Legal Studies: CUET Mock Test - 1 - Humanities/Arts MCQ
30 Questions MCQ Test - Legal Studies: CUET Mock Test - 1
Directions: Read the following passage carefully:
Criminal liability has been defined as being responsible for a criminal act. It is an established principle of criminal law that no one should be convicted or held liable for a crime, unless some measure of subjective fault can be attributed to him.
This invariably means that such a person must not only actively perform the act (actus anus), but also possess the guilty intention (mens rea) required for the commission of such offence. These two elements are a sine qua non to the commission of any offence as failure to establish those elements leads to an acquittal.
However, it is not all acts that are to be punished. There are certain defences that the law provides which exculpate criminal liability. It is provided for in sections 76 to 106 of Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860.
These defences are based on the fact that although the person committed an offence, he cannot be held criminally liable because as at the time the offence was committed, he was justified of his acts or he had no intention to commit such an offence.
Mistake of fact: This exception excludes a person from criminal liability where the person was mistaken as to the existence of some facts or ignorant of the existence of such facts.
Accident: This exception excludes a person from criminal liability where such acts occur as a result of an accident. This means that although the person performed the act, such act was devoid of an intention.
Essential elements: The act must be an accident or misfortune. The act was done without criminal intention or knowledge. It must be in the performance of a lawful act. It must be exercised in a lawful manner and by lawful means. Such an act must have been done with care and caution.
Infancy: According to Section 82 of IPC, nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age.
By virtue of Section 83 of IPC, a person under the age of twelve, but above the age of seven is not criminally liable for any offence committed, provided such child has not attained maturity of understanding to know that he ought not to do the act or make the omission.
When the child has attained maturity of understanding that he ought not to perform such an act, he becomes criminally liable.
Insanity: This exception excludes a person from criminal liability as a result of unsoundness of mind if, at the time of the commission of the offence, the person was incapable of knowing the nature of his acts and that his actions were wrong or contrary to law.
Intoxication: The provision for intoxication is stipulated under sections 85 and 86 of the IPC. The difference between these sections is that in the former, a person is intoxicated involuntarily. In the latter, a person is intoxicated voluntarily and he would be held liable for the tort.
Q. Rajiv, an environmentalist, went to Aravalli Hills for sprinkling a pesticide on a specific type of tree which was breeding a dangerous bacteria. He was doing the same during the afternoon. Bhola, a villager, was fetching woods from the forest. Rajiv was sprinkling pesticide with a pesticide gun. Unfortunately, the pesticide infused bullet reflected from a tree and caused harm to Bhola. Rajiv was held liable. Decide.
However, it is not all acts that are to be punished. There are certain defences that the law provides which exculpate criminal liability. It is provided for in sections 76 to 106 of Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860.
By virtue of Section 83 of IPC, a person under the age of twelve, but above the age of seven is not criminally liable for any offence committed, provided such child has not attained maturity of understanding to know that he ought not to do the act or make the omission.
When the child has attained maturity of understanding that he ought not to perform such an act, he becomes criminally liable.
Directions: Read the following passage carefully:
Criminal liability has been defined as being responsible for a criminal act. It is an established principle of criminal law that no one should be convicted or held liable for a crime, unless some measure of subjective fault can be attributed to him.
This invariably means that such a person must not only actively perform the act (actus anus), but also possess the guilty intention (mens rea) required for the commission of such offence. These two elements are a sine qua non to the commission of any offence as failure to establish those elements leads to an acquittal.
However, it is not all acts that are to be punished. There are certain defences that the law provides which exculpate criminal liability. It is provided for in sections 76 to 106 of Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860.
These defences are based on the fact that although the person committed an offence, he cannot be held criminally liable because as at the time the offence was committed, he was justified of his acts or he had no intention to commit such an offence.
Mistake of fact: This exception excludes a person from criminal liability where the person was mistaken as to the existence of some facts or ignorant of the existence of such facts.
Accident: This exception excludes a person from criminal liability where such acts occur as a result of an accident. This means that although the person performed the act, such act was devoid of an intention.
