Important MCQs Based On Latest Supreme Court Judgments For Law Examinations
1. A police investigation culminates in a closure report stating that no offence is made out against the accused. Upon receiving the report, the Magistrate disagrees with the police conclusion. Which of the following courses of action is NOT legally permissible for the Magistrate?(A) Accept the closure report and close the proceedings.(B) Direct further investigation if the Magistrate...
1. A police investigation culminates in a closure report stating that no offence is made out against the accused. Upon receiving the report, the Magistrate disagrees with the police conclusion. Which of the following courses of action is NOT legally permissible for the Magistrate?
(A) Accept the closure report and close the proceedings.
(B) Direct further investigation if the Magistrate considers it necessary.
(C) Take cognizance of the offence on the basis of the materials collected during investigation despite the police opinion.
(D) Direct the investigating agency to file a charge-sheet against the accused.
Answer: (D)
Cause Title: Brajesh Kumar @ Birjesh Kumar Singh Versus The State of Bihar, Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 670
Explanation: The Supreme Court has reaffirmed that upon receipt of a closure report from the police, a Magistrate cannot direct the investigating agency to file a charge-sheet against its opinion. The Court reiterated that the formation of opinion as to whether a case for trial is made out lies exclusively with the Investigating Officer. While the Magistrate retains the discretion to accept the report, reject it and take cognizance, or order further investigation, it cannot direct the police to file a charge sheet.
If Closure Report Is Filed, Magistrate Can't Direct Police To File Chargesheet : Supreme Court
2. A Sessions Case arises out of a single incident involving several accused persons. Due to the absence of some accused, two separate committal orders are passed at different times. Before the trial commences, the absconding accused are apprehended and committed to the Sessions Court. Which of the following statements is most accurate?
(A) Separate committal orders mandatorily require separate trials for all accused.
(B) The Sessions Court cannot conduct a joint trial once separate committal orders have been passed.
(C) The Sessions Court may, in its discretion, conduct a joint trial if the accused and offences are such that they can legally be tried together and no prejudice is caused.
(D) The Magistrate issuing the committal order decides whether the trial must be joint or separate.
Answer: (C)
Cause Title: Brajesh Kumar @ Birjesh Kumar Singh Versus The State of Bihar, Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 670
Explanation: The Supreme Court has clarified that committal orders do not determine whether a trial would be conducted jointly or separately, holding that the decision rests exclusively with the trial court. The Court said that “a committal order just gives the Sessions Court cognizance over the trial of the persons committed and is not the basis of the cognizance taken for trial”, i.e., it doesn't control the manner in which the trial should be conducted.
Can A Sessions Court Hold A Joint Trial Despite Separate Committal Orders? Supreme Court Explains
3. X, a Christian man, purchased land equally in the names of his two wives, A and B. A died intestate leaving X and three children. X later died intestate leaving the same three children from A and one child from B. Which of the following correctly states the devolution of the one-third share inherited by X from A's estate?
A. It devolves only upon A's three children.
B. It devolves equally among all four children of X.
C. It devolves upon B alone under Section 33.
D. It reverts to A's estate.
Answer: (B)
Cause Title: SHAKUNTALA & ORS. VERSUS ROBERT ANTHONY & ORS., Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 741
Explanation: The one-third share inherited by X became part of X's estate. Upon X's death, it devolved upon all his children, including the child born from the second wife. The second wife acquires no special right in A's property merely through Section 33.
4. A wife files an application for interim maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. During the proceedings, the husband files an application under Section 125(4) Cr.P.C. alleging that the wife is living in adultery and produces material which, on the face of it, supports his allegation. Which of the following statements is most accurate?
(A) The plea of adultery can be considered only after completion of trial and recording of full evidence; therefore, interim maintenance must necessarily be granted.
(B) The Court cannot examine any defence raised by the husband at the interim stage while deciding maintenance.
(C) If the husband is able to establish the allegation of adultery prima facie through evidence at the first instance, the Court may deny interim maintenance to the wife.
(D) An allegation of adultery, whether supported by evidence or not, automatically disentitles the wife from receiving interim maintenance.
Answer: (C)
Cause Title: HIMANSHU CHORDIA VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR., Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 748
Explanation: Section 125(4) Cr.P.C. creates a statutory bar against maintenance where the wife is living in adultery. The Supreme Court has clarified that if the husband is able to prima facie establish the allegation through evidence at the initial stage, the Court may consider such a plea while deciding interim maintenance and is not required to postpone the issue until final adjudication.
5. In a pending civil appeal, X filed an application seeking impleadment as a party under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The court rejected the application on merits. X believed that the rejection was based on an erroneous appreciation of facts but did not challenge the order. Later, X filed another impleadment application under Order XXII Rule 10 CPC in the same proceedings seeking substantially the same relief.
Which of the following is the most appropriate legal position?
(A) The second application is maintainable because an erroneous decision cannot operate as res judicata.
(B) The second application is maintainable since it is filed under a different provision of the CPC.
(C) The second application is barred by res judicata because the earlier application was decided on merits, even if the decision was based on an erroneous consideration of facts.
(D) The second application is maintainable if the applicant asserts that the earlier court misunderstood the evidence.
