West Bengal Judicial Services Prelims Mock Test - 1 - Judiciary Exams MCQ

Let us first learn the meanings of the given words:

Troop (noun): a group of soldiers or scouts.

Troupe (noun): a group of performers.

Fleet (noun): a group of ships sailing together, engaged in the same activity, or under the same ownership.

After reading the meanings, we can conclude that only ‘troop’ is the perfect contextual fit.

Hence, the correct answer is option C.

Incentive means a thing that motivates or encourages someone to do something
Some of its synonyms are inducement, motivation, motive, reason, stimulus, stimulant, spur, impetus, encouragement
He had no incentive to work after he was refused a promotion
Companies provide various incentives to attract and retain talent

We can say that ,
The above given sentence is given in Passive Voice :-
Use structure “subject + auxiliary + past participle + by + object”
The glass was not broken by the boy.
Hence , required answer will be option A .

Desolate: Empty And with out person, making you feel sad/frightened
absolute: Total and complete
Obsolete: Something no longer in use
Primitive: Belonging to an early stage in the development of humans and animals

As we know that ,
Mansion is a very big house, while hovel is a small, dingy house, castle is a large fortified residence.
Hence , hovel is an opposite word of Mansion . 

The correct answer is D as Zoroasterv’s end Avesta. has nothing to do with India’s trade and commercial contacts with the rest of the world.

Dantidurga, also known as Dantivarman or Dantidurga II was the founder of the Rashtrakuta Empire of Manyakheta. His capital was based in Gulbarga region of Karnataka. His successor was his uncle Krishna I who extended his kingdom to all of Karnataka.
Reign: c. 735 – c. 756 CE
Krishna I, an uncle of Dantidurga, took charge of the growing Rashtrakuta Empire by defeating the last Badami Chalukya ruler Kirtivarman II in 757. This is known from the copper plate grant of Emperor Govinda III of 807 and a copper plate grant of the Gujarat Rashtrakuta Emperor Karka from Baroda.
Reign: c. 756 – c. 774 CE
Dhruva was one of the most notable rulers of the Rashtrakuta Empire. He ascended the throne after replacing his elder brother Govinda II. Govinda II had become unpopular among his subjects on account of his various misconducts as a ruler, including excessive indulgence in sensual pleasures.
Reign: 780 – 793 CE
Amoghavarsha I was a Rashtrakuta emperor, the greatest ruler of the Rashtrakuta dynasty, and one of the great emperors of India. His reign of 64 years is one of the longest precisely dated monarchical reigns on record.
Reign: c. 815 – c. 877 CE (63-64 years)
Indra III was the grandson of Rashtrakuta Krishna II and son of Chedi princess Lakshmi. He became the ruler of the empire due to the early demise of his father Jagattunga. He had many titles such as Nithyavarsha, Rattakandarapa, Rajamarathanda and Kirthinarayana.
Reign: 914–927 CE
Krishna III whose Kannada name was Kannara was the last great warrior and able monarch of the Rashtrakuta Dynasty of Manyakheta. He was a shrewd administrator and skillful military campaigner.
Reign: 939 – 967 C.E
 

Called the cradle of banking industry, Dakshina Kannada and Udupi districts (erstwhile undivided Dakshina Kannada) now feel that their nurtured babies are being snatched away with the Centre's latest proposal to merge three public sector banks from the region.

The correct answer is Babar.

Key Points

• Babur was the founder of the Mughal Empire in the Indian subcontinent.
  • He was the contemporary king of Guru Nanak Dev ji.
  • He was a descendant of Timur and Genghis Khan through his father and mother respectively.