Essential elements: The act must be an accident or misfortune. The act was done without criminal intention or knowledge. It must be in the performance of a lawful act. It must be exercised in a lawful manner and by lawful means. Such an act must have been done with care and caution.
Infancy: According to Section 82 of IPC, nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age.
By virtue of Section 83 of IPC, a person under the age of twelve, but above the age of seven is not criminally liable for any offence committed, provided such child has not attained maturity of understanding to know that he ought not to do the act or make the omission.
When the child has attained maturity of understanding that he ought not to perform such an act, he becomes criminally liable.
Insanity: This exception excludes a person from criminal liability as a result of unsoundness of mind if, at the time of the commission of the offence, the person was incapable of knowing the nature of his acts and that his actions were wrong or contrary to law.
Intoxication: The provision for intoxication is stipulated under sections 85 and 86 of the IPC. The difference between these sections is that in the former, a person is intoxicated involuntarily. In the latter, a person is intoxicated voluntarily and he would be held liable for the tort.
Q. Ajit was drunk and fought with the wife. In anger, he poured petrol on her and set her on fire and later, started extinguishing the fire. He was held under the court of law. Decide.
However, it is not all acts that are to be punished. There are certain defences that the law provides which exculpate criminal liability. It is provided for in sections 76 to 106 of Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860.
By virtue of Section 83 of IPC, a person under the age of twelve, but above the age of seven is not criminally liable for any offence committed, provided such child has not attained maturity of understanding to know that he ought not to do the act or make the omission.
When the child has attained maturity of understanding that he ought not to perform such an act, he becomes criminally liable.
| 1 Crore+ students have signed up on EduRev. Have you? Download the App |
Directions: Read the following passage carefully:
Criminal liability has been defined as being responsible for a criminal act. It is an established principle of criminal law that no one should be convicted or held liable for a crime, unless some measure of subjective fault can be attributed to him.
This invariably means that such a person must not only actively perform the act (actus anus), but also possess the guilty intention (mens rea) required for the commission of such offence. These two elements are a sine qua non to the commission of any offence as failure to establish those elements leads to an acquittal.
However, it is not all acts that are to be punished. There are certain defences that the law provides which exculpate criminal liability. It is provided for in sections 76 to 106 of Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860.
These defences are based on the fact that although the person committed an offence, he cannot be held criminally liable because as at the time the offence was committed, he was justified of his acts or he had no intention to commit such an offence.
Mistake of fact: This exception excludes a person from criminal liability where the person was mistaken as to the existence of some facts or ignorant of the existence of such facts.
Accident: This exception excludes a person from criminal liability where such acts occur as a result of an accident. This means that although the person performed the act, such act was devoid of an intention.
Essential elements: The act must be an accident or misfortune. The act was done without criminal intention or knowledge. It must be in the performance of a lawful act. It must be exercised in a lawful manner and by lawful means. Such an act must have been done with care and caution.
Infancy: According to Section 82 of IPC, nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age.
By virtue of Section 83 of IPC, a person under the age of twelve, but above the age of seven is not criminally liable for any offence committed, provided such child has not attained maturity of understanding to know that he ought not to do the act or make the omission.
When the child has attained maturity of understanding that he ought not to perform such an act, he becomes criminally liable.
Insanity: This exception excludes a person from criminal liability as a result of unsoundness of mind if, at the time of the commission of the offence, the person was incapable of knowing the nature of his acts and that his actions were wrong or contrary to law.
Intoxication: The provision for intoxication is stipulated under sections 85 and 86 of the IPC. The difference between these sections is that in the former, a person is intoxicated involuntarily. In the latter, a person is intoxicated voluntarily and he would be held liable for the tort.
Q. Abhi, a patient, was under observation under a psychiatrist. Abhi is, at intervals, of sound mind. He killed Ashi during such an interval. Abhi was held liable for the murder. Decide.
However, it is not all acts that are to be punished. There are certain defences that the law provides which exculpate criminal liability. It is provided for in sections 76 to 106 of Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860.
