Andhra Pradesh Judiciary Mock Test 6 — Questions & Solutions
Every question from this prelims mock with the correct answer and a detailed, source-backed solution. Free to read. Want the real exam feel — a timer, instant scoring, and a subject-wise weakness report? Take it as a test.
100
Questions
17
Subjects
+ solutions
Every question
Take this as a timed mock test — instant score + subject-wise analytics. First mock free, then ₹999/year for unlimited.
Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, relating to the inherent powers of the Court, provides that nothing in the Code shall be deemed to limit the power of the Court to make such orders as may be necessary:
aTo grant a decree without recording evidence
bTo override an express provision of the Code in a fit case
cTo confer jurisdiction on itself where none exists
dFor the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of the process of the Court
Answer: D
Section 151 preserves the inherent power of the Court to pass orders necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of process; it cannot override express provisions or confer jurisdiction.
Under Order XXII Rule 4 read with Article 120 of the Limitation Act, 1963, an application to bring on record the legal representatives of a deceased defendant must ordinarily be made within:
aOne hundred and twenty days of the death
bNinety days of the death
cSixty days of the death
dThirty days of the death
Answer: B
Where a sole or one of several defendants dies and the right to sue survives, the legal representatives must be substituted under Order XXII Rule 4; the limitation prescribed is ninety days from the death.
Under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, an ex parte decree may be set aside if the defendant satisfies the Court that:
aThe decree is erroneous on the merits of the claim
bHe has since engaged a more competent advocate
cThe summons was not duly served, or that he was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing
dThe plaintiff has not paid the requisite court fee
Answer: C
Order IX Rule 13 allows setting aside of an ex parte decree where the defendant shows that summons was not duly served or that he was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing when the suit was called for hearing.
The general rule under Order XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is that parties to an appeal shall not be entitled to produce additional evidence. Such evidence may, however, be admitted by the Appellate Court where:
aThe opposite party has no objection, in every case
bThe appeal has been pending for more than one year
cThe Court whose decree is appealed from has refused to admit evidence which ought to have been admitted
dThe appellant merely wishes to strengthen a weak case on the merits
Answer: C
Order XLI Rule 27 permits additional evidence in appeal only in the enumerated situations, including where the lower Court wrongly refused admissible evidence, or the Appellate Court requires it to pronounce judgment; it cannot be used to fill lacunae.
Under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, no suit (save with leave for urgent relief) shall be instituted against the Government or a public officer in respect of an act purporting to be done in his official capacity until the expiration of a notice of:
aThree months
bTwo months
cSix months
dOne month
Answer: B
Section 80(1) requires a two months' notice to the Government or public officer before instituting such a suit; under Section 80(2) the Court may grant leave to sue for urgent relief without notice.
Under Section 148A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, where a caveat has been lodged, it shall remain in force for a period of:
aNinety days from the date on which it was lodged
bThirty days from the date on which it was lodged
cOne hundred and eighty days from the date on which it was lodged
dSixty days from the date on which it was lodged
Answer: A
Section 148A(5) provides that a caveat remains in force for ninety days from the date on which it was lodged, unless the application apprehended is made before its expiry.
A defendant against whom a money decree has been passed by a Junior Civil Judge wishes to deposit, under Order XXI Rule 89, the amount required to have the sale of his immovable property set aside. Apart from the amount specified in the proclamation for the decree-holder, he must also deposit for payment to the auction-purchaser a sum equal to:
atwo per cent of the purchase-money
bfive per cent of the purchase-money
cten per cent of the purchase-money
dtwenty-five per cent of the purchase-money
Answer: B
Under Order XXI Rule 89, the applicant must deposit five per cent of the purchase-money for payment to the purchaser, plus the amount specified in the proclamation of sale for the decree-holder.
Under Order XXI Rule 90 of the Code, a sale of immovable property held in execution can be set aside on the ground of material irregularity or fraud in publishing or conducting it only if the applicant proves, in addition to the irregularity or fraud, that:
ahe has sustained substantial injury by reason of such irregularity or fraud
bthe judgment-debtor had no saleable interest in the property
cthe sale price was less than half the market value
dthe decree under which the sale was held has since been reversed
Answer: A
Order XXI Rule 90 bars setting aside a sale for irregularity or fraud unless the court is satisfied that the applicant sustained substantial injury by reason of such irregularity or fraud. Absence of saleable interest is the separate ground under Rule 91.
Where no application under Rule 89, Rule 90 or Rule 91 of Order XXI is made, or where such application is made and disallowed, the court executing the decree shall:
aorder a re-auction of the property
bkeep the sale in abeyance for ninety days
crefer the matter to the District Court for confirmation
dmake an order confirming the sale, whereupon the sale shall become absolute
Answer: D
Under Order XXI Rule 92(1), where no application under Rules 89-91 is made, or is made and disallowed, the court shall make an order confirming the sale and thereupon the sale becomes absolute.
A second appeal to the High Court of Andhra Pradesh under Section 100 of the Code, from a decree passed in first appeal by a District Court, lies:
aonly if the value of the subject-matter exceeds rupees one lakh
bonly where the case involves a substantial question of law
con any question of fact or law
das of right, without leave, on mixed questions of fact and law
Answer: B
Section 100 confines the second appeal to cases involving a substantial question of law, which the High Court must formulate; it does not lie merely on questions of fact.
All questions arising between the parties to the suit in which the decree was passed, or their representatives, and relating to the execution, discharge or satisfaction of the decree, must be determined by the court executing the decree and not by a separate suit. This rule is contained in:
aSection 47 of the Code
bOrder XXI Rule 58 of the Code
cSection 11 of the Code
dSection 144 of the Code
Answer: A
Section 47 requires that questions relating to the execution, discharge or satisfaction of a decree, arising between the parties or their representatives, be determined by the executing court and not by a separate suit.