Answer: (C)
Cause Title: SANJIV KUMAR VERSUS SHAKUNTLA DEVI AND OTHERS, Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 726
Explanation: The doctrine of res judicata bars re-agitation of an issue that has already been finally decided on merits between the same parties. Even if the earlier decision was based on an erroneous consideration of facts, it remains binding unless set aside through an appropriate legal remedy. A party cannot circumvent the earlier decision by filing a fresh application under a different provision of the CPC seeking substantially the same relief.
6. A Judicial Magistrate acquits an accused. On the complainant's appeal, the Sessions Court reverses the acquittal and convicts the accused for the first time. Which of the following is the correct remedy available to the accused against the Sessions Court's judgment?
A. Appeal before the High Court under Section 374 CrPC / Section 415 BNSS
B. Appeal before the Supreme Court as a matter of right
C. Revision before the High Court under Section 397/401 CrPC / Section 438/442 BNSS
D. Review before the Sessions Court
Answer: C
Cause Title: VISHNU KUMAR GUPTA VERSUS STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANR., Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 744
Explanation: A conviction recorded by the Sessions Court while exercising appellate jurisdiction is not appealable under Section 374 CrPC/Section 415 BNSS. The appropriate remedy is a revision before the High Court.
7. A company cheque is dishonoured. The complainant files a complaint only against the authorised signatory. After limitation expires, the complainant seeks addition of the company as an accused under Section 319 CrPC. Which statement is legally most accurate?
A. The company can be added because limitation ceases to matter once trial begins.
B. The company can be added because Section 319 overrides Section 142 NI Act.
C. The company cannot be added to overcome a fatal defect and statutory limitation.
D. The company can be added only if it admits issuance of the cheque.
Answer: C
Cause Title: MANJULA KAPOOR VERSUS THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND ANR., Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 763
Explanation: The Supreme Court has held that the failure to arraign a company as an accused in a cheque dishonour complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is a fatal defect that cannot be cured by subsequently summoning the company as an additional accused under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure during the trial.
8. In a title suit, after completion of arguments, the plaintiff files an application under Order XVIII Rule 17 CPC seeking recall of PW-1 to answer questions inadvertently omitted during examination-in-chief. No ambiguity exists in the evidence already recorded. The Court should:
A. Allow the application because procedural rules are handmaids of justice
B. Allow the application if no prejudice is caused to the defendant
C. Reject the application because Rule 17 cannot be used to cure omissions in evidence
D. Allow the application subject to payment of heavy costs
Answer: C
Cause Title: K. BHARATHAMMA VERSUS BANDARU SAKKU BAI AND OTHERS, Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 764
Explanation: The power under Order XVIII Rule 17 CPC is confined to clarification sought by the Court and cannot be invoked to fill omissions or strengthen a party's case, the Court observed.
Order 18 Rule 17 CPC | Parameters On Recall Of Witness : Supreme Court Explains
9. In a murder case, Accused A absconds before trial, while Accused B faces trial. During B's trial, an eyewitness deposes and is later examined. Under Section 299 CrPC, no order was passed by the Court recording that A was absconding and that there was no immediate prospect of his arrest. After several years, A is arrested, but by then the eyewitness has died. The prosecution seeks to rely upon the eyewitness's earlier testimony recorded during B's trial. Which of the following is the most appropriate legal position?
(A) The testimony is admissible because evidence once recorded in a judicial proceeding can always be used against all accused persons.
(B) The testimony is admissible if the witness subsequently died, irrespective of compliance with Section 299 Cr.P.C. / Section 335 BNSS.
(C) The testimony is inadmissible only if A proves prejudice caused by the delay in his arrest.
(D) The testimony cannot be used against A unless the Court had earlier recorded satisfaction regarding the jurisdictional facts that A was absconding and there was no immediate prospect of his arrest.
Answer: (D)
Cause Title: Mahendra Singh Versus The State of Chhattisgarh, Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 747
Explanation: Witness Testimony Recorded Without S.299 CrPC Order Can't Be Later Used Against Accused Who Absconded : Supreme Court
10. A company entered into a settlement agreement containing an arbitration clause for the acquisition of another company. Several shareholders were required to transfer their shares to complete the transaction. One shareholder did not sign the settlement agreement but executed a separate agreement on the same day to transfer his shares. His transfer of shares was indispensable for completing the acquisition contemplated under the settlement agreement. A dispute subsequently arose and arbitration was invoked.
In determining whether the non-signatory shareholder can be referred to arbitration, which of the following is the most relevant factor?
(A) The non-signatory's participation in the performance of the underlying transaction indicating an intention to be bound by the contractual arrangement.
(B) The mere fact that the non-signatory held shares in the company.
(C) The existence of a separate agreement expressly excluding court jurisdiction.
(D) The non-signatory's status as an employee of the company.
Answer: (A)
Cause Title: KKH Finvest Pvt. Ltd. and another versus Ashiesh Shukla and others, Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 769
Explanation: A non-signatory may be bound by an arbitration agreement where its conduct demonstrates an intention to be bound by the underlying contractual arrangement. The most significant factor is the non-signatory's active and indispensable participation in the performance of the transaction, particularly where the transaction cannot be completed without such participation.