Kerala Judiciary Mock Test 9 — 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
13
Subjects
+ solutions
Every question
Take this as a timed mock test — instant score + subject-wise analytics. First mock free, then ₹999/year for unlimited.
An information disclosing a cognizable offence is given orally to the officer in charge of a police station and reduced to writing. Under Section 173(2) BNSS, with respect to a copy of such information -
ano copy need be given until the charge sheet is filed.
ba copy shall be given only with the permission of the Magistrate.
ca copy shall be given forthwith, free of cost, to the informant or the victim.
da copy shall be given only on payment of the prescribed fee.
Answer: C
Section 173(2) BNSS mandates that a copy of the information as recorded be given forthwith, free of cost, to the informant or the victim.
A person is alleged to have committed an offence punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and is infirm and above sixty years of age. Section 35(7) BNSS provides that in respect of such an offence, no arrest shall be made -
awithout the prior sanction of the State Government.
bwithout the prior permission of an officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police.
cwithout the prior written order of the jurisdictional Magistrate.
din any circumstances whatsoever.
Answer: B
Section 35(7) BNSS provides that for offences punishable with imprisonment for less than three years, where 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 Deputy Superintendent of Police.
An accused is in judicial custody for an offence punishable with imprisonment up to seven years and the police have not filed the police report. Under Section 187 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, after the expiry of what period of detention does he become entitled to be released on default bail?
aone hundred eighty days
bsixty days
cforty-five days
dninety days
Answer: B
Under Section 187(3) BNSS, the maximum period of detention pending investigation is sixty days where the offence is punishable with imprisonment up to ten years (which includes the up-to-seven-year category), and ninety days for offences punishable with death, life imprisonment or imprisonment of not less than ten years.
Under Section 187 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the fifteen days of police custody that a Magistrate may authorise -
ais unavailable once the accused is produced before a Magistrate
bcan be extended up to thirty days by the Sessions Court
cmay be sought wholly or in parts at any time during the initial forty or sixty days of the total detention period
dmust be granted in one continuous spell within the first fifteen days of arrest only
Answer: C
A key departure from Section 167 CrPC is that under Section 187 BNSS the fifteen-day police custody need not be exhausted within the first fifteen days and may be claimed in parts during the initial forty days (for offences up to ten years) or sixty days (for graver offences) of detention.
A person orally reports a cognizable offence to a police station whose jurisdiction does not cover the place where the offence was committed. Under Section 173 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the officer in charge -
acan only forward the informant to a Magistrate
bmay register it only if the offence is punishable with more than seven years
cmust refuse the information and direct the informant to the correct police station
dmust register the information (a Zero FIR) irrespective of the area in which the offence is committed
Answer: D
Section 173(1) BNSS gives statutory recognition to the Zero FIR, requiring registration of information disclosing a cognizable offence irrespective of the area where the offence is committed, with subsequent transfer to the jurisdictional station.
Under Section 176(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the visit of a forensic expert to the scene of crime to collect forensic evidence is mandatory for offences punishable with imprisonment for -
athree years or more
bten years or more
cfive years or more
dseven years or more
Answer: D
Section 176(3) BNSS makes it compulsory for forensic experts to visit the crime scene and video-record the process of collecting forensic evidence in respect of offences punishable with imprisonment of seven years or more.
Under Section 105 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, when a search and seizure is carried out, the audio-video electronic recording of the process is to be forwarded by the police officer, without delay, to the -
aCourt of Session having jurisdiction
bDirector of Prosecution
cDistrict Magistrate, Sub-Divisional Magistrate or Judicial Magistrate of the first class
dSuperintendent of Police of the district
Answer: C
Section 105 BNSS requires the recording of search and seizure through audio-video electronic means, and the recording must be forwarded without delay to the District Magistrate, Sub-Divisional Magistrate or Judicial Magistrate of the first class.
Under Section 23 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the Court of a Magistrate of the first class may pass a sentence of imprisonment not exceeding three years and a fine not exceeding -
aone lakh rupees
bfifty thousand rupees
cten thousand rupees
dfive thousand rupees
Answer: B
Section 23(2) BNSS empowers a Magistrate of the first class to pass imprisonment up to three years, or fine up to fifty thousand rupees, or both, or community service. (A second-class Magistrate's fine limit is ten thousand rupees.)
Under Section 356 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, a Court may commence the trial in absentia of a proclaimed offender who has absconded, only after a period of -
aninety days from the date of framing of the charge
bone hundred eighty days from the date of the proclamation
cthirty days from the issue of the proclamation
dsixty days from the filing of the charge-sheet
Answer: A
Section 356 BNSS introduces trial in absentia of a proclaimed offender; the court must wait ninety days from the date of framing of the charge before commencing such trial, after issuing the required warrants and publishing notice.
Under Section 479 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, a first-time offender (one never previously convicted of any offence) shall be released on bond if he has undergone detention up to -
aone-third of the maximum period of imprisonment prescribed for the offence
bone-half of the maximum period of imprisonment prescribed for the offence
cthe entire maximum period of imprisonment prescribed for the offence
done-fourth of the maximum period of imprisonment prescribed for the offence
Answer: A
The first proviso to Section 479(1) BNSS provides that a first-time offender shall be released on bond on having undergone detention up to one-third of the maximum period of imprisonment specified for the offence, as against the general one-half rule.
Under Section 472 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, a convict under sentence of death may file a mercy petition before the President or the Governor within -
asixty days from the confirmation of the death sentence
bfifteen days from the date of conviction
cthirty days from the date the jail Superintendent informs him of the relevant rejection or confirmation
dninety days from the dismissal of the appeal by the Supreme Court
Answer: C
Section 472(1) BNSS, a new provision, requires a mercy petition in death sentence cases to be filed within thirty days from the date the Superintendent of jail informs the convict of the dismissal of his appeal/review/SLP or the confirmation of the sentence.