On the appellate court reversing a money decree under which the decree-holder had already realised the amount in execution, the judgment-debtor seeks to recover what was paid. The appropriate provision under which the court places the parties in the position they would have occupied but for the erroneous decree is:
aSection 151 (inherent powers)
bOrder XLVII Rule 1 (review)
cSection 152 (clerical errors)
dSection 144 (restitution)
Answer: D
Section 144 embodies the doctrine of restitution: where a decree is varied or reversed, the court restores the parties to the position they would have occupied but for the decree.
A person apprehending that an application is going to be made against him in a suit in which he has a right to appear lodges a caveat under Section 148A of the Code. The caveat shall not remain in force after the expiry of:
asixty days from the date on which it was lodged
bthirty days from the date on which it was lodged
cninety days from the date on which it was lodged
done hundred eighty days from the date on which it was lodged
Answer: C
Under Section 148A(5), a caveat ceases to be in force on the expiry of ninety days from the date on which it was lodged, unless an application is made within that period.
In a non-commercial suit before a Senior Civil Judge, the defendant fails to present his written statement within thirty days of service of summons. Under the proviso to Order VIII Rule 1, the court may allow him to file it on a later day, for reasons recorded in writing, but not later than:
aany time before the framing of issues
bone hundred twenty days from the date of service of summons
cninety days from the date of service of summons
dsixty days from the date of service of summons
Answer: C
The proviso to Order VIII Rule 1 caps the outer limit at ninety days from service of summons; for ordinary (non-commercial) suits this limit has been held directory (Salem Advocate Bar Association v. Union of India).
An ex parte decree has been passed against a defendant by a Junior Civil Judge. He applies under Order IX Rule 13 to have it set aside. The court shall set aside the decree only if he satisfies it that:
athe decretal amount has been deposited in court
bthe plaint disclosed no cause of action
cthe summons was not duly served, or he was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing
dno appeal lies against the decree under the Code
Answer: C
Order IX Rule 13 permits setting aside an ex parte decree where the defendant shows that the summons was not duly served or that he was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing when the suit was called for hearing.
A revision petition is filed before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh under Section 115 of the Code against an order of a subordinate court. The High Court can interfere only where the subordinate court appears to have:
apassed an order against the weight of evidence
bcommitted any error of fact, however slight
cexercised a jurisdiction not vested in it, failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or acted illegally or with material irregularity in the exercise of its jurisdiction
ddecided a substantial question of law erroneously
Answer: C
Section 115 confines revisional jurisdiction to jurisdictional errors: where the subordinate court has exercised a jurisdiction not vested, failed to exercise jurisdiction vested, or acted illegally or with material irregularity in exercising it.
Which of the following is NOT a ground for review of a judgment under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code?
aA mere change in the subsequent view of the law by a superior court on a debatable point
bDiscovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after the exercise of due diligence, was not within the applicant's knowledge
cAny other sufficient reason
dSome mistake or error apparent on the face of the record
Answer: A
Order XLVII Rule 1 permits review on discovery of new evidence, an error apparent on the face of the record, or any other sufficient reason; a mere subsequent change of view on a debatable legal question is not an error apparent and is not a ground for review.
Under Section 24 of the Code, the general power to transfer or withdraw any suit, appeal or other proceeding pending before a subordinate court, at any stage and even of its own motion, is vested in the:
aSupreme Court only
bState Government on the High Court's recommendation
cSenior Civil Judge alone
dHigh Court or the District Court
Answer: D
Section 24 confers general power of transfer and withdrawal on the High Court or the District Court, exercisable on a party's application or suo motu; inter-State transfer between States having separate High Courts falls under Section 25, exercisable by the Supreme Court.
A foreign judgment is challenged in a suit before a civil court in Andhra Pradesh. Under Section 13 of the Code, such a foreign judgment shall NOT be conclusive where, among other things:
athe defendant had voluntarily submitted to the foreign court's jurisdiction
bit is supported by reasons recorded in writing
cit has been pronounced by a court of competent jurisdiction on the merits
dit has been obtained by fraud
Answer: D
Section 13 lists exceptions to conclusiveness of foreign judgments, including where the judgment was obtained by fraud, was not on the merits, was by a court without jurisdiction, founded on an incorrect view of international law, opposed to natural justice, or sustains a breach of Indian law.
Under the proviso to Section 35(7) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, where the offence is punishable with imprisonment of less than three years and the person is infirm or above sixty years of age, no arrest shall be made without the prior permission of an officer not below the rank of:
aDeputy Superintendent of Police
bSuperintendent of Police
cSub-Inspector of Police
dInspector of Police
Answer: A
Section 35(7) BNSS introduces a new safeguard requiring prior permission of an officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police before arresting an infirm person or one above sixty years for an offence carrying less than three years' imprisonment.
The power of a Judicial Magistrate to record a confession or statement during investigation, corresponding to Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, with the new requirement that the recording may be by audio-video electronic means, is contained in which section of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023:
aSection 180
bSection 187
cSection 164
dSection 183
Answer: D
Section 183 BNSS corresponds to Section 164 CrPC and additionally permits recording of confessions and statements by audio-video electronic means in the presence of the advocate of the accused.
Under Section 193(9) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, where the police officer conducts further investigation after submission of the report to the Magistrate, such further investigation, with the prior permission of the trial Court, shall ordinarily be completed within a period of:
aNinety days
bThirty days
cSixty days
dOne hundred and twenty days
Answer: A
Section 193(9) BNSS provides that further investigation after the police report, undertaken with prior permission of the trial Court, is to be completed within ninety days, extendable only with leave of the Court.
The provision for grant of anticipatory bail by the High Court or the Court of Session, corresponding to Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is contained in which section of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023:
aSection 480
bSection 438
cSection 478
dSection 482
Answer: D
Section 482 BNSS corresponds to Section 438 CrPC and empowers the High Court or Court of Session to grant pre-arrest (anticipatory) bail, omitting the guiding factors that earlier curtailed judicial discretion.
