Get Advice on Live Video Call
Earn $ Cash $ with
consultations on Bissoy App

Consider the following statement:<br>Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code does not apply where:<br>1. Five or more person assembled where one killed A<br>2. A and B who are enemies of C decided distinctly of kill C. A killed C when B was also present<br>3. The presence of any person, who participated in the pre-arranged plan, is not necessary at the time of actual commission of the crime<br>4. Privity of mind of all the accused is an essential ingredient for the commission of crime of these statements:

Correct Answer: 1, 3 and 4 are correct

Consider the following statements:
1. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code requires two persons whereas Section 149 of Indian Penal Code require five persons.
2. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code requires common intention, whereas Section 149 of Indian Penal Code requires common object
3. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 149 of Indian Penal Code both require presence of a prior consent
4. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and section 149 of Indian Penal Code. Both create specific offence
Which of the above statements are correct?

Carefully read following statements:
1. According to Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, requirement is of two persons, whereas under Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, requirement is of five persons.
2. According to Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, common intention is required whereas under Section 149 Indian Penal Code, common object is required
3. Previous consent is required under Section 34 & 149 of Indian Penal Code
4. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 149 of Indian Penal Code constitutes a specific offence
Which of the above statements is true:

Which of the following is an essential ingredient to an offence under Section 141, Indian Penal Code?
1. That there was an assembly of five or more persons
2. That assembly must have one of the five objects given in Section 141, Indian Penal Code
3. There must be commonality of object amongst all members
4. The members assembled knowingly or continued to join (remain in) the assembly

Which of the following is an essential ingredient of an offence under Section 129, Indian Penal Code? Which of the following is an essential ingredien t of an offence under Section 129, Indian Penal Code?
1. The accused is a public servant (or was a public servant at the time of commission of the offence)
2. He was having custody of a prisoner of state or custody of a war prisoner
3. Such a prisoner was rescued or escaped
4. Such an escape or rescue was due to the negligence of the accused

Under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, in respect of confessional evidence
1. So much of the information as it relates distinctly to the fact discovered in consequence of information received from the person accused may be proved against him.
2. Person giving such information must be accused of an offence.
3. Accused need not be in the police custody.
4. Any statement of the accused confessing his guilt must be made in presence of a Magistrate, in all cases, whether anything is discovered or not in consequence of such statement, may be proved against him.

Consider the following statements:
1. The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in any dispute between the Government of India and one or more States.
2. The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in any dispute between the Government of India and any State or States on one side and one or more other State on the other.
3. The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in any dispute between the Government of India and any corporation of Individual one side and one or more States on the other.
4. The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in any dispute between two or more States.
Which of these statements are correct?

Consider the following statements:
1. In the case of Mithu v. State of Punjab, the constitutional validity of Section 303 of the Indian Penal Code was examined by the Supreme Court of India and held that this Section violates Article 14 and Article 21 of the Constitution,
2. Counsel for appellants/petitioners in the above case contended that Section 303 of the Indian Penal Code is arbitrary, because it authorizes deprivation of life by an unjust and unfair procedure.
3. Section 303 of the Indian Penal Code provides punishment for culpable homicide by causing death of person other that the person whose death was intended.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Each material circumstance appearing in evidence against the accused must be put to the accused specifically, distinctly and separately. In this context, the propositions are
1. Failure to put the material evidence to the accused always vitiates the trial
2. Failure to put the material evidence amounts to a serious irregularity which can not be cured and vitiates the trial, if it has prejudiced the accused.
3. Failure to put the material evidence is not considered to services & is curable if infact no failure of justice has occasioned to the accused.
Now which of the following is correct

Which of the following is an ingredient to an offence under Section 157, Indian Penal Code?
1. That the accused harboured, received or assembled in any house or premises
2. That such house or premises were in his occupation or charge or under his control
3. Such persons were hired (or engaged or employed or were to be hired, engaged or employed) to join or become members of an unlawful assembly
4. That the accused did so knowingly

Consider the following statements:
1. A person intentionally omitted to give information which he is legally bound to give.
2. A person gives information relating to a crime which he knows to be false.
3. A person causes disappearance of evidence in order to save the accused from the accusation of crime.
Which of the above amount/amounts to an offence for screening the offender from criminal liability punishable under Section 201 Indian Penal Code?