Important MCQs Based On Latest Supreme Court Judgments For Law Examinations
Q 1. Based on the protest petition filed by the complainant against the closure report of the police, the magistrate had taken cognizance of the offence and issued a summons to the accused. The magistrate treated it as a police case, whereas the accused contended that the magistrate ought to treat it as a complaint case u/s 200 Cr.P.C. Decide.a. The magistrate had rightly issued a summons to...
Q 1. Based on the protest petition filed by the complainant against the closure report of the police, the magistrate had taken cognizance of the offence and issued a summons to the accused. The magistrate treated it as a police case, whereas the accused contended that the magistrate ought to treat it as a complaint case u/s 200 Cr.P.C. Decide.
a. The magistrate had rightly issued a summons to the accused considering it as a police case.
b. The summons issued was improper as the proper procedure was not followed by the magistrate while issuing the summons in the case of a complaint.
c. The magistrate ought to have dealt with the protest petition as a private complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C.
d. Both (b) and (c)
Answer: Option (d)
Explanation: The Supreme Court held that if the Magistrate takes cognizance of the offence and issues summons to an accused by recording satisfaction based on the additional evidence produced by way of a protest petition filed by the informant, then such a protest petition ought to be treated as a private complaint case under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Q 2. Recently, the Supreme Court directed the States to file detailed affidavits specifying the steps taken by them with respect to the mob-lynching incidents mentioned in the PIL. State the title of the case_____________________.
a. National Federation of Indian Women v. Union of India & Ors.
b. National Federation of Indian Men v. Union of India & Ors.
c. National Federation of Children v. Union of India & Ors.
d. National Federation of Transgender Welfare v. Union of India & Ors.
Answer: Option (a)
Explanation: In the case of National Federation of Indian Women v. Union of India & Ors, the Supreme Court directed the States, which have not yet responded to the public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the National Federation of Indian Women (NFIW) regarding the increase in mob lynching incidents, to file detailed affidavits specifying the steps taken by them in respect the mob-lynching incidents mentioned in the PIL.
Supreme Court Seeks States' Responses On Steps Taken In Mob Lynching Cases
Q 3. A petition was preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution after four years of unexplained delay to resurrect the dead cause of action. Decide.
a. Delay and laches are not a prominent factor while deciding the writ petition.
b. High Court ought not to accept such petition as the petitioner who sleeps over its right need not be granted benefit.
c. Mere delay in filing the petition coupled with unexplained is no ground to entertain the writ petition.
d. Both (a) and (c)
Answer: Option (b)
Explanation: Observing delay and laches as prominent factors while deciding petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court held that the High Court ought not to grant extraordinary relief to a petitioner who approaches the writ court belatedly or in other words sleeps over his rights for a considerable period of time.
Q 4. There were concurrent findings of the Trial Court and High Court acquitting the accused in a cheque dishonor case on the ground that the accused had successfully rebutted the presumption under Section 139 r/w Section 118 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. However, the complainant contended that the presumption was not rebutted by the accused as there exists a legally enforceable debt against the accused as there was a sum advanced by the complainant to the accused. The accused took the defence that the sum advanced to her by the complainant was for trading in the stock market by the complainant from the accused bank account. Decide.
a. The acquittal of the accused should be upheld by the Supreme Court as the presumption was rebutted by the accused.
b. The acquittal of the accused shouldn't be upheld by the Supreme Court as the presumption wasn't rebutted by the accused.
c. The acquittal should be reversed to conviction as there exists a legally enforceable debt against the accused.
d. Both (b) and (c)
Answer: Option (a)
Explanation: Recently, the Supreme Court upheld the acquittal of an accused in a 16-year-old cheque dishonor case since the complainant failed to prove that there exists a legally enforceable debt against the accused.
Q 5. Can an easementary right to a 'dominant heritage' be claimed by a person who has an alternative way to access its dominant heritage?
a. Yes, the easementary right can be claimed.
b. No, the easementary right cannot be claimed when there exists an alternative way to access the dominant heritage.
c. Yes, it doesn't matter whether the alternative way to access the dominant heritage exists or not.
d. Both (a) and (c)
Answer: Option (b)
Explanation: Recently, the Supreme Court observed that the claimant of an easementary right wouldn't be entitled to claim the 'easementary right by necessity' for enjoying the 'Dominant Heritage' (the property owned by the claimant) when there exists an alternative way to access the 'Dominant Heritage' apart from the way over which the easementary rights were claimed to access the Dominant Heritage.