Under Section 479(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, a first-time offender who has never been convicted of any offence in the past shall be released on bond by the Court if he has, during investigation, inquiry or trial, undergone detention for a period extending up to:
aThe whole of the maximum period of imprisonment specified for such offence
bOne-half of the maximum period of imprisonment specified for such offence
cTwo-thirds of the maximum period of imprisonment specified for such offence
dOne-third of the maximum period of imprisonment specified for such offence
Answer: D
The first proviso to Section 479(1) BNSS provides that a first-time offender is to be released on bond after undergoing detention up to one-third of the maximum sentence, as against one-half for other undertrials.
Under Section 472(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, a convict under sentence of death, or his legal heir or relative, may file a mercy petition before the President or the Governor within what period from the date on which the Superintendent of the jail informs him of the dismissal of the appeal, review or special leave petition:
aNinety days
bSixty days
cThirty days
dFifteen days
Answer: C
Section 472(1) BNSS, a new statutory mercy-petition provision, requires the petition to be filed within thirty days of the jail Superintendent's intimation; on rejection by the Governor, a further petition lies to the President within sixty days.
The provision introduced in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, permitting inquiry, trial or judgment in absentia of a proclaimed offender who has absconded to evade trial with no immediate prospect of arrest, is contained in:
aSection 299
bSection 84
cSection 356
dSection 365
Answer: C
Section 356 BNSS is a new provision enabling trial in absentia of a proclaimed offender, with safeguards including issuance of two successive warrants and appointment of State-funded counsel for the absent accused.
Under Section 398 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the obligation to prepare and notify a Witness Protection Scheme for the protection of witnesses is cast upon:
aEvery State Government
bThe Central Government
cThe High Court of the State
dThe Director General of Police
Answer: A
Section 398 BNSS, a new provision, mandates every State Government to prepare and notify a Witness Protection Scheme to ensure protection of witnesses, a matter previously governed only by Supreme Court directions.
Where, on completion of investigation, the police are unable to file the report within the prescribed period of ninety or sixty days as the case may be, an accused who has been in custody and is prepared to and does furnish bail under Section 187(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is:
aTo be released only on an order of the Court of Session
bEntitled to be discharged of the offence
cNot entitled to any relief until the charge-sheet is filed
dEntitled to be released on bail (default bail) on the expiry of the said period
Answer: D
Section 187(3) BNSS confers the indefeasible right to default (statutory) bail where investigation is not completed within ninety or sixty days; the accused must be willing to and furnish bail, but cannot be discharged of the offence.
Under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, where the arrest of a person is not required for an offence punishable with imprisonment up to seven years, the police officer is, instead of arresting, ordinarily required to:
aIssue a notice directing the person to appear before the officer
bRelease the person only on executing a personal bond before the Magistrate
cForward the person to the nearest Magistrate forthwith
dTake the person into protective custody for twenty-four hours
Answer: A
Section 35(3) BNSS, carrying forward Section 41A CrPC, requires the police to issue a notice of appearance rather than arrest where arrest is not necessary in offences punishable with up to seven years' imprisonment.
Under Section 176(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, it is mandatory for the officer in charge of the police station to cause a forensic expert to visit the crime scene to collect forensic evidence in respect of an offence made punishable with imprisonment for:
aTen years or more
bFive years or more
cThree years or more
dSeven years or more
Answer: D
Section 176(3) of the BNSS requires a forensic expert to visit the scene of crime to collect forensic evidence, and to videograph the process, for offences punishable with seven years' imprisonment or more.
Under the proviso to Section 187(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term of ten years or more, a Magistrate may authorise detention of the accused beyond fifteen days otherwise than in police custody for a total period not exceeding:
aForty days
bNinety days
cSixty days
dOne hundred and eighty days
Answer: B
Section 187(3) BNSS permits detention up to ninety days where the offence is punishable with death, life imprisonment or imprisonment of ten years or more, and sixty days for any other offence.
A novel feature introduced by Section 187(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, regarding the fifteen days of police custody is that such custody:
aCan never exceed seven days in total
bMay be granted only by the Court of Session
cMust be exhausted within the first fifteen days of remand only
dMay be authorised in whole or in parts at any time during the initial forty or sixty days of the sixty or ninety day detention period
Answer: D
Unlike the old Section 167 CrPC, Section 187(2) BNSS allows the fifteen days of police custody to be sought in parts during the initial forty days (for the 60-day bracket) or sixty days (for the 90-day bracket) of the total detention period.
The offence of 'organised crime', as a distinct offence committed by an organised crime syndicate, has for the first time been codified in the general criminal law of India under which section of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023?
aSection 110
bSection 113
cSection 111
dSection 112
Answer: C
Section 111 of the BNS, 2023 newly defines and punishes organised crime; Section 112 deals with petty organised crime and Section 113 with terrorist acts.
Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, where the death of a woman is caused otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years of marriage and it is shown that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty in connection with a demand for dowry, the offence of dowry death is punishable with imprisonment for a term not less than:
aSeven years
bThree years
cFive years
dTen years
Answer: A
Section 80 of the BNS, 2023 punishes dowry death with imprisonment of not less than seven years which may extend to imprisonment for life.
Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the right of private defence of the body and of property is conferred by Section 35, while the situations in which the right of private defence of the body extends to voluntarily causing death of the assailant are enumerated in:
aSection 37
bSection 38
cSection 100
dSection 34
Answer: B
Under the BNS, 2023, Section 38 enumerates the circumstances in which the right of private defence of the body extends to causing death, corresponding to Section 100 IPC.
Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the offence of attempt to murder is dealt with under Section 109, and the maximum punishment where the attempt causes hurt to any person is:
aImprisonment up to seven years and fine
bImprisonment for life or imprisonment up to ten years, and fine
cDeath or imprisonment for life
dImprisonment up to ten years only
Answer: B
Section 109 of the BNS, 2023 provides that where the attempt to murder causes hurt, the offender may be punished with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment of either description up to ten years, and fine.
Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the punishment for rape (in cases not otherwise aggravated) under Section 64 is rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than:
aTen years
bFive years
cSeven years
dTwelve years
Answer: A
Section 64 of the BNS, 2023 prescribes rigorous imprisonment of not less than ten years, which may extend to imprisonment for life, and fine, for rape; the offence of rape itself is defined in Section 63.
Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the punishment for murder is provided under:
aSection 101
bSection 302
cSection 300
dSection 103
Answer: D
Section 101 BNS defines when culpable homicide is murder, while Section 103 prescribes the punishment (death or imprisonment for life, and fine). Sections 300 and 302 belonged to the repealed IPC.
Which of the following is a NEW form of punishment introduced for the first time under Section 4 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023?
aSolitary confinement
bCommunity service
cForfeiture of property
dRigorous imprisonment
Answer: B
Section 4(f) BNS introduces community service as a punishment for the first time in Indian criminal law, in addition to death, imprisonment for life, imprisonment, forfeiture of property and fine.
A, in order to commit theft, suddenly and forcibly grabs a mobile phone from B's hand and runs away. Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, A is most appropriately liable for:
aTheft simpliciter under Section 303
bSnatching under Section 304
cExtortion under Section 308
dRobbery under Section 309
Answer: B
Section 304 BNS newly defines 'snatching' as theft where the offender suddenly, quickly or forcibly seizes movable property; it is punishable with imprisonment up to three years and fine.
Criminal conspiracy under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 requires an agreement between:
aThree or more persons
bTwo or more persons
cFive or more persons
dAny single person with himself
Answer: B
Section 61 BNS provides that when two or more persons agree to do an illegal act, or a legal act by illegal means, such agreement is a criminal conspiracy.
The maximum total period for which solitary confinement may be imposed under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, irrespective of the length of imprisonment, is:
aFourteen days
bOne month
cThree months
dSix months
Answer: C
Section 11 BNS caps solitary confinement at three months in the aggregate, with graded limits of one, two and three months depending on the term of imprisonment.
Under Section 128 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), a communication made during marriage by one spouse to the other may be disclosed in evidence:
aUnder no circumstances whatsoever
bWhenever the court considers it necessary in the interests of justice
cIn suits between the married persons, or in proceedings in which one married person is prosecuted for a crime committed against the other
dOnly after the marriage has been dissolved
Answer: C
Section 128 BSA protects marital communications, but the bar does not apply in suits between the married persons or in proceedings in which one married person is prosecuted for any crime committed against the other (or where the maker consents).
Under Section 138 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), regarding the testimony of an accomplice, which statement is correct?
aAn accomplice is not a competent witness against the accused
bAn accomplice may testify only after a pardon is tendered to him
cAn accomplice is a competent witness against an accused person, and a conviction is not illegal if it proceeds upon the corroborated testimony of an accomplice
dA conviction based on the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice cannot stand
Answer: C
Section 138 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (replacing Section 133 of the repealed Indian Evidence Act, 1872) provides in its enacted form: 'An accomplice shall be a competent witness against an accused person; and a conviction is not illegal if it proceeds upon the corroborated testimony of an accomplice.' Note that the BSA wording uses 'corroborated' (a deliberate departure from the old IEA s.133 'uncorroborated' phrasing); read with the rule of prudence in Section 119 BSA, corroboration in material particulars is sought.
Section 139 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), relating to the number of witnesses, provides that:
aA minimum of three witnesses is required in cases triable by the Court of Session
bNo particular number of witnesses shall in any case be required for the proof of any fact
cAt least two witnesses are required to prove any fact
dThe number of witnesses required is fixed by the High Court Rules
Answer: B
Section 139 BSA embodies the rule that evidence is weighed, not counted: no particular number of witnesses shall in any case be required for the proof of any fact.
In Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014) 10 SCC 473, the Supreme Court (interpreting the provision now corresponding to Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA)) held that to prove the contents of an electronic record by way of secondary evidence, the certificate now required under Section 63(4) BSA is:
aElectronic records may always be proved by oral evidence without any certificate
bA certificate under Section 63(4) is mandatory for admitting an electronic record by way of secondary evidence
cThe general provision prevails over the special provision on electronic records
dA certificate is required only for records produced by foreign computers
Answer: B
Anvar P.V. (overruling Navjot Sandhu) held that the provisions on electronic records form a complete code, making the certificate (now under Section 63(4) BSA, which re-enacts the erstwhile Section 65B(4) IEA) mandatory for admitting secondary electronic evidence; reaffirmed in Arjun Panditrao Khotkar (2020).
A confession is irrelevant in a criminal proceeding under Section 22 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), where it appears to the court to have been caused by an inducement, threat, coercion or promise that:
aWas made after the confession was recorded
bRelates only to the accused's family and not to the charge
cProceeds from any person whatsoever, regardless of authority
dHas reference to the charge and proceeds from a person in authority, giving the accused reasonable grounds for supposing he would gain an advantage or avoid an evil
Answer: D
Under Section 22 BSA the inducement, threat, coercion or promise must have reference to the charge against the accused, proceed from a person in authority, and be sufficient to give the accused reasonable grounds for supposing that he would gain an advantage or avoid an evil of a temporal nature in reference to the proceedings against him.
Under Section 39 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), when the court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law, science or art, or as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions, the opinions of persons specially skilled in such matters are:
aRelevant facts, and such persons are called experts
bAdmissible only if corroborated by direct evidence
cConclusive proof of the fact in issue
dInadmissible unless the expert was a public servant
Answer: A
Section 39 BSA makes the opinions of specially skilled persons (experts) relevant facts on points of foreign law, science, art (or any other field), and as to the identity of handwriting or finger impressions; such opinion is advisory, not conclusive.
Section 108 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), dealing with the burden of proving that the case of the accused comes within any of the General Exceptions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, provides that:
aThe burden shifts to the court to investigate the exception
bNo burden lies on either party regarding exceptions
cThe burden lies on the prosecution to disprove the exception
dThe burden of proving the existence of circumstances bringing the case within the exception is upon the accused, and the court shall presume the absence of such circumstances
Answer: D
Section 108 BSA places on the accused the burden of proving circumstances bringing his case within a General Exception (or any special exception or proviso), and the court shall presume the absence of such circumstances until proved.
