Judicial Service Exams: Question And Answers Based On Latest Judgements-1

(a) Lillu @ Rajesh & Anr Vs State Of Haryana

(b) RIT Foundation Vs Union of India

(c) Independent Thought Vs Union of India

(d) X Vs Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department

Ans.: (a) Lillu @ Rajesh & Anr Vs State Of Haryana

2. In which of the following cases, the Supreme Court has recently held that 'any person who conducts the "two-finger test" while examining a person alleged to have been subjected to a sexual assault shall be guilty of misconduct'?

(a) Lalankumar Singh Vs State of Maharashtra

(b) Mukesh Singh Vs State of Uttar Pradesh

(c) State of Jharkhand Vs Kumar Rai @ Pandav Rai

(d) X Vs Arun Kumar C.K

Ans.: (c) State of Jharkhand Vs Shailendra Kumar Rai @ Pandav Rai

[In this case Supreme Court held that the "two-finger test" or pre vaginum test must not be conducted - It has no scientific basis and neither proves nor disproves allegations of rape. It instead re-victimizes and re-traumatizes women who may have been sexually assaulted, and is an affront to their dignity - It is patriarchal and sexist to suggest that a woman cannot be believed when she states that she was raped, merely for the reason that she is sexually active - Directions issued to the Union Government as well as the State Governments - Ensure that the guidelines formulated by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare are circulated to all government and private hospitals - Conduct workshops for health providers to communicate the appropriate procedure to be adopted while examining survivors of sexual assault and rape.]

3. Whether a woman is "habituated to sexual intercourse" or "habitual to sexual intercourse" is ……………….. for the purposes of determining whether the ingredients of Section 375 of the IPC are present in a particular case.

(a) Relevant

(b) Irrelevant

(c) Depends on facts and circumstances of the case

(d) None of the above

Ans.: (b) Irrelevant

[53A of the Evidence Act, evidence of a victim's character or of her previous sexual experience with any person shall not be relevant to the issue of consent or the quality of consent, in prosecutions of sexual offences. See: State of Jharkhand Vs Shailendra Kumar Rai @ Pandav Rai]

4. In which of the following Judgement the Supreme Court directed the Government to review curriculums in medical schools so that the two-finger test is not prescribed as one of the procedures to be adopted while examining survivors of sexual assault and rape?

(a) Lalankumar Singh Vs State of Maharashtra

(b) Mukesh Singh Vs State of Uttar Pradesh

(c) State of Jharkhand vs Shailendra Kumar Rai @ Pandav Rai

(d) X Vs Arun Kumar C.K

Ans.: (c) State of Jharkhand Vs Shailendra Kumar Rai @ Pandav Rai

5. The Supreme Court has recently held that:

(a) All married women entitled to safe and legal abortion

(b) Unmarried women not entitled to safe and legal abortion

(c) All women whether married or unmarried are entitled to safe and legal abortion

(d) None of the above

Ans.: (c) All women whether married or unmarried are entitled to safe and legal abortion

[See: X Vs Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, Govt of NCT Of Delhi]

5. In which of the following case the Supreme Court held that all women, whether married or unmarried, are entitled to safe and legal abortion?

(a) X Vs State of Uttar Pradesh

(b) X Vs State of Maharashtra

(c) X Vs State of Madhya Pradesh

(d) X Vs Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department

Ans.: (d) X Vs Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department

[In this case the Supreme Court held that all women are entitled to safe and legal abortion noting that the 2021 amendment to the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act does not make a distinction between married and unmarried women]

6.Whether an unmarried woman who conceive out of live-in relationship entitled to legal abortion?

(a) Yes

(b) No

(c) Depends on facts and circumstances of the case

(d) None of the above

Ans.: (a) Yes

[In X Vs Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, the Supreme Court held that exclusion of unmarried women who conceive out of live-in relationship from the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules is unconstitutional.]

8. For a married woman consent of husband is…………..for Legal Abortion

(a) Mandatory

(b) Directory

(c) Not required

(d) Depends on facts and circumstances of the case

Ans.: (c) Not required

[In X Vs Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, the Supreme Court held that it is the woman alone who has the right over her body and is the ultimate decisionmaker on the question of whether she wants to undergo an abortion.]

9. For an unmarried woman consent of a family member is …………….for legal abortion

(a) Mandatory

(b) Directory

(c) Not required

(d) Depends on facts and circumstances of the case

Ans.: (c) Not required

[In X Vs Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, the Supreme Court held that it is the woman alone who has the right over her body and is the ultimate decisionmaker on the question of whether she wants to undergo an abortion.]

10. In which of the following cases Supreme Court held that Article 21 of the Constitution recognizes and protects the right of a woman to undergo termination of pregnancy if her mental or physical health is at stake?

(a) X Vs State of Uttar Pradesh

(b) X Vs State of Maharashtra

(c) X Vs State of Madhya Pradesh

(d) X Vs Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department

Ans.: (d) X Vs Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department

11. For a minor, consent of guardian is …………….for legal abortion

(a) Necessary

(b) Not necessary

(c) Depends on facts and circumstances of the case

(d) None of the above

Ans.: (a) For Minors and mentally ill persons, consent of guardian is necessary.

12. For a wife to seek abortion of pregnancy on the ground of strain in marital relationship

(a) Consent of husband necessary

(b) Legal Divorce is necessary

(c) Depends on facts and circumstances of the case

(d) Legal Divorce Or Husband's Consent Not Required

Ans.: (d) Legal Divorce Or Husband's Consent Not Required

[See: X Vs Union of India]

13. Does "Marital Rape" included for the purposes of Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act?

(a) Yes

(b) No

(c) It is out of the purview of the Act

(d) None of the above

Ans.: (a) Yes

[In X Vs Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, the Supreme Court held that the meaning of rape must be held to include "marital rape" for the purpose of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act and Rules.

The Court held that wives, who conceived out of forced sex by their husbands, will also come within the ambit of "survivors of sexual assault or rape or incest" mentioned in Rule 3B(a) of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules. For context, Rule 3B(a) mentions the categories of women who can seek termination of pregnancy in the term of 20-24 weeks]

14. Supreme Court has recently held that in cases if 'teenage pregnancies" the doctor ……………… disclose the name and identity of the minor girl in the information given to police under POCSO Act

(a) Need to

(b) Need not

(c) Need to disclose depending on the nature of offences

(d) None of the above

Ans.: (b) Need not

[In X Vs Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, the Supreme Court read down the mandatory police reporting requirement under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act to hold that a doctor need not disclose the name and identity of the minor girl in the information given to police.]

15. In which of the following case, the Delhi High Court recently passed a split verdict on the issue of 'marital rape'?

(a) X Vs NCT Delhi

(b) RIT Foundation Vs Union of India

(c) Independent Thought Vs Union of India

(d) X Vs Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department

Ans.: (b) RIT Foundation Vs Union of India

[Delhi High Court in this case passed a split verdict on a batch of petitions challenging the exception to Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, which exempts forceful sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife from the offence of rape.

Justice Rajiv Shakdher has held that the exemption to the husband from the offence of marital rape is unconstitutional. Exception 2 of 375, 376B IPC was therefore struck down by him as violative of Article 14.

However, Justice C Hari Shankar said that he does not agree with Justice Shakdher. Justice Hari Shankar has held that Exception 2 to Section 375 does not violate Constitution and that the exception is based on an intelligible differentia.]