All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
Humanities/Arts Exam  >  Humanities/Arts Questions  >  The question consist of two statements, one l... Start Learning for Free
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App
The question consist of two statements, one labelled as PRINCIPLE and other as FACT. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.
PRINCIPLE : Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that person's consent moves that property, such taking is said to commit theft.
FACT: RAMU cuts down a tree on RINKU'S ground, with the intention of dishonestly taking the tree out of RINKU's possession without RINKU's constant. A could not take the tree away.
  • a)
    RAMU can be prosecuted for theft
  • b)
    RAMU cannot be prosecuted for theft
  • c)
    RAMU can be prosecuted for attempt to theft
  • d)
    RAMU has neither committed theft nor attempt to commit theft.
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
FREE This question is part of
Download PDF Attempt Test
Download PDF Attempt this Test
Most Upvoted Answer
The question consist of two statements, one labelled as PRINCIPLE and ...
In this case , RAMU did an offence of theft as he intentionally cut down the tree from RINKU's ground without his consent . He is said to commit theft . 'Theft' is defined in the section 378 of IPC . Theft is an offense where portable property of an individual is removed without his assent .
< Previous Question Next Question >
Explore Courses for Humanities/Arts exam

Similar Humanities/Arts Doubts

Directions: In this question, one or more principle(s) is/are given and is/are followed by fact(s). Read the principle(s) carefully and apply it/them to the given fact(s) and choose the most appropriate option.Principle 1: Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that persons consent moves that property in order to such taking, is said to commit theft.Principle 2: Whoever, being in any manner entrusted with property or with any dominion over property, dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use that property or dishonestly uses or disposes of that property in violation of any direction of law prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be discharged or of any legal contract, express or implied, which he has made touching the discharge of such trust or wilfully suffers any other person so to do, commits criminal breach of trust.Facts: Ramlal, going on pilgrimage to Ayodhya, entrusts his gold plate to Arunesh, the keeper of a warehouse, till Ramlal shall return. Arunesh carries the plate to a goldsmith and sells it.Q.What offence has been committed by Arunesh, if any?

Directions: Read the following passage carefully:Theft is a general term embracing a wide variety of misconduct by which a person is improperly deprived of his property. Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any property out of the possession of another person, moves that property for such taking, is said to commit theft.The purpose of theft law is to promote security of property by threatening aggressors with punishment. Property security is valued as part of the individuals enjoyment of his belongings and because the community wishes to encourage saving and economic planning, which would be jeopardized if accumulated property could be plundered with impunity. Another function of the law of theft is to divert the powerful acquisitive instinct from non-productive preying on others to productive activity.One problem that dogs the law of theft, as will be seen below, is that in a commercial society no clear line can be drawn between greedy antisocial acquisitive behavior on the one hand and, on the other hand, aggressive selling, advertising, and other entrepreneurial activity that is highly regarded or at least commonly tolerated. Here two important principles of constitutional and criminal law come into play to restrict the scope of the law of theft. A criminal law must not be so comprehensive as to jeopardize the ordinary behavior of decent citizens.Nor may a criminal law be so vague that it fails to warn the citizen what is forbidden and leaves to the discretion of enforcement officers or judges whether certain behavior should be punishable. The tension between these principles, and the impulse to penalize all egregious greed, account for the fact that theft law inevitably falls short of penalizing all rascality. Whoever intending to take dishonestly with an intention to cause wrongful loss to another or wrongful gain to himself any movable property out of the possession of any person without that persons consent, moves that property in order to such taking is said to commit theft.At the same time—such are the refractory problems of legislative drafting—it is impossible, even with the most painstaking draftsmanship, to avoid overpenalizing in some cases. For example, obviously trivial peculations such as using an employers stationery for writing personal notes quite clearly fall within theft law; yet it has proved impossible to articulate exceptions that will exclude this and a myriad of other trivial violations. Such things remain, therefore, within the province of prosecutorial and judicial discretion.Q.Tia, Sohams wedding planner went to Sohams office to discuss his wedding plans. Since Soham was not in his office, Tia waited in his cabin. Tia had few card designs and few samples of return gift with her. When Soham didnt turn up, Tia collected all the samples and cards and took along with her. As she was collecting the sample return gifts, Tia also took a stone resembling a return gift from his table. Since the stone happened to be a valuable one, Soham filed a complaint and it was traced in Tias office.