Illustration (a) to Section 119 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), permits the court to presume that:
aA man who is in possession of stolen goods soon after the theft is either the thief or has received the goods knowing them to be stolen, unless he can account for his possession
bAn accomplice is always unworthy of credit
cA document not produced after notice does not exist
dEvery official act has been improperly performed
Answer: A
Section 119 BSA allows the court to presume the existence of facts having regard to the common course of natural events and human conduct; Illustration (a) is the classic presumption regarding recent and unexplained possession of stolen goods.
Under Section 55 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), oral evidence must in all cases be direct. With respect to an opinion, oral evidence must be the evidence of:
aThe person who holds that opinion, on the grounds on which he holds it
bThe person who first recorded the opinion in writing
cAny person who has heard of the opinion
dAny expert, irrespective of whether he holds the opinion
Answer: A
Section 55 BSA requires oral evidence to be direct; if it refers to an opinion or the grounds on which that opinion is held, it must be the evidence of the person who holds that opinion on those grounds.
Under Section 105 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), the burden of proof in a suit or proceeding lies on:
aThe party with fewer witnesses
bWhichever party would fail if no evidence at all were given on either side
cThe defendant in every case
dThe party against whom judgment is sought, in all cases
Answer: B
Section 105 BSA fixes the burden of proof on that person who would fail if no evidence at all were given on either side, i.e. the person asserting the affirmative of the issue.
A mortgage in which the mortgagor delivers possession of the mortgaged property to the mortgagee and authorises him to retain such possession until payment of the mortgage-money, and to receive the rents and profits in lieu of interest or in payment of the mortgage-money, is known under Section 58 as a:
aSimple mortgage
bUsufructuary mortgage
cMortgage by conditional sale
dEnglish mortgage
Answer: B
Section 58(d) defines a usufructuary mortgage, where the mortgagee is put in possession and appropriates the rents and profits in lieu of interest or towards the principal. There is no personal covenant to pay in such a mortgage.
A mortgage which is not a simple mortgage, a mortgage by conditional sale, a usufructuary mortgage, an English mortgage or a mortgage by deposit of title-deeds within the meaning of Section 58 is called:
aA puisne mortgage
bAn anomalous mortgage
cA submortgage
dAn equitable mortgage
Answer: B
Section 58(f) defines a mortgage by deposit of title-deeds, and Section 58(g) provides that any mortgage not falling within the named categories is an anomalous mortgage.
In the absence of a contract or local usage to the contrary, a lease of immovable property for agricultural or manufacturing purposes is, under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, deemed to be a lease:
aFrom year to year, terminable by six months' notice expiring with the end of a year of the tenancy
bFor a fixed term of one year, not terminable by notice
cFrom month to month, terminable by fifteen days' notice
dFrom year to year, terminable by fifteen days' notice
Answer: A
Section 106 deems leases for agricultural or manufacturing purposes to be year-to-year leases, terminable by six months' notice; leases for any other purpose are deemed month-to-month, terminable by fifteen days' notice.
Under Section 107 of the Transfer of Property Act, a lease of immovable property from year to year, or for any term exceeding one year, or reserving a yearly rent, can be made only by:
aDelivery of possession alone
bA registered instrument
cAn oral agreement accompanied by delivery of possession
dAn unregistered instrument attested by two witnesses
Answer: B
Section 107 requires a lease from year to year, or for a term exceeding one year, or reserving a yearly rent, to be made by a registered instrument; all other leases may be made by a registered instrument or by oral agreement accompanied by delivery of possession.
Under Section 123 of the Transfer of Property Act, a gift of immovable property can be effected only by:
aDelivery of possession by the donor
bAn unregistered instrument attested by one witness
cA registered instrument signed by or on behalf of the donor and attested by at least two witnesses
dAn oral declaration accepted by the donee
Answer: C
Section 123 requires a gift of immovable property to be made by a registered instrument signed by or on behalf of the donor and attested by at least two witnesses. For movable property, gift may be by registered instrument or by delivery.
Under Section 126 of the Transfer of Property Act, a gift which the parties agree shall be revocable, wholly or in part, at the mere will of the donor is:
aVoid, wholly or in part, as the case may be
bVoidable at the option of the donee
cValid only if the property is movable
dValid and binding on the donee
Answer: A
Section 126 permits revocation of a gift only on the happening of a specified event not depending on the will of the donor; a gift made revocable at the mere will of the donor is void to that extent.
The rule against perpetuity contained in Section 14 of the Transfer of Property Act permits the vesting of an interest to be postponed at most until:
aA fixed period of twenty-one years from the date of transfer
bThe lifetime of one or more persons living at the date of transfer and the minority of some person in existence at the expiration of that period
cThe lifetime of one or more living persons at the date of transfer plus eighteen years in all cases
dThe lifetime of the transferor only
Answer: B
Section 14 prohibits creating an interest that takes effect after the lifetime of one or more living persons plus the minority of an unborn ultimate beneficiary in existence at the close of that period; vesting cannot be postponed beyond that.
Maintenance pendente lite and expenses of the proceedings to a spouse having no independent income may be ordered under which provision of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955?
aSection 24
bSection 27
cSection 26
dSection 25
Answer: A
Section 24 deals with maintenance pendente lite and expenses of the proceeding, available to either spouse who has no independent income sufficient for support. Section 25 deals with permanent alimony and maintenance.
Under Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, a child born of a marriage which is null and void under Section 11:
aIs legitimate as if the marriage had been valid
bBecomes legitimate only on a decree of the court declaring so
cIs legitimate only if the parents acted in good faith
dIs illegitimate for all purposes
Answer: A
Section 16(1) deems a child of a void marriage to be legitimate as though the marriage had been valid, irrespective of whether a decree of nullity is granted. Such legitimacy is conferred by statute and not dependent on the parents' good faith.