By virtue of Section 83 of IPC, a person under the age of twelve, but above the age of seven is not criminally liable for any offence committed, provided such child has not attained maturity of understanding to know that he ought not to do the act or make the omission.
When the child has attained maturity of understanding that he ought not to perform such an act, he becomes criminally liable.
Directions: Read the following passage carefully:
Criminal liability has been defined as being responsible for a criminal act. It is an established principle of criminal law that no one should be convicted or held liable for a crime, unless some measure of subjective fault can be attributed to him.
This invariably means that such a person must not only actively perform the act (actus anus), but also possess the guilty intention (mens rea) required for the commission of such offence. These two elements are a sine qua non to the commission of any offence as failure to establish those elements leads to an acquittal.
However, it is not all acts that are to be punished. There are certain defences that the law provides which exculpate criminal liability. It is provided for in sections 76 to 106 of Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860.
These defences are based on the fact that although the person committed an offence, he cannot be held criminally liable because as at the time the offence was committed, he was justified of his acts or he had no intention to commit such an offence.
Mistake of fact: This exception excludes a person from criminal liability where the person was mistaken as to the existence of some facts or ignorant of the existence of such facts.
Accident: This exception excludes a person from criminal liability where such acts occur as a result of an accident. This means that although the person performed the act, such act was devoid of an intention.
Essential elements: The act must be an accident or misfortune. The act was done without criminal intention or knowledge. It must be in the performance of a lawful act. It must be exercised in a lawful manner and by lawful means. Such an act must have been done with care and caution.
Infancy: According to Section 82 of IPC, nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age.
By virtue of Section 83 of IPC, a person under the age of twelve, but above the age of seven is not criminally liable for any offence committed, provided such child has not attained maturity of understanding to know that he ought not to do the act or make the omission.
When the child has attained maturity of understanding that he ought not to perform such an act, he becomes criminally liable.
Insanity: This exception excludes a person from criminal liability as a result of unsoundness of mind if, at the time of the commission of the offence, the person was incapable of knowing the nature of his acts and that his actions were wrong or contrary to law.
Intoxication: The provision for intoxication is stipulated under sections 85 and 86 of the IPC. The difference between these sections is that in the former, a person is intoxicated involuntarily. In the latter, a person is intoxicated voluntarily and he would be held liable for the tort.
Q. Arya, an eleven year old girl, had a 15 year old sibling. Arya had always been a stubborn kid. One day, she demanded a toy from his brother. He refused to give her the same. Arya, in rage, stabbed her brother with a knife and he was badly injured. She was held by the court of law. Decide.
Directions: Read the following passage carefully:
Criminal liability has been defined as being responsible for a criminal act. It is an established principle of criminal law that no one should be convicted or held liable for a crime, unless some measure of subjective fault can be attributed to him.
This invariably means that such a person must not only actively perform the act (actus anus), but also possess the guilty intention (mens rea) required for the commission of such offence. These two elements are a sine qua non to the commission of any offence as failure to establish those elements leads to an acquittal.
However, it is not all acts that are to be punished. There are certain defences that the law provides which exculpate criminal liability. It is provided for in sections 76 to 106 of Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860.
These defences are based on the fact that although the person committed an offence, he cannot be held criminally liable because as at the time the offence was committed, he was justified of his acts or he had no intention to commit such an offence.
Mistake of fact: This exception excludes a person from criminal liability where the person was mistaken as to the existence of some facts or ignorant of the existence of such facts.
Accident: This exception excludes a person from criminal liability where such acts occur as a result of an accident. This means that although the person performed the act, such act was devoid of an intention.
Essential elements: The act must be an accident or misfortune. The act was done without criminal intention or knowledge. It must be in the performance of a lawful act. It must be exercised in a lawful manner and by lawful means. Such an act must have been done with care and caution.
Infancy: According to Section 82 of IPC, nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age.
By virtue of Section 83 of IPC, a person under the age of twelve, but above the age of seven is not criminally liable for any offence committed, provided such child has not attained maturity of understanding to know that he ought not to do the act or make the omission.