Additional Information

• Guru Nanak Dev
  • Guru Nanak Dev, first of the 10 gurus, founded the Sikh faith, introducing the concept of one God.
  • He started the institution of Guru Ka Langar. Langar is the term in the Sikh religion refers to the common kitchen where food is served to everyone without any discrimination.
  • He emphasized the equality of women and rejected the path of renunciation, and he rejected the authority of the Vedas.
  • He was the contemporary of Mughal emperor - Babur.
• Jahangir:
  • He was Akbar’s son by a Rajput wife.
  • His ascension was challenged by his eldest son Prince Khusrau.
  • Jahangir’s reign witnessed the visit of two Englishmen – William Hawkins and Sir Tomas Roe.
• Shahjahan:
  • Shah Jahan was born in Lahore, Pakistan to Prince Salim.
  • Her official Mughal name was Bilqis Makani.
  • Shah Jahan’s grandfather was Mughal Emperor Akbar.
  • He also created many other architectural marvels including the Pearl Mosque at Agra, the Red Fort, the Jama Masjid at Delhi, the Shalimar Gardens.
• Aurangzeb:
  • Aurangzeb was considered one of the ablest of the Mughal kings.
  • Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb’s 49 years of ruling period are considered as the “Golden age” of the Mughal Empire.
  • He adopted the regnal title Alamgir (Persian: “Conqueror of the World”).

1st term = 3 * 1 = 3
2nd term = 3 * 3 = 9
3rd term = 3 * 9 = 27
4th term = 3 * 27 = 81

Thus, Missing number is 5th term = 3 * 81 = 243

Specific performance is an equitable remedy in the law of contract, whereby a court issues an order requiring a party to perform a specific act, to complete performance of the contract.
According to section 10 of the Specific Relief Act, the specific performance of contract can be enforced in the following cases:-
1. If there exists no standard for ascertaining the actual damage caused by the non performance of the act which agreed to be done
2. When pecuniary compensation for its non performance would not afford adequate relief
3. When it is probable that pecuniary compensation cannot be got for the non performance of the act agreed to be done

By virtue of Section 437, a police officer can release an accused on bail in non-bailable case.
Section 437 CrPC deals with the concept of bail in non-bailable cases and to the relevant extent reads as 437. Bail may be taken in case of non bailable offence, when any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a court, other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail.

Section 2 of Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act 1939 states the various grounds of dissolution of muslim marriage.
Whereabouts of the husband are not known for four years is provided under section 2(i) of the Act.
The husband has failed to perform, without reasonable cause, his marital obligations for a period of three years is provided under section 2(iv) of the Act.
Non-maintenance of the wife by the husband for two years is provided under 2(ii) of the Act.
Option 4, i.e. Non-payment of mahr is not provided as a ground for dissolution of a Muslim marriage under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939.

An ex parte communication is an oral or written communication made without proper notice to all parties and not on the public record, from an interested person outside the agency to a member of the agency, an administrative law judge, or an employee involved in the decision-making process. Federal law does not prohibit ex parte communications from private parties because section 53 is silent on the question of ex parte contracts.

Following are good defences to an action in torts :

• Volenti non fit injuria is a common law doctrine which states that if someone willingly places themselves in a position where harm might result, knowing that some degree of harm might result, they are not able to bring a claim against the other party
• Vis major (superior force) term is used in civil cases to denote an act of God. A loss vis major results from natural causes

Scienti non fit injuria means that only knowledge of the risk is not enough to claim defence, there must be acceptance to undergo the resultants of the risk undertaken. There had to be consent. Mere knowledge is not sufficient. Hence, it cannot be defence.

The decree for maintenance or alimony does not get extinguished on the death of the husband and is executable against the deceased husband's estate.
In the matter of Mrs. Aruna Basu Mullick v. Mrs. Dorothea Mitra AIR 1983 SC 9164, it has been held by the Supreme Court that a decree for alimony passed under Section 37 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 does not extinguish with the death of the husband/judgement debtor.
It is further held that there is no rationality in the contention that a decree for maintenance or alimony gets extinguished with the death of the husband when any other decree even though not charged on the husband's property would not get so extinguished. A decree against the husband is executable against the estate of the husband in the hands of the heirs and there is no personal liability.

Section 2 of the Limitation Act is the defining section of the Act. According to section 2(l), suit does not include an appeal or an application. Therefore, option (4) is the answer.