After the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, in a Joint Hindu family governed by Mitakshara law, the daughter of a coparcener:
aAcquires rights in coparcenary property only on the death of her father
bIs entitled only to a share equal to one-half of a son's share
cAcquires coparcenary rights only if she is unmarried on the date of the amendment
dBecomes a coparcener by birth in her own right in the same manner as a son
Answer: D
Section 6, as substituted by the 2005 Amendment, makes the daughter of a coparcener a coparcener by birth in her own right in the same manner as a son, with the same rights and liabilities in the coparcenary property.
In Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma (2020), the Supreme Court held that a daughter's right to be a coparcener under the amended Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956:
aArises by birth and does not depend on the father being alive on the date of the amendment
bIs available only to unmarried daughters
cArises only if her father was alive on 9th September 2005
dArises only if the daughter was born after 9th September 2005
Answer: A
In Vineeta Sharma the Supreme Court held that the daughter's coparcenary right under Section 6 is by birth and does not depend on the father (the living coparcener) being alive on the date of the 2005 amendment, overruling Prakash v. Phulavati.
Under Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, any property possessed by a female Hindu, whether acquired before or after the commencement of the Act, is held by her:
aAs a limited owner only
bAs a life-estate holder until remarriage
cAs a full owner and not as a limited owner
dAs a trustee for the heirs of her husband
Answer: C
Section 14(1) converts a female Hindu's limited estate into absolute ownership, declaring that property possessed by her shall be held as full owner and not as a limited owner. Section 14(2) is a narrow exception for grants prescribing a restricted estate.
In V. Tulasamma v. Sesha Reddy (AIR 1977 SC 1944), the Supreme Court held that property allotted to a Hindu widow in lieu of her right to maintenance falls under:
aSection 15 and reverts to the husband's heirs
bSection 30 and depends upon a will
cSection 14(1) and the widow becomes the absolute owner
dSection 14(2) and the widow takes only a restricted estate
Answer: C
In V. Tulasamma the Supreme Court held that property given to a widow in recognition of her pre-existing right to maintenance falls within Section 14(1), so she holds it as an absolute owner; Section 14(2) applies only where a new restricted estate is conferred.
Under Section 15(2)(a) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, where a female Hindu dies intestate leaving no son or daughter (or children of a predeceased son or daughter), property inherited by her from her father or mother shall devolve upon:
aThe heirs of her husband
bThe State by escheat
cHer mother-in-law absolutely
dThe heirs of her father
Answer: D
Section 15(2)(a) carves out an exception: property a female Hindu inherited from her father or mother, in the absence of her own children, reverts to the heirs of the father rather than devolving under the general order in Section 15(1).
Where, in a general offer made to the world at large, a person performs the conditions of the proposal, the performance amounts, under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, to:
aAn invitation to offer
bA counter-offer
cMere preparation, requiring separate communication of acceptance
dAcceptance of the proposal
Answer: D
Section 8 provides that performance of the conditions of a proposal is an acceptance of the proposal; this principle, applied in Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co., governs general offers.
The doctrine of frustration, holding that the word 'impossible' in Section 56 is to be understood in a practical and not literal sense, was authoritatively explained by the Supreme Court in:
aCarlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.
bNiranjan Shankar Golikari v. Century Spinning & Mfg. Co. Ltd.
cSatyabrata Ghose v. Mugneeram Bangur & Co.
dMohori Bibee v. Dharmodas Ghose
Answer: C
In Satyabrata Ghose v. Mugneeram Bangur & Co., the Supreme Court held that 'impossible' in Section 56 covers cases where the object or purpose of the contract has failed, even if literal performance remains physically possible.
A negative covenant restraining an employee from serving a competitor during the subsistence of the employment was held not to offend Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 by the Supreme Court in:
aMohori Bibee v. Dharmodas Ghose
bMadhub Chander v. Raj Coomar
cSatyabrata Ghose v. Mugneeram Bangur & Co.
dNiranjan Shankar Golikari v. Century Spinning & Mfg. Co. Ltd.
Answer: D
In Niranjan Shankar Golikari v. Century Spinning & Mfg. Co. Ltd. (1967), the Supreme Court upheld a negative covenant operating during the term of employment, distinguishing it from a post-termination restraint which would be void under Section 27.
Under Section 230 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, in the absence of a contract to that effect, an agent who enters into a contract on behalf of his principal:
aIs jointly and severally liable with the principal
bCan personally enforce it but is not personally bound
cCannot personally enforce it, nor is he personally bound by it
dIs personally bound by it in every case
Answer: C
Section 230 lays down the general rule that, absent a contract to the contrary, an agent can neither personally enforce contracts entered into on behalf of his principal nor be personally bound by them.
A promise to compensate, wholly or in part, a person who has already voluntarily done something for the promisor is, under the Indian Contract Act, 1872:
aEnforceable only if reduced to a registered writing
bVoid for want of consideration
cA valid contract notwithstanding the absence of fresh consideration, under Section 25(2)
dVoidable at the option of the promisor
Answer: C
Section 25(2) makes a promise to compensate a person who has already voluntarily done something for the promisor a valid contract even though it is unsupported by fresh consideration.
Where consent to an agreement is caused by coercion, fraud or misrepresentation, the agreement is, under the Indian Contract Act, 1872:
aA contract voidable at the option of the party whose consent was so caused
bVoidable at the option of either party
cVoid ab initio
dValid and binding on both parties
Answer: A
Section 19 provides that an agreement, the consent to which is caused by coercion, fraud or misrepresentation, is a contract voidable at the option of the party whose consent was so caused.
A person entitled to the possession of specific movable property may, under Section 8 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, compel a person in possession or control thereof to deliver it where the thing claimed:
aIs of a value readily and adequately compensable in money
bHas been mixed inseparably with the defendant's own goods
cWas lawfully sold to the defendant for value
dIs held by the defendant as the agent or trustee of the claimant
Answer: D
Section 8 allows recovery of specific movable property, inter alia, where the defendant holds it as the claimant's agent or trustee, or where money compensation would not afford adequate relief.
