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 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.If Magistrate Takes Cognizance Of Additional Materials Along With Protest Petition, Case Has To Proceed As Private Complaint: Supreme CourtQ 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 CasesQ 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.Article 226 | Delay Defeats Equity, HC Should Dismiss Writ Petition If Petitioner Is Guilty Of Delay Or Laches: Supreme CourtQ 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.S.138 NI Act | Supreme Court Refuses To Interfere With Concurrent Findings That Cheque Wasn't Issued Towards Legally Enforceable Debt, Upholds AcquittalQ 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...

Important MCQs Based On Latest Supreme Court Judgments For Law Examinations

Yash Mittal

Tags