According to Section 18 of CPC, "Where it is alleged to be uncertain within the local limits of the jurisdiction of which of two or more Courts any immovable property is situated, any one of those Courts may, if satisfied that there is ground for the alleged uncertainty, record a statement to that effect, and thereupon proceed to entertain and dispose of any suit relating to that property, and its decree in the suit shall have the same effect as the property were situate within the local limits of its jurisdiction: Provided that the suit is one with respect to which the Court is competent as regards the nature and value of the suit to exercise jurisdiction."

According to Section 20(1) of the Limitation Act, 'the expression agent duly authorised in this behalf in Sections 18 and 19 shall, in the case of a person under disability, includes his lawful guardian, committee or manager or an agent duly authorised by such guardian, committee or manager to sign the acknowledgment or make the payment.'

Section 113-B deals with the presumption as to dowry death. It says that when the question is whether a person has committed the dowry death of a woman and it is shown that soon before her death such woman has been subjected by such person to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, the Court shall presume that such person had caused the dowry death.
For the purposes of this section, dowry death shall have the same meaning as in section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code, (45 of 1860).

Abetment has been defined under Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code as ''a person abets the doing of a thing, who first instigates any person to do that thing or secondly engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy and in order to the doing of that thing or thirdly intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing''.
Therefore, the offence of abetment is constituted in all the given statements.

Dislodging a tooth by a blow of fist is an offence under Section 325 IPC. Court contended that a blow caused by a kick or fist or by any other body part, which resulted into grievous harm is an offence and attracts Section 325 IPC.

In the case of Queen-Empress v. Abdullah, (1885) ILR 7 All 385, W. Comer Petheram, C. J. held that the signs made by the deceased were the conduct of a person and that they are therefore, relevant under Section 8 of the Evidence Act.

Nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege is in fact a guarantee of human liberty; it protects individuals from state abuse and unjust interference. It ensures the fairness and transparency of the judicial authority. The principle is often associated with the attempts to constrain states, governments, judicial and legislative bodies from enacting on retroactive legislation, or ex post facto clauses and ensuring that all criminal behaviour is criminalised and all punishments established before the commencement of any criminal prosecution.

Key Points

• The Parliament shall meet at least twice a year. The maximum gap between two sessions of the Parliament cannot be more than six months.
• The President from time to time summons each house of the Parliament to meet.
• There are usually three sessions in a year :
  • Budget session
  • Monsoon session
  • Winter session
• A sitting of a  parliament can be terminated by adjournment or adjournment sine die or prorogation or dissolution.
• Adjournment: It suspends the work in a sitting for a specified time, which may be hours, days, and weeks.
• Adjournment sine die: It means terminating a sitting of Parliament for an indefinite period.
  • The power of adjournment sine die lies with the presiding officer of the House and not the president. Hence, Option 2 is correct.

Additional Information

• Prorogation: After the presiding officer declares the House adjourned sine die, within the next few days, the President issues a notification for the prorogation of the session.
  • However, the President can also prorogue the house while in session.
• Dissolution: It ends the very life of the existing house and a new house is constituted after general elections are held.
  • Rajya Sabha being a permanent house is not subject to dissolution, while Lok Sabha is subject to dissolution.

Section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure does not talk about the period of limitation for offences which are punishable with imprisonment exceeding three years or which are punishable with death penalty. Thus, option 4 is correct and all the three options above give correct provision as given under section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Section 2(f) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 says that 'probate' means the copy of a will certified under the seal of a court of competent jurisdiction with a grant of administration to the estate of the testator.

It was held in the case of Mahboob Shah v. King Emperor that common intention within the meaning of Section 34 implies a pre-arranged plan and to convict the accused of an offence applying the Section, it should be proved that criminal act was done in concert pursuant to the prearranged plan. It is difficult, if not impossible, to procure direct evidence to prove the intention of an individual, in most cases it has to be inferred from his act or conduct or other relevant circumstances of the case. Therefore, when a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone. Hence, the right answer is option (1).