Directions: Read the following passage carefully:Theft is a general term embracing a wide variety of misconduct by which a person is improperly deprived of his property. Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any property out of the possession of another person, moves that property for such taking, is said to commit theft.The purpose of theft law is to promote security of property by threatening aggressors with punishment. Property security is valued as part of the individuals enjoyment of his belongings and because the community wishes to encourage saving and economic planning, which would be jeopardized if accumulated property could be plundered with impunity. Another function of the law of theft is to divert the powerful acquisitive instinct from non-productive preying on others to productive activity.One problem that dogs the law of theft, as will be seen below, is that in a commercial society no clear line can be drawn between greedy antisocial acquisitive behavior on the one hand and, on the other hand, aggressive selling, advertising, and other entrepreneurial activity that is highly regarded or at least commonly tolerated. Here two important principles of constitutional and criminal law come into play to restrict the scope of the law of theft. A criminal law must not be so comprehensive as to jeopardize the ordinary behavior of decent citizens.Nor may a criminal law be so vague that it fails to warn the citizen what is forbidden and leaves to the discretion of enforcement officers or judges whether certain behavior should be punishable. The tension between these principles, and the impulse to penalize all egregious greed, account for the fact that theft law inevitably falls short of penalizing all rascality. Whoever intending to take dishonestly with an intention to cause wrongful loss to another or wrongful gain to himself any movable property out of the possession of any person without that persons consent, moves that property in order to such taking is said to commit theft.At the same time—such are the refractory problems of legislative drafting—it is impossible, even with the most painstaking draftsmanship, to avoid overpenalizing in some cases. For example, obviously trivial peculations such as using an employers stationery for writing personal notes quite clearly fall within theft law; yet it has proved impossible to articulate exceptions that will exclude this and a myriad of other trivial violations. Such things remain, therefore, within the province of prosecutorial and judicial discretion.Q.Ajay handed over his mothers jewellery to his girlfriend, Jaya, for safekeeping. His girlfriend was in a need of money as she was planning a surprise for Ajays birthday. Jaya sold the jewellery to Mohan, though she was not authorised to do so. Ajay filed a suit against Jaya.

Directions: Read the following passage carefully:Theft is a general term embracing a wide variety of misconduct by which a person is improperly deprived of his property. Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any property out of the possession of another person, moves that property for such taking, is said to commit theft.The purpose of theft law is to promote security of property by threatening aggressors with punishment. Property security is valued as part of the individuals enjoyment of his belongings and because the community wishes to encourage saving and economic planning, which would be jeopardized if accumulated property could be plundered with impunity. Another function of the law of theft is to divert the powerful acquisitive instinct from non-productive preying on others to productive activity.One problem that dogs the law of theft, as will be seen below, is that in a commercial society no clear line can be drawn between greedy antisocial acquisitive behavior on the one hand and, on the other hand, aggressive selling, advertising, and other entrepreneurial activity that is highly regarded or at least commonly tolerated. Here two important principles of constitutional and criminal law come into play to restrict the scope of the law of theft. A criminal law must not be so comprehensive as to jeopardize the ordinary behavior of decent citizens.Nor may a criminal law be so vague that it fails to warn the citizen what is forbidden and leaves to the discretion of enforcement officers or judges whether certain behavior should be punishable. The tension between these principles, and the impulse to penalize all egregious greed, account for the fact that theft law inevitably falls short of penalizing all rascality. Whoever intending to take dishonestly with an intention to cause wrongful loss to another or wrongful gain to himself any movable property out of the possession of any person without that persons consent, moves that property in order to such taking is said to commit theft.At the same time—such are the refractory problems of legislative drafting—it is impossible, even with the most painstaking draftsmanship, to avoid overpenalizing in some cases. For example, obviously trivial peculations such as using an employers stationery for writing personal notes quite clearly fall within theft law; yet it has proved impossible to articulate exceptions that will exclude this and a myriad of other trivial violations. Such things remain, therefore, within the province of prosecutorial and judicial discretion.Q.Bhola went to buy a watch to be gifted to his son with a view to find a watch similar to the one he owns. He selected the watch but when he saw the price tag, he gave it up. But meanwhile, he inadvertently took the valuable watch from the shop and left his less valuable watch in the casket of the valuable watch. Nobody in the shop noticed it and he also discovered it only after reaching home.