Under Section 290 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, an application for plea bargaining by the accused must be filed within -
athirty days from the date of framing of the charge
bsixty days from the date of taking cognizance
cat any time before pronouncement of judgment
dthirty days from the date of arrest
Answer: A
Section 290 BNSS makes plea bargaining time-bound: the accused must file the application for plea bargaining within thirty days from the date of framing of the charge.
Under Section 230 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the Magistrate must furnish to the accused (and the victim, if represented) a copy of the police report and connected documents free of cost within a period not exceeding -
athirty days from production or appearance of the accused
bsixty days from production or appearance of the accused
cfourteen days from production or appearance of the accused
dseven days from production or appearance of the accused
Answer: C
Section 230 BNSS mandates that the Magistrate furnish copies of the police report and other documents without delay, and in no case beyond fourteen days from the date of production or appearance of the accused, free of cost, and supply by electronic means is permitted.
Under Section 398 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the duty to prepare and notify a Witness Protection Scheme is cast upon the -
aconcerned High Court
bevery State Government
cCentral Government
dNational Human Rights Commission
Answer: B
Section 398 BNSS, for the first time, statutorily obliges every State Government to prepare and notify a Witness Protection Scheme to ensure protection of witnesses.
Under Section 174 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, an officer in charge of a police station who receives information of a non-cognizable offence shall, in addition to entering its substance and referring the informant to a Magistrate, forward the diary report of all such cases to the Magistrate -
aweekly
bfortnightly
cdaily
dmonthly
Answer: B
Section 174(1)(ii) BNSS introduces a new requirement that the daily diary report of all non-cognizable cases be forwarded to the Magistrate fortnightly.
A police officer present at a place witnesses a person committing a cognizable offence. Under Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the officer -
amust first obtain a warrant from the jurisdictional Magistrate
bmay arrest such person without an order from a Magistrate and without a warrant
cmay arrest only after recording reasons before a Superintendent of Police
dmust refer the matter to the Director of Prosecution before arrest
Answer: B
Section 35(1)(a) BNSS empowers a police officer to arrest, without an order of a Magistrate and without a warrant, any person who commits a cognizable offence in the presence of such officer.
Under Section 89 of the CPC, where it appears to the court that there exist elements of a settlement which may be acceptable to the parties, the court may refer the dispute to -
aarbitration only.
barbitration, conciliation, judicial settlement including settlement through Lok Adalat, or mediation.
ca commissioner appointed under Order 26.
dthe District Collector for compromise.
Answer: B
Section 89 empowers the court to formulate terms of settlement and refer the dispute to arbitration, conciliation, judicial settlement including settlement through Lok Adalat, or mediation.
A plaint is liable to be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the CPC where -
athe relief claimed is undervalued and the plaintiff fails to correct the valuation.
bthe plaint is written on insufficiently stamped paper.
cthe suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be barred by any law.
dthe plaintiff fails to comply with Order 7 Rule 9.
Answer: C
Order 7 Rule 11(d) provides for rejection of the plaint where the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be barred by any law; clauses (b), (c) and (f) deal separately with undervaluation, insufficient stamping and non-compliance respectively.
Section 9 of the CPC provides that civil courts shall have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature -
awithout any exception whatsoever.
bexcepting suits of which their cognizance is impliedly barred only.
cexcepting suits of which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred.
dexcepting suits of which their cognizance is expressly barred only.
Answer: C
Section 9 confers jurisdiction on civil courts to try all suits of a civil nature except those of which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred.
Where a court finds that it has no jurisdiction to entertain a plaint, the proper course under the CPC is to -
adismiss the suit under Section 9.
breject the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11(a).
creturn the plaint under Order 7 Rule 10 to be presented to the court in which the suit should have been instituted.
dtransfer the suit suo motu under Section 24.
Answer: C
Order 7 Rule 10 provides that a plaint shall, at any stage of the suit, be returned to be presented to the court in which the suit should have been instituted when the court finds it lacks jurisdiction; it is not transferred under Section 24.
An application for a temporary injunction to restrain a defendant from alienating the suit property pending the suit is properly made under -
aOrder 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC.
bSection 94(c) read with Order 40 of the CPC.
cOrder 38 Rule 5 of the CPC.
dSection 151 of the CPC alone.
Answer: A
Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 govern the grant of temporary injunctions to restrain dispossession, waste, damage or alienation of property in dispute; such applications are commonly read with Section 151.
The general power of the High Court and the District Court to transfer or withdraw any suit, appeal or other proceeding at any stage is conferred by -
aSection 22 of the CPC.
bSection 23 of the CPC.
cSection 24 of the CPC.
dSection 25 of the CPC.
Answer: C
Section 24 confers on the High Court or District Court the general power to transfer or withdraw any suit, appeal or other proceeding at any stage, on the application of a party or of its own motion.
Where a plaintiff withdraws a suit or abandons part of his claim without the permission of the court referred to in Order 23 Rule 1 of the CPC, the consequence is that the plaintiff -
amay institute a fresh suit in respect of the same subject-matter as of right.
bmay file a fresh suit only with the leave of the appellate court.
cmay continue the same suit on payment of fresh court fees.
dshall be precluded from instituting any fresh suit in respect of such subject-matter or such part of the claim.
Answer: D
Under Order 23 Rule 1, a plaintiff who withdraws or abandons a claim without the court's permission to file afresh is precluded from instituting any fresh suit in respect of that subject-matter; liberty to sue afresh must be obtained from the court.
