Judiciary Exams Exam  >  Judiciary Exams Tests  >  Criminal Law for Judiciary Exams  >  Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Judiciary Exams MCQ

Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Judiciary Exams MCQ


Test Description

25 Questions MCQ Test Criminal Law for Judiciary Exams - Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not

Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not for Judiciary Exams 2024 is part of Criminal Law for Judiciary Exams preparation. The Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not questions and answers have been prepared according to the Judiciary Exams exam syllabus.The Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not MCQs are made for Judiciary Exams 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, notes, meanings, examples, exercises, MCQs and online tests for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not below.
Solutions of Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not questions in English are available as part of our Criminal Law for Judiciary Exams for Judiciary Exams & Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not 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: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not | 25 questions in 25 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: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 1

According to Section 392 of the IPC, what is the maximum duration of rigorous imprisonment for individuals convicted of robbery?

Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 1
As per Section 392 of the IPC, individuals convicted of robbery may face a maximum duration of ten years of rigorous imprisonment. This provision aims to deter individuals from engaging in such criminal activities by imposing a significant penalty for their actions.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 2

In which scenario can the prescribed period of imprisonment for robbery be increased to a maximum of 14 years?

Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 2
The prescribed period of imprisonment for robbery can be increased to a maximum of 14 years when the crime takes place on a highway during the hours between sunset and sunrise (at night). This heightened penalty underscores the seriousness with which the law views robberies committed in such circumstances.
1 Crore+ students have signed up on EduRev. Have you? Download the App
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 3

What additional penalty, besides imprisonment, can individuals convicted of robbery potentially face according to Section 392 of the IPC?

Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 3
In addition to facing a maximum duration of ten years of rigorous imprisonment, individuals convicted of robbery according to Section 392 of the IPC may also be subjected to the imposition of a fine. This financial penalty serves as a deterrent and a form of punishment for the crime committed.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 4
Under what conditions does Section 392 of the IPC specify a higher penalty for individuals engaged in robbery?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 4
Section 392 of the IPC stipulates a higher penalty of up to 14 years of imprisonment for individuals engaged in robbery if the crime occurs on a highway during the hours between sunset and sunrise (at night). This provision reflects the increased risk and potential harm associated with robberies committed in such vulnerable settings.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 5
What distinguishes robbery from theft and extortion under Section 390 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 5
Robbery, as per Section 390 of the Indian Penal Code, involves the act of taking or attempting to take property from another individual using force, threat of force, causing injury, instilling fear, or attempting to cause severe harm. This distinguishes robbery from theft, which does not involve the use of force, and extortion, which typically involves coercion or intimidation for monetary gain.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 6
What is the key intention behind a robbery according to the IPC?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 6
In a robbery, the key intention is to permanently deprive the owner of their property, whether it is movable or immovable. This means that the perpetrator aims to retain the stolen property for themselves and not return it to the rightful owner. This element of intent differentiates robbery from other forms of property crimes.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 7
Which of the following actions would NOT constitute robbery under the IPC?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 7
Borrowing a friend's laptop without permission does not constitute robbery under the IPC because robbery involves the use of force, threat of force, causing injury, or instilling fear to take someone else's property without their consent. In this scenario, there is no element of force or coercion involved in acquiring the laptop.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 8
How does robbery differ from theft in terms of legal consequences?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 8
Robbery carries more severe consequences than theft under the law because it involves not only the act of taking someone's property but also the use of force, threat of force, causing harm, or instilling fear in the victim. The element of violence or coercion in a robbery typically results in harsher penalties compared to theft, where force may not be present.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 9
According to Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code, what defines robbery?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 9
Robbery, as defined by Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code, involves the act of taking someone else's property through the use of force or threat. This distinguishes robbery from other forms of theft or misappropriation. It emphasizes the element of coercion or intimidation in the unlawful taking of property.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 10
What is the punishment for robbery as per Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 10
Section 392 stipulates that the punishment for robbery includes rigorous imprisonment for up to ten years along with a fine. This signifies the severity with which the legal system views the crime of robbery and aims to deter individuals from engaging in such criminal activities.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 11
Under what circumstances can the imprisonment term for robbery be extended to fourteen years as per the Indian Penal Code?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 11
If a robbery occurs on the highway between sunset and sunrise, the imprisonment term can be extended to fourteen years according to the Indian Penal Code. This provision aims to address the heightened risks and vulnerabilities associated with robberies that take place during the night.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 12
Which section of the Indian Penal Code deals with instances where harm is caused intentionally during an attempted robbery?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 12
Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code specifically addresses cases where harm is caused intentionally during an attempted robbery. This section outlines severe penalties, including life imprisonment or rigorous imprisonment for up to ten years, along with fines, for individuals involved in such criminal activities. It underscores the legal consequences of inflicting harm in the course of criminal acts like robbery.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 13
What is the legal definition of robbery according to Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 13
Robbery, as defined in Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code, involves taking someone else's property through the use of force or threat. This definition distinguishes robbery from theft by emphasizing the element of force or threat in the act. Committing robbery can lead to rigorous imprisonment for up to ten years, with a possible extension to fourteen years if the offense occurs on a highway between sunset and sunrise.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 14
What is the punishment for attempting to commit robbery according to Section 393 of the Indian Penal Code?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 14
Section 393 of the Indian Penal Code addresses the offense of attempting to commit robbery. The punishment for attempted robbery includes rigorous imprisonment for a maximum of seven years, along with the possibility of being fined. This provision aims to deter individuals from engaging in acts that lead to or are associated with robbery.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 15
Under what circumstances does the punishment for robbery increase to rigorous imprisonment for 14 years according to the relevant legal provisions?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 15
The punishment for robbery escalates to rigorous imprisonment for 14 years when the offense is committed on the highway between sunset and sunrise. This specific circumstance is highlighted in the legal provisions related to robbery to address the heightened risk and severity associated with robberies occurring during nighttime hours on highways.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 16
What legal provision deals with instances where harm is intentionally caused during an attempted robbery?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 16
Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code specifically addresses situations where harm is caused intentionally during an attempted robbery. In such cases, both the offender and any accomplice involved can face severe penalties, including life imprisonment or rigorous imprisonment for up to ten years, in addition to fines. This provision aims to deter individuals from resorting to violence or causing harm while attempting to commit a robbery.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 17
According to Section 393 of the law, what is the punishment for attempted robbery?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 17
As per Section 393, the punishment for attempted robbery involves rigorous imprisonment for a maximum of seven years and the possibility of being fined. This severe penalty aims to deter individuals from engaging in such criminal activities.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 18
What key elements are outlined in Section 392 of the law regarding theft and associated actions?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 18
Section 392 of the law specifies the key elements related to theft and associated actions, which include engaging in theft, intentionally causing or attempting to cause death, physical harm, or wrongful restraint while fearing immediate harm, and committing these actions either with the intent of theft or during the act of theft. Understanding these elements is crucial for interpreting and applying the law effectively.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 19
What are the potential penalties outlined in Section 394 for causing harm intentionally during an attempted robbery?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 19
Section 394 addresses instances where harm is intentionally caused during an attempted robbery. In such cases, both the offender and any accomplice involved can face severe penalties, including life imprisonment or rigorous imprisonment for up to ten years, along with fines. These strict consequences aim to discourage individuals from engaging in violent criminal behavior.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 20
In the case of Harish Chandra v. State of U.P. (1976), what was the key legal argument made by the defense to challenge the application of Section 390 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 20
In the case of Harish Chandra v. State of U.P. (1976), the defense argued that the harm caused, specifically a slap to the victim after the theft, could not be directly linked to the theft itself. This argument was put forth to challenge the application of Section 390 of the IPC, which defines the offense of robbery. However, the Supreme Court dismissed this argument and ruled that the harm inflicted during the incident was indeed connected to the theft, leading to the conviction of the accused for robbery.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 21
What was the pivotal factor that led to the Supreme Court's ruling in the case of Harish Chandra v. State of U.P. (1976) that the offense fell under Section 390 of the Indian Penal Code?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 21
The Supreme Court's decision in the case of Harish Chandra v. State of U.P. (1976) was influenced by the occurrence of harm during the theft itself. The Court concluded that the harm inflicted on the victim, in this case, a slap following the theft of the wristwatch, was a crucial factor in determining that the offense fell under Section 390 of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with robbery. This ruling emphasized that harm need not be limited to the act of theft but could extend to any consequences arising from the criminal act.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 22
What was the final verdict reached in the case of Harish Chandra v. State of U.P. (1976) regarding the accused individuals?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 22
In the case of Harish Chandra v. State of U.P. (1976), the final verdict pronounced by the Court was that both accused individuals were found guilty of the offense of robbery. This decision was based on the Court's assessment of the events, legal arguments presented, and the application of relevant provisions of the Indian Penal Code. The verdict highlighted the seriousness of the crime committed and the legal consequences that followed as a result of their actions.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 23
What is the significance of fulfilling all five essential elements outlined in Section 378 of the IPC in proving Robbery through theft, according to the case of State of Maharashtra v. Joseph Mingel Koli and Ors.?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 23
The significance of fulfilling all five essential elements outlined in Section 378 of the IPC in proving Robbery through theft, as highlighted in the case of State of Maharashtra v. Joseph Mingel Koli and Ors., is crucial. Failure to establish these elements during the theft commission can negate the act's classification as Robbery under Section 390. This emphasizes the importance of meeting all legal criteria to classify an act as robbery through theft.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 24
What was the legal outcome in the case of Harinder Singh v. State of Punjab (1993)?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 24
In the case of Harinder Singh v. State of Punjab (1993), the legal outcome was that the Supreme Court convicted the accused of Robbery based on the evidence and injuries sustained by the cashier. This decision was reached after considering the actions taken by the accused during the theft incident.
Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 25
In what scenario can the imprisonment term for robbery under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code be extended to fourteen years?
Detailed Solution for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not - Question 25
The imprisonment term for robbery under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code can be extended to fourteen years if the robbery takes place on a highway between sunset and sunrise. This provision aims to address the heightened risks and vulnerabilities associated with robberies that occur during these specific hours.
99 docs|98 tests
Information about Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not Page
In this test you can find the Exam questions for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not solved & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving Questions and answers for Test: Section 392 IPC Bailable or Not, EduRev gives you an ample number of Online tests for practice

Top Courses for Judiciary Exams

Download as PDF

Top Courses for Judiciary Exams