Under Section 12 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, where a part of a contract cannot be specifically performed, the court may direct specific performance of the part which can be performed, provided the party suing:
aDeposits double the consideration as security
bFirst obtains substituted performance of the unperformable part
cProves that the unperformable part forms the bulk of the contract
dPays or has paid the consideration for the whole, reduced by the consideration for the part left unperformed, and relinquishes all claim to further performance
Answer: D
Section 12(3) permits specific performance of the performable part where the unperformable part is large, only if the plaintiff pays the consideration for the whole (less that for the part left out) and relinquishes all claim to performance of the remaining part and to compensation.
Which of the following contracts is NOT specifically enforceable under Section 14 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (as amended in 2018)?
aA contract part of which can be specifically performed
bA contract for the transfer of immovable property
cA contract whose performance involves a continuous duty which the court cannot supervise
dA contract for the sale of shares having a peculiar value
Answer: C
Section 14, as amended, bars specific performance of, inter alia, a contract involving a continuous duty which the court cannot supervise, a contract dependent on personal qualifications, a determinable contract, and one where substituted performance has been obtained.
Under Section 40 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, a plaintiff in a suit for perpetual or mandatory injunction may claim damages:
aWithout any need to claim such relief in the plaint
bOnly after the injunction has been refused on merits
cEither in addition to, or in substitution for, the injunction, but only if such relief is claimed in the plaint
dOnly in substitution for the injunction and never in addition
Answer: C
Section 40 allows damages in addition to or in substitution for an injunction under Section 38 or 39, but bars such relief unless claimed in the plaint, with liberty to amend at any stage to include the claim.
A suit for recovery of possession of specific immovable property by a person claiming on the strength of his title is governed by which provision of the Specific Relief Act, 1963?
aSection 7
bSection 5
cSection 6
dSection 8
Answer: B
Section 5 provides that a person entitled to possession of specific immovable property may recover it in the manner provided by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, that is, on the basis of title; Section 6 provides the summary possessory remedy independent of title.
Under Section 18 of the Registration Act, 1908, the registration of which of the following is optional?
aA Will
bA gift of immovable property
cA lease of immovable property exceeding one year
dA non-testamentary instrument transferring immovable property worth two thousand rupees
Answer: A
Section 18 lists documents whose registration is optional, expressly including a Will. The instruments in the other options fall within compulsory registration under Section 17.
Under Section 32 of the Registration Act, 1908, a document required to be registered is to be presented at the proper registration office by:
aOnly the registering officer of the district
bSome person executing or claiming under the document, or the representative or assign of such person, or the agent of such person duly authorised by power-of-attorney
cOnly the person who has executed the document
dAny member of the public who has knowledge of the transaction
Answer: B
Section 32 permits presentation by a person executing or claiming under the document, by his representative or assign, or by his agent duly authorised by a power-of-attorney executed and authenticated as required by Sections 33 and 34.
Documents (other than Wills) remaining unclaimed in a registration office under the Registration Act, 1908 may be destroyed after a period exceeding:
aThree years
bOne year
cFive years
dTwo years
Answer: D
Under the rule-making and destruction provisions of the Registration Act, documents other than Wills remaining unclaimed in a registration office for a period exceeding two years may be destroyed. Wills are excluded from this rule.
Under Section 17 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, all instruments chargeable with duty and executed by any person in India must be stamped:
aWithin four months of execution
bWithin three months of execution
cAt any time before they are produced in evidence
dBefore or at the time of execution
Answer: D
Section 17 requires that instruments chargeable with duty and executed in India be stamped before or at the time of execution. By contrast, certain instruments executed out of India may be stamped within three months after first receipt in India under Section 18.
In computing the period of limitation for an appeal under Section 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963, which of the following is excluded?
aOnly the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the decree
bThe day on which the judgment was pronounced and the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the decree, sentence or order appealed from
cOnly the day on which the judgment was pronounced
dNeither the day of judgment nor the time for obtaining a copy
Answer: B
Under Section 12(2), in computing limitation for an appeal, both the day the judgment complained of was pronounced and the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the decree, sentence or order are excluded.
Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 provides for exclusion of time during which the plaintiff has been prosecuting with due diligence another civil proceeding, provided that proceeding was prosecuted:
aAfter the expiry of the prescribed period
bIn a court of competent jurisdiction which dismissed it on merits
cIn a court which, from defect of jurisdiction or other cause of a like nature, is unable to entertain it
dWithout bona fides but with due diligence
Answer: C
Section 14 excludes time spent prosecuting in good faith and with due diligence a civil proceeding in a court which is unable to entertain it owing to defect of jurisdiction or other cause of a like nature.
Under Section 17 of the Limitation Act, 1963, where a suit or application is based upon the fraud of the defendant or his agent, the period of limitation does not begin to run until:
aThree years from the date the fraud was committed
bThe cause of action first accrued, irrespective of discovery
cThe plaintiff has, or could with reasonable diligence have, discovered the fraud
dThe defendant admits the fraud in writing
Answer: C
Section 17 postpones the running of limitation in cases of fraud or mistake until the plaintiff has discovered, or could with reasonable diligence have discovered, the fraud or mistake.
Under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963, a written acknowledgment of liability signed by the party against whom the right is claimed gives rise to a fresh period of limitation only if it is made:
aAt any time, even after the prescribed period has expired
bOrally and reduced to writing later
cWithin three years after the prescribed period
dBefore the expiration of the prescribed period
Answer: D
Section 18 requires that the acknowledgment in writing, signed by the party (or his agent), be made before the expiry of the prescribed period; a fresh period is then computed from the date of signing. An acknowledgment after expiry does not revive limitation.