The power conferred on a court by Section 148 of the CPC to enlarge time, even though the originally fixed period has expired, is exercisable -
awithout any outer limit.
bsubject to a maximum total period of ninety days.
csubject to a maximum total period of thirty days.
donly once and for a maximum of seven days.
Answer: C
Section 148, as amended, allows the court to enlarge a period fixed or granted by it for the doing of any act, but the total period so extended shall not exceed thirty days in all.
A suit for a civil nature, the cognizance of which is neither expressly nor impliedly barred, is filed before a Civil Court. Under Section 9 CPC, the Court -
ashall have jurisdiction to try it, subject only to the provisions contained in the Code.
bshall refer it to the District Court for orders before trial.
chas discretion whether or not to entertain such a suit.
dmay decline to try it if a remedy lies before a statutory tribunal.
Answer: A
Section 9 CPC declares that the Courts shall (subject to the provisions contained in the Code) have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature excepting suits of which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred.
Under Explanation VIII to Section 11 CPC, a decision of a Court of limited jurisdiction, competent to decide an issue, operates as res judicata in a subsequent suit -
aonly if that Court was also competent to try the subsequent suit.
bnotwithstanding that such Court of limited jurisdiction was not competent to try the subsequent suit.
conly where both suits are between the same parties in the same court.
donly where the subsequent suit is of a small cause nature.
Answer: B
Explanation VIII to Section 11 provides that an issue heard and finally decided by a Court of limited jurisdiction, competent to decide it, operates as res judicata in a subsequent suit, notwithstanding that such Court was not competent to try the subsequent suit.
A building is situated within the territorial limits of two different courts. A suit to obtain relief respecting that immovable property may, under Section 17 CPC, be instituted -
ain any court within whose local limits any portion of the property is situate.
bonly in the District Court having jurisdiction over both areas.
conly after obtaining leave of the High Court.
donly in the court within whose limits the larger portion of the property lies.
Answer: A
Section 17 CPC provides that where a suit is to obtain relief respecting immovable property situate within the jurisdiction of different Courts, the suit may be instituted in any Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction any portion of the property is situate.
An objection that a suit was instituted in a court without territorial or pecuniary jurisdiction shall, under Section 21 CPC, be allowed by an appellate or revisional court only if -
athe objection is raised for the first time in appeal.
bthe decree exceeds the pecuniary limit of the trial court.
cthe defendant did not file a written statement.
dthe objection was taken in the court of first instance, at the earliest possible opportunity, and there has been a consequent failure of justice.
Answer: D
Section 21 CPC bars such objections in appeal/revision unless they were taken in the court of first instance at the earliest possible opportunity and there has been a consequent failure of justice.
Under Section 24 CPC, a District Court may transfer a suit from one subordinate court to another -
aeither on the application of any party or of its own motion, at any stage.
bonly on the application of a party to the suit.
conly with the prior sanction of the High Court.
donly before the framing of issues.
Answer: A
Section 24 CPC empowers the High Court or the District Court, on the application of any party or of its own motion, at any stage, to transfer or withdraw any suit, appeal or proceeding pending before it or any subordinate court.
Where a suit is dismissed under Order IX Rule 8 CPC for default of appearance of the plaintiff, the plaintiff -
ais precluded from bringing a fresh suit in respect of the same cause of action.
bmust first obtain leave of the High Court to file afresh.
cmay continue the suit only by way of review.
dmay file a fresh suit on the same cause of action without any restriction.
Answer: A
Order IX Rule 9 CPC provides that where a suit is wholly or partly dismissed under Rule 8, the plaintiff is precluded from bringing a fresh suit in respect of the same cause of action; his remedy is to apply for an order setting aside the dismissal.
For an offence of kidnapping from lawful guardianship under Section 137(b) [Section 135] of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the child taken or enticed out of the keeping of the lawful guardian must be -
abelow the age of twenty-one years in case of a female.
bbelow the age of eighteen years, irrespective of sex.
cbelow the age of fourteen years.
dbelow the age of sixteen years in case of a male and eighteen years in case of a female.
Answer: B
Section 135 BNS makes the offence gender-neutral, fixing a uniform age of below eighteen years for any child, unlike the earlier IPC provision which used sixteen years for males.
Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, voluntarily causing grievous hurt by use of acid is punishable with imprisonment -
awhich may extend to seven years and fine.
bof not less than ten years but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and fine.
cof not less than five years extending to ten years and fine.
dof not less than three years but which may extend to ten years.
Answer: B
Section 122 BNS prescribes rigorous imprisonment of not less than ten years extendable to imprisonment for life, with fine payable to the victim to meet medical expenses.
A person who, by doing any rash or negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide, causes the death of another and then escapes from the scene without reporting the incident, is punishable under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 with imprisonment which may extend to -
afive years.
bseven years.
cten years.
dtwo years.
Answer: C
Section 104(2) BNS enhances the punishment to imprisonment up to ten years where the offender escapes from the scene or fails to report the incident, as against up to seven years under Section 104(1).
The offence of defamation under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is punishable with -
aimprisonment for life, or with fine.
bsimple imprisonment which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both, or with community service.
crigorous imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine.
dsimple imprisonment which may extend to one year only.
Answer: B
Section 354(2) BNS retains the maximum of two years' simple imprisonment or fine or both, and additionally introduces community service as a sentencing option.
Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, an assembly is designated an "unlawful assembly" if the number of persons composing it, with a common object specified in the section, is -
athree or more.
bten or more.
ctwo or more.
dfive or more.
Answer: D
Section 187 BNS designates an assembly of five or more persons with a prohibited common object as an unlawful assembly.
For the offence of dacoity under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the number of persons conjointly committing or attempting to commit a robbery, including those present and aiding, must amount to -
afour or more.
bfive or more.
ctwo or more.
dthree or more.
