Judiciary Exams Exam  >  Judiciary Exams Tests  >  Criminal Law for Judiciary Exams  >  Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Judiciary Exams MCQ

Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Judiciary Exams MCQ


Test Description

15 Questions MCQ Test Criminal Law for Judiciary Exams - Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra

Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra for Judiciary Exams 2024 is part of Criminal Law for Judiciary Exams preparation. The Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra questions and answers have been prepared according to the Judiciary Exams exam syllabus.The Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra MCQs are made for Judiciary Exams 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, notes, meanings, examples, exercises, MCQs and online tests for Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra below.
Solutions of Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra questions in English are available as part of our Criminal Law for Judiciary Exams for Judiciary Exams & Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra solutions in Hindi for Criminal Law for Judiciary Exams course. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for Judiciary Exams Exam by signing up for free. Attempt Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra | 15 questions in 15 minutes | Mock test for Judiciary Exams preparation | Free important questions MCQ to study Criminal Law for Judiciary Exams for Judiciary Exams Exam | Download free PDF with solutions
Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 1

Who was part of the Coram in the Supreme Court for the case "Ranjit Udeshi v State Of Maharashtra"?

Detailed Solution for Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 1
The Coram in the Supreme Court for the case "Ranjit Udeshi v State Of Maharashtra" consisted of Gajendragadkar, P.B. (Cj), Wanchoo, K.N., Hidayatullah, M., Shah, J.C. The composition of the Coram is crucial in determining the legal perspectives and outcomes of the case.
Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 2

In the case of Ranjit Udeshi v State Of Maharashtra, what action did Udeshi take after being convicted by lower courts?

Detailed Solution for Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 2
Following his conviction by lower courts, Ranjit D. Udeshi decided to appeal the verdict to the Supreme Court. This legal move indicates his intent to challenge the decision made by the lower judicial bodies and seek a different outcome at the highest level of the legal system.
1 Crore+ students have signed up on EduRev. Have you? Download the App
Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 3

Which law was central to the judgment in the case "Ranjit Udeshi v State Of Maharashtra"?

Detailed Solution for Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 3
The judgment in the case "Ranjit Udeshi v State Of Maharashtra" primarily focused on interpreting and applying provisions of the Indian Penal Code. The court's deliberations and decisions were rooted in analyzing the legal aspects related to obscenity within the framework of this specific legislation.
Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 4
What does Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code address as a criminal offense?
Detailed Solution for Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 4
Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code specifically addresses obscenity as a criminal offense. This section, however, does not provide a clear definition of what constitutes obscenity, relying on community standards and leaving interpretation to the judiciary.
Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 5
Which historical test of obscenity, originating from British law, assessed material based on its potential to corrupt susceptible minds?
Detailed Solution for Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 5
The historical test of obscenity that originated from British law and assessed material based on its potential to corrupt susceptible minds is known as the Hicklin Test. This test, established in Regina v Hicklin (1868), focused on the impact of material on minds susceptible to immoral influences.
Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 6
What was the main legal concern raised by the appellants regarding Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code?
Detailed Solution for Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 6
The appellants primarily argued that Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code excessively restricts the freedom of speech guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. This legal concern was central to their challenge of the section's constitutional validity.
Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 7
According to the appellants, what did they posit regarding the punishment under Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code?
Detailed Solution for Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 7
The appellants posited that punishment under Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code should require intent to corrupt the public. They argued that establishing this intent should be a prerequisite for imposing penalties under the section, reflecting a specific legal standpoint on the issue of intent in relation to the offense.
Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 8
What legal concept did the Supreme Court of India defend concerning Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code?
Detailed Solution for Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 8
The Supreme Court of India defended Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code as a reasonable restriction on freedom of speech, emphasizing the importance of promoting public decency and morality within society. This stance reflects the court's view on balancing the right to freedom of speech with the maintenance of public order and morality.
Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 9
What was the court's ruling regarding the classification of Lady Chatterley's Lover?
Detailed Solution for Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 9
Applying the established test, the court deemed Lady Chatterley's Lover to be obscene, leading to the affirmation of the High Court's decision. The appeal against this ruling was rejected, thereby maintaining the classification of the book as obscene under the criteria set by the court.
Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 10
What distinguished Aveek Sarkar's ruling from past judgments like Samaresh Bose v Amal Mitra (1985) and S Khushboo v Kanniammal (2010)?
Detailed Solution for Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 10
Aveek Sarkar's ruling stood out from past judgments like Samaresh Bose v Amal Mitra (1985) and S Khushboo v Kanniammal (2010) due to its emphasis on greater accountability, particularly regarding mens rea, and advocating for considering the impugned image as a whole. This departure marked a paradigm shift in legal accountability and interpretation.
Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 11
What fundamental aspect did the Aveek Sarkar judgment emphasize in terms of accountability?
Detailed Solution for Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 11
The Aveek Sarkar judgment underscored the importance of greater accountability of mens rea, highlighting a shift towards a more stringent approach to assessing intent and mental state in legal matters. This emphasis on mens rea accountability signified a significant evolution in legal standards and interpretation.
Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 12
How does the Ranjit Udeshi case contribute to the broader legal landscape, particularly in terms of judicial interpretation?
Detailed Solution for Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 12
The Ranjit Udeshi case contributes significantly to the broader legal landscape by challenging the traditional approach to obscenity laws. It goes beyond Section 292 and offers insights into the broader judicial interpretation of the legal code, specifically questioning the requirement of mens rea, especially in cases like obscenity where intent is not explicitly mentioned. This case prompts a reevaluation of how obscenity is defined and prosecuted within the legal system.
Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 13
How does the Ranjit Udeshi case differ from offenses like murder under Indian criminal law?
Detailed Solution for Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 13
Unlike offenses like murder under Indian criminal law, the Ranjit Udeshi case imposes strict liability for obscenity, irrespective of the accused's intent. This means that in obscenity cases, even if the accused was unaware of the obscene nature of the material, they can still be held liable. This departure from requiring proof of intent, which is necessary in cases like murder, underscores the unique legal considerations surrounding obscenity laws and strict liability.
Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 14
What critique does legal scholar Latika Vashisht offer regarding the approach set by the Ranjit Udeshi case in shaping obscenity laws?
Detailed Solution for Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 14
Legal scholar Latika Vashisht criticizes the approach set by the Ranjit Udeshi case for overlooking aesthetic and emotional aspects of obscenity while limiting considerations to societal norms. This critique underscores the complexity of obscenity laws and the need to balance various factors in determining what is considered obscene.
Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 15
Why is it suggested to revisit judgments like Ranjit Udeshi v. State of Maharashtra for understanding contemporary obscenity law?
Detailed Solution for Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra - Question 15
Revisiting judgments like Ranjit Udeshi v. State of Maharashtra is recommended to grasp the jurisprudential evolution shaping contemporary obscenity law. These cases offer insights into how legal interpretations have evolved over time, reflecting changes in societal norms and values. Understanding such evolution helps in navigating the complexities of current legal frameworks and their implications.
99 docs|98 tests
Information about Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra Page
In this test you can find the Exam questions for Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra solved & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving Questions and answers for Test: Case Brief: Ranjit Udeshi v State of Maharashtra, EduRev gives you an ample number of Online tests for practice

Top Courses for Judiciary Exams

Download as PDF

Top Courses for Judiciary Exams