Directions: Read the following passage carefully:Theft is a general term embracing a wide variety of misconduct by which a person is improperly deprived of his property. Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any property out of the possession of another person, moves that property for such taking, is said to commit theft.The purpose of theft law is to promote security of property by threatening aggressors with punishment. Property security is valued as part of the individuals enjoyment of his belongings and because the community wishes to encourage saving and economic planning, which would be jeopardized if accumulated property could be plundered with impunity. Another function of the law of theft is to divert the powerful acquisitive instinct from non-productive preying on others to productive activity.One problem that dogs the law of theft, as will be seen below, is that in a commercial society no clear line can be drawn between greedy antisocial acquisitive behavior on the one hand and, on the other hand, aggressive selling, advertising, and other entrepreneurial activity that is highly regarded or at least commonly tolerated. Here two important principles of constitutional and criminal law come into play to restrict the scope of the law of theft. A criminal law must not be so comprehensive as to jeopardize the ordinary behavior of decent citizens.Nor may a criminal law be so vague that it fails to warn the citizen what is forbidden and leaves to the discretion of enforcement officers or judges whether certain behavior should be punishable. The tension between these principles, and the impulse to penalize all egregious greed, account for the fact that theft law inevitably falls short of penalizing all rascality. Whoever intending to take dishonestly with an intention to cause wrongful loss to another or wrongful gain to himself any movable property out of the possession of any person without that persons consent, moves that property in order to such taking is said to commit theft.At the same time—such are the refractory problems of legislative drafting—it is impossible, even with the most painstaking draftsmanship, to avoid overpenalizing in some cases. For example, obviously trivial peculations such as using an employers stationery for writing personal notes quite clearly fall within theft law; yet it has proved impossible to articulate exceptions that will exclude this and a myriad of other trivial violations. Such things remain, therefore, within the province of prosecutorial and judicial discretion.Q.Kabir owed some money to Sia. Sia removed his horse, which was grazing by the side of a river, and kept it tied in her own farm. When Kabir asked her to release the horse, Sia told him that she would do so when the money was paid to her. Kabir filed a case against Sia.