When the child has attained maturity of understanding that he ought not to perform such an act, he becomes criminally liable.
Insanity: This exception excludes a person from criminal liability as a result of unsoundness of mind if, at the time of the commission of the offence, the person was incapable of knowing the nature of his acts and that his actions were wrong or contrary to law.
Intoxication: The provision for intoxication is stipulated under sections 85 and 86 of the IPC. The difference between these sections is that in the former, a person is intoxicated involuntarily. In the latter, a person is intoxicated voluntarily and he would be held liable for the tort.
Q. Gurjot drank alcohol given by a friend, thinking it to be a cold drink. He became intoxicated and hit a person while driving his car back home. He was held liable for the tort done. Decide.
Who among the following is entitled to legal services?
Assertion (A): The Advocate's Act recognizes only one class of practitioners.
Reason (R): The Advocate's Act abolished all old categories of practitioners.
Consider the following statements regarding NHRC of India. Which of the following is/are incorrect?
A. It is based in Mumbai.
B. Its chairman must be a judge of the Supreme Court.
C. It is mandatory to appoint a woman as a member of the commission.
Rashid wants to pursue a 5 year integrated BA LLB programme from National Law University, Jodhpur. Which entrance exam will he have to take?
What distinction do senior advocates bear in their uniform?
The National Minorities Commission consists of _____________ members, except the Chairman and the Vice-Chairman.
There were three processes whereby the developing civilization progressively moved towards social engineering through free legal aid. Point the odd one out.
Assertion (A): Lok Adalats have the same powers as are vested in a civil court with respect to certain matters only.
Reason (R): Lok Adalats have been recognized under Civil Procedure Code.
In which of the following can the parties, out of their own free will, appoint (a) neutral person(s) to resolve their disputes?
Which statement is true with respect to jurisdiction in ad hoc arbitrations?
Assertion (A): The Bar Council of India regulates the content, syllabus, and duration of the law degree.
Reason (R): The Bar Council of India was established by Parliament under the Advocates Act, 1961.
The decisions of the International Court of Justice
Who is the ex officio member of State Bar Councils?
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted under whose chairmanship?
With regard to Zonal Councils, consider the following statements:
- The Zonal Councils are statutory bodies.
- They are established by an Act of the Parliament, that is, States Reorganisation Act 1956.
- North-Eastern Council was created under the States Reorganisation Act 1956.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
The following question consists of four statements, labeled as A, B, C, and D. You are to examine these statements carefully and select the best option for answer.
A. Attorney-General of India is qualified to be appointed as a judge of the high court.
B. Attorney-General represents Government of India in the Supreme Court.
C. Appointment of the Attorney-General is political in nature.
D. Attorney-General is appointed on the basis of professional competence.
Decide correct statement(s):
Any proceedings for removal of a judge of any High Court in India may be initiated only by
The term "intellectual property rights" covers:
Directions: Read the following passage carefully:
The Indian Contract Act, 1872 is a legislation governing the contractual relationship between two or more parties - individuals, companies, governments. It deals with all aspects of contracts, such as formation, performance, enforceability of contracts, indemnities and guarantees, bailment and pledge and agency, among others. A contract brought as a result of coercion, undue influence, fraud or misrepresentation would be voidable at the option of the person whose consent was caused.
Although one of the oldest laws in India, legal experts note that the Indian Contract Act's relevance has grown manifold in the current business environment with significant increase in the number of contracts being entered into between various parties, and the resultant disputes. Over the last one year or so, there has been an effort to step up corporate governance across boards through new company law provisions, and updating Securities and Exchange Board of India's (SEBI's) listing agreement for companies.
Many legal experts feel that the time has come to take a hard look at the Indian Contract Act to bring it in sync with the changing business environment.
"Good corporate governance demands well-defined and executed contracts, where the Indian Contract Act plays a crucial role," said Ramesh Vaidyanathan, managing partner, Advaya Legal.
Most legal experts say the Indian Contract Act is a relevant and comprehensive piece of legislation. The concepts under the contract law are based on the contract law of the United Kingdom. However, the Act contains certain provisions which are different.
As per Section 4 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, the communication of an acceptance is complete as against the acceptor when it comes to the knowledge of the proposer. An acceptance may be revoked at any time before the communication of the acceptance is complete as against the acceptor, but not afterwards.
Section 9 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 contemplates implied contracts when it lays down that in so far as such proposal or acceptance is made otherwise than in words, the promise is said to be implied.
Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act provides for compensation for loss or damage caused by breach of contract, naturally arising in the usual course of things from such breach. However, remote and indirect loss or damage sustained by reason of the breach is not provided under the contract law.
Under the Indian Contract Act, a contract without consideration is void subject to certain exceptions provided in Section 25 of the Act, such as love and affection u/s 25(1), compensation for voluntary services u/s 25(2), etc. However, the English law recognises contracts without consideration in some cases.
Q. A coolie in uniform picks up the luggage of S to be carried out of the railway station without being asked by A, and S does not stop him as well. Examine whether the coolie is entitled to receive money from S under the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
Directions: Read the following passage carefully:
The Indian Contract Act, 1872 is a legislation governing the contractual relationship between two or more parties - individuals, companies, governments. It deals with all aspects of contracts, such as formation, performance, enforceability of contracts, indemnities and guarantees, bailment and pledge and agency, among others. A contract brought as a result of coercion, undue influence, fraud or misrepresentation would be voidable at the option of the person whose consent was caused.
Although one of the oldest laws in India, legal experts note that the Indian Contract Act's relevance has grown manifold in the current business environment with significant increase in the number of contracts being entered into between various parties, and the resultant disputes. Over the last one year or so, there has been an effort to step up corporate governance across boards through new company law provisions, and updating Securities and Exchange Board of India's (SEBI's) listing agreement for companies.
Many legal experts feel that the time has come to take a hard look at the Indian Contract Act to bring it in sync with the changing business environment.
"Good corporate governance demands well-defined and executed contracts, where the Indian Contract Act plays a crucial role," said Ramesh Vaidyanathan, managing partner, Advaya Legal.
Most legal experts say the Indian Contract Act is a relevant and comprehensive piece of legislation. The concepts under the contract law are based on the contract law of the United Kingdom. However, the Act contains certain provisions which are different.
As per Section 4 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, the communication of an acceptance is complete as against the acceptor when it comes to the knowledge of the proposer. An acceptance may be revoked at any time before the communication of the acceptance is complete as against the acceptor, but not afterwards.
Section 9 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 contemplates implied contracts when it lays down that in so far as such proposal or acceptance is made otherwise than in words, the promise is said to be implied.
Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act provides for compensation for loss or damage caused by breach of contract, naturally arising in the usual course of things from such breach. However, remote and indirect loss or damage sustained by reason of the breach is not provided under the contract law.
Under the Indian Contract Act, a contract without consideration is void subject to certain exceptions provided in Section 25 of the Act, such as love and affection u/s 25(1), compensation for voluntary services u/s 25(2), etc. However, the English law recognises contracts without consideration in some cases.
Q. Aman contracts to repair Bir's house in a certain way and receives the money in advance. Aman repairs the house but not according to the contract. Is Bir entitled to recover the cost of making the repairs?
Directions: Read the following passage carefully:
The Indian Contract Act, 1872 is a legislation governing the contractual relationship between two or more parties - individuals, companies, governments. It deals with all aspects of contracts, such as formation, performance, enforceability of contracts, indemnities and guarantees, bailment and pledge and agency, among others. A contract brought as a result of coercion, undue influence, fraud or misrepresentation would be voidable at the option of the person whose consent was caused.
Although one of the oldest laws in India, legal experts note that the Indian Contract Act's relevance has grown manifold in the current business environment with significant increase in the number of contracts being entered into between various parties, and the resultant disputes. Over the last one year or so, there has been an effort to step up corporate governance across boards through new company law provisions, and updating Securities and Exchange Board of India's (SEBI's) listing agreement for companies.
Many legal experts feel that the time has come to take a hard look at the Indian Contract Act to bring it in sync with the changing business environment.
