) Procedure for summary trial (II) Info

Question 43: A hangman who hangs the prisoners pursuant to the order of the court is exempted from criminal liability by virtue of -

Question 44: 'B' puts his hand by making an aperture in D's house. What offence 'B' has committed?

Question 45: Who can be appointed as Special Public Prosecutor?

Question 46: 'Y' gives grave and sudden provocation to 'A', 'A' on this provocation, fires a pistol at 'Y', neither intending nor knowing himself to be likely to k

Question 47: 'A' is on his trial for the murder of 'C'. There is evidence to show that 'C' was murdered by 'A' and 'B', and that 'B' said - 'A' and 'I' murdered 'C

Question 48: Which of the following provision of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 defines the term 'Best Interest of Child'?

Question 49: 'A' by putting 'B' in fear of grievous hurt, dishonestly induces 'B' to sign a blank paper and delivers it to 'A'. 'B' signs and delivers the paper to

Question 50: When during the course of an inquiry under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 the child completes the age of eighteen ye