Answer: B
Section 308 BNS requires that the total number of persons conjointly committing, attempting or aiding the robbery be five or more for the act to amount to dacoity.
Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any person being a public servant in the discharge of his duty as such public servant commits an offence under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 falling under -
aSection 132 BNS.
bSection 129 BNS.
cSection 127 BNS.
dSection 130 BNS.
Answer: D
Section 130 BNS deals with assault or criminal force to deter a public servant from the discharge of his duty, corresponding to the former Section 353 IPC.
Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the offence of "organised crime" is dealt with by -
aSection 109 BNS.
bSection 111 BNS.
cSection 112 BNS.
dSection 110 BNS.
Answer: A
Section 109 BNS introduces organised crime as a distinct offence covering continuing unlawful activity by a syndicate; Section 110 deals with petty organised crime and Section 111 with terrorist acts.
Abetment of suicide of any person who has attained the age of eighteen years and is not suffering from mental illness or other listed incapacity is punishable under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 under -
aSection 104 BNS.
bSection 106 BNS.
cSection 108 BNS.
dSection 105 BNS.
Answer: B
Section 106 BNS deals with abetment of suicide generally, whereas Section 105 BNS deals specifically with abetment of suicide of a child or a person with mental illness.
Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the punishment for committing an affray is imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one month, or with fine which may extend to -
afive hundred rupees.
btwo thousand rupees.
cfive thousand rupees.
done thousand rupees.
Answer: D
Section 192(2) BNS prescribes imprisonment up to one month, or fine up to one thousand rupees, or both, for the offence of affray.
The provision in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 dealing with acts endangering the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India is -
aSection 153 BNS.
bSection 124A BNS.
cSection 152 BNS.
dSection 150 BNS.
Answer: D
Section 150 BNS penalises acts endangering the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India; the BNS does not retain the term "sedition" as used in former Section 124A IPC.
Leading questions under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 are dealt with in Section 146. As a rule, a leading question -
amay never be asked at any stage.
bmay be asked in examination-in-chief as of right.
cmay be asked in cross-examination.
dmay be asked only with the consent of the witness.
Answer: C
Under Section 146 of the BSA leading questions may be asked in cross-examination, but in examination-in-chief or re-examination only with the court's permission, replacing the former Sections 141 and 142.
Under Section 39 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, when the court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law, science, art or as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions, the opinions of persons specially skilled in such matters are -
ainadmissible.
bbinding on the court.
cconclusive on the point.
drelevant facts.
Answer: D
Section 39 of the BSA makes the opinions of experts relevant facts on the matters enumerated, carrying forward the former Section 45 of the Evidence Act.
Which provision of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 lays down that no particular number of witnesses shall, in any case, be required for the proof of any fact?
aSection 134
bSection 142
cSection 138
dSection 139
Answer: D
Section 139 of the BSA provides that no particular number of witnesses is required to prove any fact, corresponding to the former Section 134 of the Evidence Act.
Primary evidence is defined under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 in -
aSection 56
bSection 60
cSection 58
dSection 57
Answer: D
Section 57 of the BSA defines primary evidence as the document itself produced for the inspection of the court, re-numbering the former Section 62 of the Evidence Act.
Under Section 61 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, the admissibility of an electronic or digital record -
acannot be denied merely on the ground that it is an electronic or digital record, and such record has, subject to Section 63, the same legal effect as a paper document.
bis barred unless the original device is produced in court.
cis treated only as secondary evidence in every case.
ddepends solely on the oral testimony of the person who created it.
Answer: A
Section 61 of the BSA provides that admissibility of an electronic or digital record shall not be denied merely because it is electronic, and such records, subject to Section 63, have the same legal effect and validity as other documents.
Under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, the rule that facts admitted by the parties or their agents at the hearing, or which they agree to admit in writing, need not be proved is contained in -
aSection 52
bSection 53
cSection 51
dSection 55
Answer: B
Section 53 of the BSA provides that no fact need be proved which the parties agree to admit, corresponding to the former Section 58 of the Evidence Act.
Where, in a joint trial of more persons than one for the same offence, a confession made by one of them affecting himself and some other of such persons is proved, the court, under Section 24 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 -
amay take such confession into consideration against the maker and the other co-accused.
bmust exclude the confession entirely.
cmust convict all the co-accused on that confession alone.
dmay use it only against the maker of the confession.
Answer: A
Section 24 of the BSA permits the court to take into consideration against a co-accused jointly tried for the same offence a confession affecting both the maker and that co-accused, re-enacting the former Section 30 of the Evidence Act.
A is in the custody of a police officer and, without any Magistrate being present, makes a full confession admitting the murder. Later, on the basis of information given by A, the murder weapon is recovered from a concealed spot. Under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, what is provable against A?
aOnly so much of the information as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered.
bThe entire confession, since it ultimately led to a genuine discovery.
cNothing whatsoever, as the confession was made in police custody.
dThe confession, provided it is later confirmed before a Magistrate.
Answer: A
Section 23 BSA bars confessions made in police custody unless in the immediate presence of a Magistrate, but its proviso permits proof of so much of the information as relates distinctly to the fact discovered, whether or not it amounts to a confession.
A victim, before succumbing to her injuries, makes an oral statement to a nurse identifying her assailant and describing the circumstances of the assault. Under which provision of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 is this dying declaration relevant?
aSection 26
bSection 58
cSection 39
dSection 23
Answer: A
Section 26 BSA makes relevant statements by persons who are dead or cannot be found, including a statement by a person as to the cause of his death or the circumstances of the transaction that resulted in his death.