"Good corporate governance demands well-defined and executed contracts, where the Indian Contract Act plays a crucial role," said Ramesh Vaidyanathan, managing partner, Advaya Legal.
Most legal experts say the Indian Contract Act is a relevant and comprehensive piece of legislation. The concepts under the contract law are based on the contract law of the United Kingdom. However, the Act contains certain provisions which are different.
As per Section 4 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, the communication of an acceptance is complete as against the acceptor when it comes to the knowledge of the proposer. An acceptance may be revoked at any time before the communication of the acceptance is complete as against the acceptor, but not afterwards.
Section 9 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 contemplates implied contracts when it lays down that in so far as such proposal or acceptance is made otherwise than in words, the promise is said to be implied.
Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act provides for compensation for loss or damage caused by breach of contract, naturally arising in the usual course of things from such breach. However, remote and indirect loss or damage sustained by reason of the breach is not provided under the contract law.
Under the Indian Contract Act, a contract without consideration is void subject to certain exceptions provided in Section 25 of the Act, such as love and affection u/s 25(1), compensation for voluntary services u/s 25(2), etc. However, the English law recognises contracts without consideration in some cases.
Q. Ramaswami proposed to sell his house to Ramanathan. Ramanathan sent his acceptance by post. Next day, Ramanathan sent a telegram withdrawing his acceptance. The telegram of revocation of acceptance was received by Ramaswami before the letter of acceptance.
In the light of the above situation, examine the validity of the acceptance according to the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
Directions: Read the following passage carefully:
The Indian Contract Act, 1872 is a legislation governing the contractual relationship between two or more parties - individuals, companies, governments. It deals with all aspects of contracts, such as formation, performance, enforceability of contracts, indemnities and guarantees, bailment and pledge and agency, among others. A contract brought as a result of coercion, undue influence, fraud or misrepresentation would be voidable at the option of the person whose consent was caused.
Although one of the oldest laws in India, legal experts note that the Indian Contract Act's relevance has grown manifold in the current business environment with significant increase in the number of contracts being entered into between various parties, and the resultant disputes. Over the last one year or so, there has been an effort to step up corporate governance across boards through new company law provisions, and updating Securities and Exchange Board of India's (SEBI's) listing agreement for companies.
Many legal experts feel that the time has come to take a hard look at the Indian Contract Act to bring it in sync with the changing business environment.
"Good corporate governance demands well-defined and executed contracts, where the Indian Contract Act plays a crucial role," said Ramesh Vaidyanathan, managing partner, Advaya Legal.
Most legal experts say the Indian Contract Act is a relevant and comprehensive piece of legislation. The concepts under the contract law are based on the contract law of the United Kingdom. However, the Act contains certain provisions which are different.
As per Section 4 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, the communication of an acceptance is complete as against the acceptor when it comes to the knowledge of the proposer. An acceptance may be revoked at any time before the communication of the acceptance is complete as against the acceptor, but not afterwards.
Section 9 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 contemplates implied contracts when it lays down that in so far as such proposal or acceptance is made otherwise than in words, the promise is said to be implied.
Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act provides for compensation for loss or damage caused by breach of contract, naturally arising in the usual course of things from such breach. However, remote and indirect loss or damage sustained by reason of the breach is not provided under the contract law.
Under the Indian Contract Act, a contract without consideration is void subject to certain exceptions provided in Section 25 of the Act, such as love and affection u/s 25(1), compensation for voluntary services u/s 25(2), etc. However, the English law recognises contracts without consideration in some cases.
Q. A husband formed and registered an agreement with his wife that he will give his earnings to her but later denied to fulfil his promise arguing that he was not getting any consideration for the same. As per the passage, is the argument by the husband legally valid?
Top Courses for Humanities/Arts
Important Questions for Legal Studies: CUET Mock Test - 1
Legal Studies: CUET Mock Test - 1 MCQs with Answers
Online Tests for Legal Studies: CUET Mock Test - 1
|
© EduRev
|
Education Revolution
|
Follow Us
|