Easement By Necessity Not Available When There Is Alternative Way To Access Property: Supreme Court
Q 6. It was claimed by the police that the recovery of the evidence was done based on the statements made by the accused under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1972, however, the accused pleaded that the recovery was not done based on the Section 27 statements as the prosecution failed to establish that nobody knew of the existence of the dead body at the place from where it was recovered. Decide.
a. The conviction cannot be set aside merely because the prosecution knew about the discovery of the evidence before the recovery statements made by the accused.
b. The conviction can be set aside as no one should know about the recovery of evidence before the accused recovery statement under Section 27.
c. The conviction can be set aside once the prosecution fails to prove that no one knew about the discovery of the evidence before the accused S. 27 statements.
d. Both (b) and (c)
Answer: Option (d)
Explanation: To convict an accused based on the statements made under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, the Supreme Court observed that the prosecution must establish the fact that the discovery of the evidence-based on the statement made by the accused under Section 27 of the Evidence Act must not be known to anyone before the information was given by the accused.
Q 7. A lease deed was executed by 'Mr. X' who doesn't hold title over the property. Later on, the property devolved back to Mr. X. Now, the successors of Mr. X want a share in the property. Decide.
a. The successors cannot ask for a share in the property as the lease made by Mr. X was bad in law.
b. The successors cannot ask for a share in the property as the lease was made by Mr. X despite having no title to execute the lease deed of the property.
c. If the conveyor of the property doesn't have the title then the specific declaration to declare that the document is invalid would not be necessary.
d. All of the above
Answer: Option (d)
Explanation: The Supreme Court held if someone tries to transfer property rights to another person through a legal document but doesn't actually own those rights, the new owner or their successors won't have the legal right to claim those rights from that document.
Q 8. A candidate's election nomination was rejected on the grounds of non-disclosure of the details of vehicles that were sold/gifted by their dependents to the new owner whereby the vehicles weren't transferred in the name of the new owner. Decide in light of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 whether non-disclosure of vehicle details amounts to 'corrupt practice'.
a. Yes, it amounts to corrupt practice as every detail has to be disclosed by the candidates.
b. Yes, it does amount to corrupt practice as a voter's right to know is absolute.
c. No, it doesn't amount to corrupt practice as mere failure to get a transferred vehicle registered in the name of the new owner will not mean that the sale/gift transaction will get invalidated.
d. Both (a) and (b)
Answer: Option (c)
Explanation: The Supreme Court has observed that mere failure to get a transferred vehicle registered in the name of the new owner will not mean that the sale/gift transaction will get invalidated. The Court made this observation in the context of deciding whether the non-disclosure of three vehicles allegedly owned by the family members of Arunachal Pradesh MLA Karikho Kri in the election affidavit would amount to a 'corrupt practice' invalidating his election.
Q 9. In which of the cases, did the Supreme Court for the first time recognize a right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change as a distinct right?
a. MK Ranjitsinh And Ors. v. Union of India
b. MK Stalin v Union of India
c. MK Ravindran v Union of India
d. MK Rathod v. Union of India
Answer: Option (a)
Explanation: In its first, the Supreme Court, through its judgment of MK Ranjitsinh And Ors. v. Union of India, has recognized a right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change as a distinct right. The Court said that Articles 14 (equality before law and the equal protection of laws) and 21 (right to life and personal liberty) of the Indian Constitution are important sources of this right.
For First Time, Supreme Court Recognizes Right To Be Free From Adverse Effects Of Climate Change
Q 10. The accused was convicted of committing an offence of murder based on the direct eyewitness statement stating that the accused was seen stabbing the victim deliberately with a knife. However, the accused contended that the prosecution hadn't proved the motive of the accused to kill the accused. Decide.
a. The conviction ought to be reversed to acquittal as motive is an important factor while deciding the guilt of the accused.
b. The conviction ought not to be reversed as the motive becomes an unimportant factor when there's direct evidence proving the accused guilt.
c. The lack or absence of motive on the part of the accused is inconsequential when direct evidence establishes the crime.
d. Both (b) and (c)
Answer: Option (d)
Explanation: While upholding the accused conviction for committing a day-light murder, the Supreme Court held that if there's a direct ocular piece of evidence inspiring the confidence of the court then the motive behind the commission of the offence would be of little relevance and the prosecution need not prove the motive of the accused in the commission of the crime.
Motive Is Insignificant When There Is Direct Evidence Proving The Guilt Of Accused: Supreme Court
The questions are drafted by Mr. Yash Mittal. He can be reached at yash@livelaw.in