In a forgery trial, the court must form an opinion on whether two specimens of handwriting were written by the same person. Whose opinion is made a relevant fact under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023?
aA person specially skilled in the identity of handwriting, i.e., an expert under Section 39.
bOnly the investigating officer.
cAny literate witness who has seen the accused write.
dThe Magistrate alone, on personal comparison.
Answer: A
Section 39 BSA makes relevant the opinion of persons specially skilled in foreign law, science, art, or the identity of handwriting or finger impressions; such persons are called experts.
Under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, in a civil suit the fact that the character of a party is such as to render probable or improbable any conduct imputed to him is -
arelevant only if the opposite party first introduces it.
birrelevant, except in so far as such character appears from facts otherwise relevant.
cconclusive proof of the conduct imputed.
dalways relevant.
Answer: B
Section 46 BSA provides that in civil cases the character of a party is generally irrelevant, except in so far as it appears from facts that are otherwise relevant.
In Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain, the Supreme Court struck down clause (4) of Article 329A (introduced by the 39th Amendment) primarily on the ground that it violated -
athe doctrine of pleasure.
bthe rule against delegated legislation.
cthe basic structure of the Constitution.
dthe doctrine of colourable legislation.
Answer: C
Applying the basic structure doctrine laid down in Kesavananda Bharati, the Court invalidated the clause insulating the Prime Minister's election from judicial scrutiny as offending free and fair elections, judicial review and the rule of law.
In Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India, the Supreme Court struck down clauses (4) and (5) which had been inserted in Article 368 by the 42nd Amendment, because those clauses -
aconferred unlimited amending power on Parliament and excluded judicial review of amendments.
babolished the Council of States.
ctransferred the President's emergency powers to the Prime Minister.
dextended the term of the Lok Sabha to six years.
Answer: A
Clauses (4) and (5) of Article 368, added by the 42nd Amendment, sought to bar judicial review of constitutional amendments and to declare the amending power unlimited; the Court held this destroyed the limited amending power and judicial review, both part of the basic structure.
Under the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution, 'Public order' and 'Police' are subjects falling in -
athe Union List.
bthe State List.
cthe Concurrent List.
dthe residuary powers of Parliament.
Answer: B
Entries 1 and 2 of List II (State List) cover 'Public order' and 'Police' respectively, making these matters within the exclusive legislative competence of the State Legislature.
Substantive 'Criminal law' and 'Criminal procedure' (including matters formerly in the Indian Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure) are placed in which List of the Seventh Schedule?
aConcurrent List.
bState List.
cUnion List.
dDistributed between the Union and State Lists.
Answer: A
Entries 1 and 2 of List III (Concurrent List) deal with criminal law and criminal procedure, so both the Union and the States may legislate on these subjects, subject to the rule in Article 254 in case of repugnancy.
An Inter-State Council, to inquire into and advise upon disputes and matters of common interest between States, may be established by -
athe Supreme Court under Article 131.
bthe Parliament under Article 245.
cthe Governors of the States jointly.
dthe President under Article 263.
Answer: D
Article 263 empowers the President, where it appears that public interest would be served, to establish an Inter-State Council and define its duties and organisation.
The writ that lies to call upon a person holding a public office to show by what authority he holds it, and to oust him if the holding is unauthorised, is -
aQuo Warranto.
bProhibition.
cCertiorari.
dMandamus.
Answer: A
Quo Warranto issues against a usurper of a public office of a substantive character created by statute or the Constitution, requiring him to show the legal authority by which he claims the office.
The right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the rights conferred by Part III is itself guaranteed as a fundamental right by -
aArticle 136.
bArticle 144.
cArticle 32.
dArticle 226.
Answer: C
Article 32 guarantees the right to constitutional remedies and was described by Dr. Ambedkar as the 'heart and soul' of the Constitution; the High Courts' wider writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is not itself a fundamental right.
Creation of one or more All-India Services common to the Union and the States can be initiated by Parliament under Article 312 only if the Council of States first declares, by resolution supported by not less than two-thirds of the members present and voting, that it is necessary in the national interest. Such resolution is to be passed by -
athe Lok Sabha.
bthe Legislative Council of a State.
cboth Houses sitting jointly.
dthe Rajya Sabha.
Answer: D
Article 312(1) requires the Rajya Sabha (Council of States), representing the States, to pass the enabling two-thirds resolution before Parliament may by law provide for the creation of new All-India Services.
Where property is transferred subject to a condition or limitation making any interest cease on the transferee's doing an act, but that condition is forbidden by law or is of such a nature that, if permitted, it would defeat the provisions of any law, the condition under Section 25 read with Section 31 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 is -
avalid only if the transfer is by way of gift.
bvalid and fully enforceable.
cvoid, and renders the entire transfer void as well.
dvoid, so that the transfer takes effect as if no such condition had been imposed.
Answer: D
Under Section 25, a transfer made on a condition that is impossible, forbidden by law, fraudulent, opposed to public policy or such as would defeat any law is void; the transfer then operates as though the unlawful condition had not been imposed, the transfer itself remaining valid.
Under Section 35 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (doctrine of election), where a person professes to transfer property which he has no right to transfer and, by the same transaction, confers a benefit on the owner of that property, the owner -
amay keep the benefit and also retain his own property in every case.
bmust elect either to confirm the transfer of his property or to dissent from it, and if he dissents he must relinquish the benefit conferred.
cis bound to confirm the transfer irrespective of his wishes.
dloses both the benefit and his own property automatically.
Answer: B
Section 35 embodies the doctrine of election: a person taking a benefit under a transaction must elect to give effect to the whole; if he elects to retain his own property against the transfer, he must relinquish the benefit conferred on him, which goes back to the transferor.