Top Courses for Humanities/ArtsView all

Top Courses for Humanities/Arts

The question consist of two statements, one labelled as PRINCIPLE and other as FACT. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.PRINCIPLE : Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that persons consent moves that property, such taking is said to commit theft.FACT: RAMU cuts down a tree on RINKUS ground, with the intention of dishonestly taking the tree out of RINKUs possession without RINKUs constant. A could not take the tree away.a)RAMU can be prosecuted for theftb)RAMU cannot be prosecuted for theftc)RAMU can be prosecuted for attempt to theftd)RAMU has neither committed theft nor attempt to commit theft.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
The question consist of two statements, one labelled as PRINCIPLE and other as FACT. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.PRINCIPLE : Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that persons consent moves that property, such taking is said to commit theft.FACT: RAMU cuts down a tree on RINKUS ground, with the intention of dishonestly taking the tree out of RINKUs possession without RINKUs constant. A could not take the tree away.a)RAMU can be prosecuted for theftb)RAMU cannot be prosecuted for theftc)RAMU can be prosecuted for attempt to theftd)RAMU has neither committed theft nor attempt to commit theft.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? for Humanities/Arts 2024 is part of Humanities/Arts preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the Humanities/Arts exam syllabus. Information about The question consist of two statements, one labelled as PRINCIPLE and other as FACT. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.PRINCIPLE : Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that persons consent moves that property, such taking is said to commit theft.FACT: RAMU cuts down a tree on RINKUS ground, with the intention of dishonestly taking the tree out of RINKUs possession without RINKUs constant. A could not take the tree away.a)RAMU can be prosecuted for theftb)RAMU cannot be prosecuted for theftc)RAMU can be prosecuted for attempt to theftd)RAMU has neither committed theft nor attempt to commit theft.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for Humanities/Arts 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for The question consist of two statements, one labelled as PRINCIPLE and other as FACT. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.PRINCIPLE : Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that persons consent moves that property, such taking is said to commit theft.FACT: RAMU cuts down a tree on RINKUS ground, with the intention of dishonestly taking the tree out of RINKUs possession without RINKUs constant. A could not take the tree away.a)RAMU can be prosecuted for theftb)RAMU cannot be prosecuted for theftc)RAMU can be prosecuted for attempt to theftd)RAMU has neither committed theft nor attempt to commit theft.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for The question consist of two statements, one labelled as PRINCIPLE and other as FACT. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.PRINCIPLE : Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that persons consent moves that property, such taking is said to commit theft.FACT: RAMU cuts down a tree on RINKUS ground, with the intention of dishonestly taking the tree out of RINKUs possession without RINKUs constant. A could not take the tree away.a)RAMU can be prosecuted for theftb)RAMU cannot be prosecuted for theftc)RAMU can be prosecuted for attempt to theftd)RAMU has neither committed theft nor attempt to commit theft.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for Humanities/Arts. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for Humanities/Arts Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of The question consist of two statements, one labelled as PRINCIPLE and other as FACT. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.PRINCIPLE : Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that persons consent moves that property, such taking is said to commit theft.FACT: RAMU cuts down a tree on RINKUS ground, with the intention of dishonestly taking the tree out of RINKUs possession without RINKUs constant. A could not take the tree away.a)RAMU can be prosecuted for theftb)RAMU cannot be prosecuted for theftc)RAMU can be prosecuted for attempt to theftd)RAMU has neither committed theft nor attempt to commit theft.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of The question consist of two statements, one labelled as PRINCIPLE and other as FACT. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.PRINCIPLE : Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that persons consent moves that property, such taking is said to commit theft.FACT: RAMU cuts down a tree on RINKUS ground, with the intention of dishonestly taking the tree out of RINKUs possession without RINKUs constant. A could not take the tree away.a)RAMU can be prosecuted for theftb)RAMU cannot be prosecuted for theftc)RAMU can be prosecuted for attempt to theftd)RAMU has neither committed theft nor attempt to commit theft.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for The question consist of two statements, one labelled as PRINCIPLE and other as FACT. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.PRINCIPLE : Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that persons consent moves that property, such taking is said to commit theft.FACT: RAMU cuts down a tree on RINKUS ground, with the intention of dishonestly taking the tree out of RINKUs possession without RINKUs constant. A could not take the tree away.a)RAMU can be prosecuted for theftb)RAMU cannot be prosecuted for theftc)RAMU can be prosecuted for attempt to theftd)RAMU has neither committed theft nor attempt to commit theft.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of The question consist of two statements, one labelled as PRINCIPLE and other as FACT. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.PRINCIPLE : Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that persons consent moves that property, such taking is said to commit theft.FACT: RAMU cuts down a tree on RINKUS ground, with the intention of dishonestly taking the tree out of RINKUs possession without RINKUs constant. A could not take the tree away.a)RAMU can be prosecuted for theftb)RAMU cannot be prosecuted for theftc)RAMU can be prosecuted for attempt to theftd)RAMU has neither committed theft nor attempt to commit theft.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice The question consist of two statements, one labelled as PRINCIPLE and other as FACT. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.PRINCIPLE : Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that persons consent moves that property, such taking is said to commit theft.FACT: RAMU cuts down a tree on RINKUS ground, with the intention of dishonestly taking the tree out of RINKUs possession without RINKUs constant. A could not take the tree away.a)RAMU can be prosecuted for theftb)RAMU cannot be prosecuted for theftc)RAMU can be prosecuted for attempt to theftd)RAMU has neither committed theft nor attempt to commit theft.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice Humanities/Arts tests.
Explore Courses for Humanities/Arts exam

Top Courses for Humanities/Arts

Explore Courses

Suggested Free Tests

Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev
Get App
© EduRev
Education Revolution
Follow Us
Signup to see your scores go up
within 7 days!
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup