- Home
- /
- Law Exam Updates in India: Schedules, Key Announcements
- /
- Important MCQs Based On Latest...
Important MCQs Based On Latest Supreme Court Judgments For Law Examinations
Yash Mittal
10 March 2024 12:45 PM IST
Q 1. When the Police Officer uses a case diary to refresh their memory, can the accused be permitted to rely on a case diary to cross-examine the police? State the correct position of law. a. The accused wouldn't be permitted to rely on a case diary to cross-examine the police. b. When the police officer uses a case diary to refresh his memory, the accused will get a right to access it...
Q 1. When the Police Officer uses a case diary to refresh their memory, can the accused be permitted to rely on a case diary to cross-examine the police? State the correct position of law.
a. The accused wouldn't be permitted to rely on a case diary to cross-examine the police.
b. When the police officer uses a case diary to refresh his memory, the accused will get a right to access it for cross-examination.
c. As per the Indian Evidence Act, only the police is allowed to refresh their memory, and not the accused.
d. None of the above
Answer: Option (b)
Explanation: The Supreme Court has held that an accused has a right to cross-examine a police officer as to the recording made in the case diary whenever the police officer uses it to refresh his memory.
Q 2. Recently, in one of the following judgments the Supreme Court held that the summons issued by ED needs to be respected and responded to by the person to whom summons were issued.
a. Directorate of Enforcement v. Arvind Kejriwal
b. Directorate of Enforcement v. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors.
c. Directorate of Enforcement v. Tejashvi Yadav
d. Directorate of Enforcement v. Hemant Soren
Answer: Option (b)
Explanation: The Supreme Court suspended the operation and execution of an interim order issued by the Madras High Court staying the summonses issued to district collectors in Tamil Nadu in connection with alleged illegal sand mining-money laundering cases.
"Since the Enforcement Directorate is conducting inquiry/investigation under PMLA in connection with four FIRs, this could be an investigation or proceedings under the act and hence, the district collectors and persons to whom summonses have been issued are obliged to respect and respond to said summonses.", the court said.
Q 3. To charge a person under Section 364A of IPC i.e., 'kidnapping for ransom', what is the essential ingredient to be proved by the prosecution apart from kidnapping?
a. The prosecution must prove the instant death threat to the victim.
b. The prosecution must prove the ransom demand.
c. The prosecution must prove the threats given by the accused to cause hurt to the victim.
d. All of the above
Answer: Option (d)
Explanation: Recently, the Supreme Court acquitted an accused charged under Section 364A of the Indian Penal Code i.e., kidnapping for ransom, after finding that the prosecution failed to establish that there was an instant threat of death to the kidnapped from the accused.
Q 4. A magistrate can issue a summon to the accused despite a police report when called for isn't received by the magistrate from the police. Test out the validity of the statement with the following options.
a. Yes, the Magistrate shouldn't wait for the police report and can issue a summon to the accused.
b. Yes, the Magistrate is bound to accept the police report.
c. No, the Magistrate should wait for the police report, if called for, before issuing a summon to the accused.
d. No, the Magistrate cannot issue the summon to the accused as the magistrate is bound by the police report.
Answer: Option (c)
Explanation: The Supreme Court held that once the Magistrate has called for the police report under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, then the magistrate couldn't issue a summon unless the report is submitted by the police. The Magistrate cannot issue process to the accused without application of mind and ought to have waited to issue process against the accused until the report was received from the police.
Q 5. In which of the following Judgments, the Supreme Court overturned the Asian Resurfacing judgment which mandated the interim orders passed by High Courts staying trials in civil and criminal cases will automatically expire after six months from the date of the order, unless expressly extended by the High Courts.
a. High Court Bar Association Delhi v. Union of India
b. High Court Bar Association Lucknow v. State of UP
c. High Court Bar Association Jabalpur v. State of MP
d. High Court Bar Association Allahabad v. State of UP
Answer: Option (d)
Explanation: In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court in High Court Bar Association Allahabad v. State of UP overturned its 2018 Asian Resurfacing judgment which mandated the interim orders passed by High Courts staying trials in civil and criminal cases will automatically expire after six months from the date of the order, unless expressly extended by the High Courts.
Q 6. In which of the following cases did the Supreme Court dismiss the PIL seeking to digitally monitor all the activities of MPs/MLAs to 'ensure transparency and to prevent corruption'?
a. Dr. Surinder Nath Kundra v Union Of India And Anr.
b. Dr. Surendra Nath Kundan v. Union of India
c. Dr. Jogendra Nath Kundra v. Union of India
d. Dr. Devendra Nath Kundra v. Union of India
Answer: Option (a)
Explanation: The Supreme Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition seeking to digitally monitor all the activities of MPs/MLAs to 'ensure transparency and to prevent corruption'.
Q 7. State the correct position of law concerning the reference of the dispute to the arbitral tribunal.
a. Limitation Act applies for filing an application for appointment of arbitrator.
b. Court can refuse to make reference to the arbitral tribunal if claims are ex-facie dead / time-barred.
c. Under the A&C Act, the court has no power to decide the validity of the claim at the stage of reference/appointment of arbitrator under Section 11(6).
d. Both (a) and (b)
Answer: Option (d)
Explanation: In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court held that the Limitation Act, 1963 is applicable to proceedings for appointment of arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("A&C Act"), and a Court may refuse to make a reference if the claims, on the date of commencement of arbitration proceedings, are ex-facie barred.
Q 8. In which of the following cases, the Supreme Court urged Parliament to consider amending the Act to prescribe a specific limitation period for filing applications under Section 11(6).
a. M/s Arif Azim Co. Ltd. Versus M/s Aptech Ltd.
b. SBP & Co. v. Patel Engineering Ltd. and Another
c. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited & Another v. Nortel Networks India Private Limited
d. Secunderabad Cantonment Board v. B. Ramachandraiah & Sons
Answer: Option (a)
Explanation: The court highlighted the absence of a statutory prescription regarding the time limit for such applications and expressed concerns about the unduly long three-year period allowed for filing under Article 137 of the Limitation Act. While recognizing the legislative vacuum, the court urged Parliament to consider amending the Act to prescribe a specific limitation period for filing applications under Section 11(6).
Q 9. As per Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC, what is the correct position of law with respect to filing an application seeking an amendment to the suit?
a. An application seeking amendment to the suit must be preferred before the commencement of trial.
b. An application seeking amendment to the suit shall not alter the nature of the suit.
c. An application seeking amendment to the suit shall not cause prejudice to the interest of the other party.
d. All of the above
Answer: Option (d)
Explanation: The Supreme Court held that an application seeking an amendment to the plaint shouldn't be allowed under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC if the amendment alters the nature of the suit.
Q 10. Is it permissible for the Police to register the details of the cognizable offence in the 'general diary' maintained by the police? State the correct position of law through the following options.
a. Yes, registration of FIR is not mandatory for information disclosing the commission of the cognizable offence(s).
b. Yes, the general diary entry can precede the registration of FIR.
c. No, an Information disclosing commission of a cognizable offence shall first be entered in a book kept by the officer in charge of a police station and not in the General Diary.
d. None of the above
Answer: Option (c)
Explanation: The Supreme Court held that the information disclosing the commission of the cognizable offence needs to be recorded as a First Information Report ("FIR") in the form of a book and not in the General Diary maintained by the Police under the Police Act, 1861.