Which of the following statements regarding what may be transferred under Section 6 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 is INCORRECT?
aA mere right to sue cannot be transferred.
bA public office, or the salary of a public officer, whether before or after it has become payable, cannot be transferred.
cA right to future maintenance, in whatsoever manner arising, secured or determined, cannot be transferred.
dAn easement can be transferred apart from the dominant heritage to which it is attached.
Answer: D
Under Section 6(c), an easement cannot be transferred apart from the dominant heritage. A mere right to sue [6(e)], a right to future maintenance [6(dd)], and a public office or its salary [6(f)] are all non-transferable.
A executes a written agreement to sell his land in an area governed by the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act to B, who pays the consideration and is put in possession. The agreement is not registered though required to be. A later sues B for recovery of possession. After the Registration and Other Related Laws (Amendment) Act, 2001, can B successfully resist the suit under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882?
aYes, because part performance never required a registered contract.
bNo, because Section 53A confers a right of action on the transferee to recover the property.
cYes, because possession alone perfects title in B.
dNo, because after the 2001 amendment the contract relied on under Section 53A must be a registered one.
Answer: D
The Registration and Other Related Laws (Amendment) Act, 2001 deleted the words 'though required to be registered has not been registered' from Section 53A, so an unregistered contract executed after 24-09-2001 cannot be the basis of part performance. Section 53A in any case is only a shield (defence), never a sword.
A, the eldest son, expecting to inherit his father's estate, executes for consideration a transfer of his expectant share in favour of B during the father's lifetime. As per Section 6 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, the transfer is -
avoid, being a transfer of a mere chance of an heir-apparent succeeding (spes successionis).
bvoidable at the option of A's father.
cvalid and binding once the father dies and A inherits.
dvalid if reduced to a registered instrument attested by two witnesses.
Answer: A
Section 6(a) declares that the chance of an heir-apparent succeeding to an estate (spes successionis) cannot be transferred; such a transfer is void ab initio and is not validated even if the expectation later materialises.
X, who is the ostensible owner of certain immovable property with the implied consent of the real owner, sells it for consideration to Y. The real owner later seeks to avoid the sale. Under Section 41 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, the transfer to Y is protected only if -
aY acted in good faith after taking reasonable care to ascertain that the transferor had power to make the transfer.
bY obtained the property without paying any consideration.
cthe real owner had given his express consent in writing to the sale.
dY registered the sale deed within four months of execution.
Answer: A
Section 41 protects a transferee for consideration from an ostensible owner, but the proviso requires that the transferee acted in good faith after taking reasonable care to ascertain the transferor's power to transfer.
A, who has no present title to a plot, fraudulently represents that he is authorised to transfer it and sells it for consideration to B. Subsequently A himself acquires good title to that very plot. As against this acquired interest, the position under Section 43 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 is that -
aB can compel the transfer to operate on the interest A later acquires, at B's option, so long as the contract subsists.
bA may keep the after-acquired property as the original transfer was without title.
cthe transfer enures automatically in favour of A's heirs, not B.
dthe earlier transfer remains void and confers nothing on B.
Answer: A
Section 43 embodies the doctrine of feeding the grant by estoppel: where a person erroneously or fraudulently represents authority to transfer and later acquires an interest, the transferee may, at his option, claim that the transfer operates on that subsequently acquired interest while the contract remains in force.
An agreement to which the consent of the promisor is freely given is not void merely because the consideration is inadequate; but the inadequacy of the consideration
arenders the agreement voidable at the option of the promisor
bmay be taken into account by the Court in determining the question whether the consent of the promisor was freely given
cmust be proved before the agreement can be enforced
dis wholly irrelevant for any purpose under the Act
Answer: B
Explanation 2 to Section 25 provides that inadequacy of consideration does not by itself avoid the agreement, but may be considered by the Court on the question whether consent was freely given.
Mark the person who is NOT competent to contract under Section 11 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
aAn adult of sound mind carrying on a lawful business
bA person of the age of majority and sound mind
cA minor
dA person of sound mind not disqualified by any law to which he is subject
Answer: C
Section 11 requires majority, soundness of mind, and the absence of any disqualification; a minor lacks majority and is therefore not competent to contract.
A contract to do an act which, after the contract is made, becomes impossible, or by reason of some event which the promisor could not prevent, unlawful,
abecomes void when the act becomes impossible or unlawful
bis voidable at the option of the promisee only
cmust be performed by paying compensation in lieu thereof
dremains binding and the promisor is liable in damages
Answer: A
The second paragraph of Section 56 embodies the doctrine of supervening impossibility (frustration): such a contract becomes void when the act becomes impossible or unlawful.
A contract by which one party promises to save the other from loss caused to him by the conduct of the promisor himself, or by the conduct of any other person, is called a
acontract of bailment
bcontract of indemnity
cquasi-contract
dcontract of guarantee
Answer: B
Section 124 defines a 'contract of indemnity' as a contract to save the other party from loss caused by the conduct of the promisor or of any other person.
In a contract of guarantee, the person in respect of whose default the guarantee is given is called the
asurety
bprincipal debtor
cindemnifier
dcreditor
Answer: B
Under Section 126, the person who gives the guarantee is the 'surety', the person to whom it is given is the 'creditor', and the person in respect of whose default it is given is the 'principal debtor'.
The guidelines to prevent sexual harassment of women at the workplace, which operated as binding law until the 2013 Act was enacted, were laid down by the Supreme Court in -
aMedha Kotwal Lele v. Union of India
bBodhisattwa Gautam v. Subhra Chakraborty
cVishaka v. State of Rajasthan
dApparel Export Promotion Council v. A.K. Chopra
Answer: C
In Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997), the Supreme Court framed the Vishaka Guidelines on sexual harassment at the workplace, which held the field until the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013.