An easement, as defined under Section 4 of the Indian Easements Act, 1882, is a right which the owner or occupier of certain land possesses for the beneficial enjoyment of that land, to do or prevent something being done in or upon certain other land:
anot his own;
bwhether his own or not his own;
cwhich is owned by the Government alone.
dwhich is his own;
Answer: A
Section 4 expressly requires the servient land to be 'certain other land not his own'; an easement cannot exist over one's own property.
For acquisition of a right of way or other easement by prescription under Section 15 of the Indian Easements Act, 1882, the period of peaceable and open enjoyment as of right is:
atwenty years;
btwelve years;
csixty years.
dthirty years;
Answer: A
Section 15 fixes twenty years' uninterrupted enjoyment as of right for a way or other easement (twenty years also for light or air), substituted by thirty years where the servient property belongs to the Government.
Under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, an offence of dishonour of a cheque for insufficiency of funds is punishable with imprisonment which may extend to:
aSix months, or with fine which may extend to the amount of the cheque, or with both
bThree years, or with fine which may extend to thrice the amount of the cheque, or with both
cOne year, or with fine which may extend to the amount of the cheque, or with both
dTwo years, or with fine which may extend to twice the amount of the cheque, or with both
Answer: D
Section 138 prescribes imprisonment for a term which may be extended to two years, or with fine which may extend to twice the amount of the cheque, or with both.
For an offence under Section 138 to be made out, the payee must make a demand for payment by giving a written notice to the drawer within:
aThirty days of receipt of information from the bank regarding return of the cheque
bFifteen days of receipt of information from the bank regarding return of the cheque
cForty-five days of the cheque being drawn
dThree months of the cheque being dishonoured
Answer: A
Proviso (b) to Section 138 requires the payee or holder in due course to make a demand by written notice within thirty days of receipt of information from the bank about return of the cheque as unpaid.
Under the first proviso to Section 138, the cheque must be presented to the bank within a period of:
aThree months from the date on which it is drawn, or the period of its validity, whichever is later
bOne year from the date on which it is drawn
cSix months from the date on which it is drawn, or the period of its validity, whichever is earlier
dSix months from the date of its dishonour
Answer: C
Proviso (a) to Section 138 requires presentment within six months from the date on which the cheque is drawn, or within the period of its validity, whichever is earlier.
Which provision of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 confers on every woman in a domestic relationship the right to reside in the shared household, whether or not she has any right, title or beneficial interest in it?
aSection 19
bSection 22
cSection 17
dSection 20
Answer: C
Section 17 guarantees every woman in a domestic relationship the right to reside in the shared household, irrespective of whether she has any right, title or beneficial interest in the same; residence orders to enforce this are passed under Section 19.
Match the relief with the section of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005: (i) Protection orders, (ii) Residence orders, (iii) Monetary relief, (iv) Custody orders.
a(i) 17, (ii) 18, (iii) 19, (iv) 20
b(i) 18, (ii) 19, (iii) 20, (iv) 21
c(i) 19, (ii) 18, (iii) 21, (iv) 20
d(i) 18, (ii) 20, (iii) 19, (iv) 22
Answer: B
Protection orders are dealt with by Section 18, residence orders by Section 19, monetary relief by Section 20 and custody orders by Section 21 of the Act.
The A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 ousts the jurisdiction of ordinary civil courts in matters falling within the Act and vests adjudication of eviction primarily in the:
aCivil Judge (Junior Division)
bRent Controller
cCourt of the District Judge
dDistrict Collector
Answer: B
The Act creates a self-contained code under which the Controller, and on appeal the appellate authority, decide eviction and rent disputes, excluding the jurisdiction of ordinary civil courts.
Under the A.P. Civil Courts Act, 1972, the principal civil court of original jurisdiction in a district is the:
aDistrict Court presided over by the District Judge
bCourt of Small Causes
cCourt of the Senior Civil Judge
dCourt of the Junior Civil Judge
Answer: A
Under the scheme of the Act the District Court, presided over by the District Judge, is the principal civil court of original jurisdiction in the district, above the Senior Civil Judge and Junior Civil Judge.
Section 16 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 broadly embodies the rule of caveat emptor. The exception under Section 16(1), under which an implied condition as to fitness for a particular purpose arises, applies where:
aThe buyer has had an opportunity to examine the goods and finds a latent defect
bThe buyer expressly makes known to the seller the particular purpose for which the goods are required, so as to show that he relies on the seller's skill or judgment, and the goods are of a description which it is in the course of the seller's business to supply
cThe goods are sold under a patent or trade name in every case
dThe seller is not a dealer in goods of that description
Answer: B
Under Section 16(1) of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, an implied condition of fitness for a particular purpose arises where the buyer, expressly or by implication, makes known the purpose so as to show reliance on the seller's skill or judgment, and the goods are of a description it is in the course of the seller's business to supply.
Sums due by way of assessment, rent, fee and penalty imposed under the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905 are recoverable as:
aArrears of land revenue under the Andhra Pradesh Revenue Recovery Act, 1864
bA fine under the Code of Criminal Procedure
cA simple money decree of a civil court
dA debt provable only in insolvency
Answer: A
Amounts of assessment, rent, fee and penalty under the Act are deemed to be land revenue and recoverable as arrears of land revenue under the Andhra Pradesh (Madras) Revenue Recovery Act, 1864.
In a prosecution under Section 34 of the A.P. Excise Act, 1968, by virtue of Section 42, it shall be presumed until the contrary is proved that the accused has committed the offence in respect of any intoxicant or apparatus for its manufacture. On whom does the burden then rest?
aThere is no statutory presumption; the prosecution must prove everything
bOn the prosecution, to prove conscious possession beyond reasonable doubt
cOn the Excise Officer, to prove the quantity notified
dOn the accused, to account satisfactorily for the possession
Answer: D
Section 42 raises a statutory presumption of commission of the offence in respect of the intoxicant or manufacturing apparatus, and the accused must account satisfactorily for such possession.
Law Mock is an independent preparation resource and is not affiliated with any High Court, Public Service Commission, or government body. All exam information is sourced from official notifications and is updated periodically.