In which judgment did the Supreme Court recognise transgender persons as a 'third gender' and uphold the right to self-identification of gender?
aNavtej Singh Johar v. Union of India
bK.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India
cNational Legal Services Authority v. Union of India
dJustice K.S. Puttaswamy (Aadhaar) v. Union of India
Answer: C
In National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) v. Union of India (2014), the Supreme Court recognised transgender persons as a 'third gender' and affirmed their right to self-identification under Articles 14, 19 and 21.
The legal maxim 'audi alteram partem' embodies which principle?
aThe act of the court shall prejudice no one
bHe who comes to equity must come with clean hands
cNo man shall be a judge in his own cause
dNo person shall be condemned unheard
Answer: D
'Audi alteram partem' means 'hear the other side', i.e., no person shall be condemned without a fair opportunity of being heard. The maxim 'nemo judex in causa sua' covers the rule against bias.
The doctrine of 'rarest of the rare' as the test for imposing the death penalty was enunciated by the Supreme Court in -
aJagmohan Singh v. State of U.P.
bMithu v. State of Punjab
cMachhi Singh v. State of Punjab
dBachan Singh v. State of Punjab
Answer: D
In Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty and laid down that it should be imposed only in the 'rarest of rare' cases. Machhi Singh (1983) later elaborated the guiding criteria.
The maxim 'res ipsa loquitur', frequently applied in the law of torts, means -
aLet the buyer beware
bA wrong without a remedy
cThe thing speaks for itself
dDamage without legal injury
Answer: C
'Res ipsa loquitur' means 'the thing speaks for itself' and allows negligence to be inferred from the very nature of an accident, shifting the burden to the defendant.
If the day before yesterday was Saturday, then what day will it be on the day after tomorrow?
aTuesday
bThursday
cWednesday
dFriday
Answer: C
If the day before yesterday was Saturday, today is Monday. The day after tomorrow is two days after Monday, i.e., Wednesday.
Q84Reasoning & Mental Ability
Find the odd one out: 36, 49, 64, 81, 100, 121, 144.
a49
bNone of these
c100
d64
Answer: B
Every number listed is a perfect square (6² to 12²), so none of them is the odd one out.
Q85Reasoning & Mental Ability
A is twice as old as B. Five years ago, A was three times as old as B. What is the present age of A?
a25 years
b30 years
c20 years
d15 years
Answer: C
Let B = x, so A = 2x. Then 2x − 5 = 3(x − 5), giving x = 10, so A = 2x = 20 years.
Q86Reasoning & Mental Ability
Which figure-number completes the series? 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36, ?
a42
b49
c64
d45
Answer: B
The series is the squares of consecutive natural numbers (1², 2², 3², ...). The next term is 7² = 49.
Q87Reasoning & Mental Ability
In a row of 25 candidates appearing for an interview, a candidate is 11th from the left end. What is his position from the right end?
a15th
b14th
c13th
d16th
Answer: A
Position from the right = total − position from left + 1 = 25 − 11 + 1 = 15th.
Q88Specific Relief Act
Which of the following statements regarding specific performance of contracts under the Specific Relief Act, 1963 is correct?
aA contract to refer present or future differences to arbitration shall be specifically enforced as a contract.
bAn arbitration agreement is wholly unenforceable and cannot even bar a suit.
cA contract to refer differences to arbitration is enforceable only after an award is made.
dSave as provided by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, no contract to refer differences to arbitration shall be specifically enforced, but it may be pleaded as a bar to a suit on the subject agreed to be referred.
Answer: D
Section 14(2) (formerly Section 14 read with the saving clause) provides that, save as provided in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, an arbitration agreement cannot be specifically enforced, but its existence may be pleaded as a bar to a suit instituted in disregard of the agreed reference.
An instrument can be rectified under Section 26 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 where, through fraud or mutual mistake of the parties, the instrument does not express their real intention. In a suit for rectification, the court -
amay rectify the instrument only if rectification has been specifically claimed in the pleading.
bmay rectify and also direct specific performance of the rectified contract, where so prayed.
cmay rectify the instrument suo motu even if rectification is not claimed in the pleading.
dmay rectify the instrument only after a separate suit for specific performance is decreed.
Answer: B
Section 26(4) provides that no relief of rectification shall be granted unless specifically claimed in the pleading; however, where a party claims both rectification and specific performance, the court may, if it thinks fit, rectify the instrument and direct specific performance of the contract as rectified. Hence option (c) is correct (and the suo motu option is false).
A obtains a decree for specific performance of a contract for the sale of immovable property against B, but A (the purchaser) fails to pay the purchase money within the period allowed by the decree. The vendor B's appropriate remedy under Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 is to -
afile a fresh suit for rescission of the contract.
bexecute the decree to recover possession from the purchaser.
cfile an appeal challenging the decree for specific performance.
dapply in the same suit in which the decree was made to have the contract rescinded.
Answer: D
Section 28 empowers the vendor or lessor, where the purchaser or lessee does not pay the purchase money within the period fixed by the decree, to apply in the same suit for an order rescinding the contract; a fresh suit is unnecessary. The court may rescind the contract or extend the time.
A plaintiff entitled to seek the consequential relief of recovery of possession intentionally omits to do so and sues merely for a declaration of title. Under Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, the court -
ashall grant the declaration and may mould the consequential relief on its own motion.
bshall grant a conditional declaration subject to a subsequent suit for possession.
cshall grant the declaration but direct the plaintiff to pay additional court fee.
dshall not make any declaration where the plaintiff, being able to seek further relief than mere declaration, omits to do so.
Answer: D
The proviso to Section 34 bars a court from making any declaration where the plaintiff, being able to seek further relief than a mere declaration of title, omits to seek it. A bare declaratory decree is impermissible in such a case.
Which one of the following is an incorrect statement regarding the grant of a perpetual injunction under the Specific Relief Act, 1963?
aAn injunction cannot be granted to restrain any person from prosecuting a judicial proceeding pending at the institution of the suit, unless to prevent multiplicity of proceedings.
bAn injunction cannot be granted to prevent the breach of a contract the performance of which would not be specifically enforced.
cAn injunction cannot be granted to prevent the breach of a contract the performance of which could be specifically enforced.
dAn injunction cannot be granted when equally efficacious relief can certainly be obtained by any other usual mode of proceeding, except in case of breach of trust.
Answer: C
Section 41 lists situations where injunction is refused, including those in options (a), (b) and (c). Conversely, Section 42 permits an injunction to perform a negative agreement even where the positive part cannot be specifically enforced; an injunction to prevent breach of a specifically enforceable contract is NOT barred, so statement (d) is incorrect.
Under the first proviso to Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, the Rent Control Court shall not direct a tenant to put the landlord in possession for bona fide own occupation if -
athe landlord is more than sixty years of age.
bthe tenant has been in occupation for more than twelve years.
cthe building is more than thirty years old.
dthe landlord has another building of his own in his possession in the same city, town or village, except where for special reasons it is just and proper to do so.
Answer: D
The first proviso to Section 11(3) bars a direction for bona fide own occupation where the landlord already has another building of his own in his possession in the same city, town or village, unless the Court is satisfied that for special reasons it is just and proper to grant it.
A tenant carrying on a tailoring business in a rented shop in a notified area resists an application by the landlord under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, contending that he depends for his livelihood mainly on the income from that business and that no other suitable building is available in the locality. The Rent Control Court shall -
agrant eviction but direct the landlord to pay compensation for loss of business.
bignore the contention, as livelihood is irrelevant to a bona fide need claim.
crefer the dispute to the Accommodation Controller for decision.
dnot give the direction for eviction if it is satisfied that the tenant so depends for his livelihood and no other suitable building is available in the locality for him to carry on the trade.
Answer: D
The second proviso to Section 11(3) protects a tenant who depends for his livelihood mainly on the income derived from a trade or business carried on in the building where there is no other suitable building available in the locality for him to carry on that trade or business.
Before filing an application under Section 11(4)(i) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 on the ground of unauthorised sub-letting or transfer for the first time in respect of the same tenancy, the landlord must send a registered notice intimating the contravention, and the tenant fails to terminate the transfer or sub-lease within -
afifteen days of receipt of the notice.
bsixty days of receipt of the notice.
cthirty days of receipt of the notice or refusal thereof.
done month after the institution of the petition.
Answer: C
The proviso to Section 11(4)(i) requires, when the ground is invoked for the first time in respect of the same tenancy, a registered notice of the contravention; the application lies only if the tenant fails to terminate the transfer or sub-lease within thirty days of receipt or refusal of the notice.
On the partition of a joint Hindu family, the leasehold right held by the family in a building vests in one member of the family. The landlord applies for eviction under Section 11(4)(i) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 alleging an unauthorised transfer of the tenancy right. The application is -
amaintainable, because any change in the identity of the tenant amounts to sub-letting.
bmaintainable, because there has been a vesting of the right in a single member.
cmaintainable only if the partition was effected by a registered deed.
dnot maintainable, because the Explanation to Section 11(4)(i) provides that such vesting on partition is not a transfer of the tenant's right within the meaning of the clause.
Answer: D
The Explanation to Section 11(4)(i) provides that where, on partition of a joint family or of co-tenants' rights or on dissolution of a firm, the leasehold right vests in a member, co-tenant or partner, no transfer of the tenant's right is deemed to have taken place within the meaning of that clause.
Under the proviso to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the drawer of a dishonoured cheque becomes liable only if, after receipt of the demand notice, he fails to make payment within -
afifteen days of the dishonour of the cheque.
bthirty days of the receipt of the notice.
cfifteen days of the receipt of the notice.
dthirty days of the dishonour of the cheque.
Answer: C
Clause (c) of the proviso to Section 138 requires the drawer to make payment within fifteen days of the receipt of the demand notice; the cause of action and the offence arise only on failure to pay within that period.
A complaint for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 must, under Section 142(1)(b), be made in writing within -
aone month of the date on which the cause of action arises under clause (c) of the proviso to Section 138.
bfifteen days of the date on which the cause of action arises.
cthree months of the dishonour of the cheque.
dsix months of the date of the cheque.
Answer: A
Section 142(1)(b) requires the complaint to be filed within one month of the date on which the cause of action arises under clause (c) of the proviso to Section 138; the court may, on sufficient cause, condone the delay.
Under Section 143A of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the court trying an offence under Section 138 may direct the drawer to pay interim compensation, which shall not exceed -
atwenty per cent of the amount of the cheque.
bthe entire amount of the cheque together with interest.
cten per cent of the amount of the cheque.
dtwice the amount of the cheque.
Answer: A
Section 143A, inserted by the 2018 Amendment, caps interim compensation at twenty per cent of the cheque amount; if the drawer is acquitted, the complainant must refund it with interest.
In an appeal against conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the Appellate Court under Section 148 may order the appellant to deposit a minimum of -
aten per cent of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial court.
bthe entire amount of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial court.
ctwenty per cent of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial court.
dfifty per cent of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial court.
Answer: C
Section 148, inserted by the 2018 Amendment, empowers the Appellate Court to direct deposit of a sum which shall be a minimum of twenty per cent of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial court, in addition to any amount paid under Section 143A.
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.
