Consider the following statements: 1. In criminal proceedings good character of the accused is always relevant 2. In criminal proceedings bad character of the accused is always relevant 3. In a civil case evidence of character of any person concerned is always admissible 4. A previous conviction is relevant as evidence of bad character Which of the statements given above are correct?

Which of the following statement is correct?
1. Evidence of character in civil cases isirrelevant.
2. Previous conviction is relevant as evidence of bad character.
3. Evidence of good character is relevant in criminal cases.
4. Word cases character includes reputation only.

A

1 and 3 are correct

B

1, 2 and 3 are correct

C

2 and 3 are correct

D

All are correct

In criminal proceedings, under which of the following situations, the fact that the accused person has bad character, is relevant?
1. Where the character of the accused is in issue
2. When it affects damages
3. To rebut prior evidence of good character
4. Where the court is satisfied
Select the correct answer:

A

1 only

B

2 and 3

C

3 and 4

D

1 and 3

Evidences are adduced by the parties to the suit about the 'character'. As per the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, which of the following is/are correct?
1. Evidence of the character in civil proceedings is irrelevant and inadmissible generally.
2. The character evidence is admissible if it affects the amount of damages which he ought to receive.
3. The character evidence is admissible in so far as such character appears from facts otherwise relevant.
Select the correct answer:

A

1 only

B

1 and 2 only

C

2 and 3 only

D

1, 2 and 3

"When the previous commission by the accused of an offence is relevant, the previous conviction of such person is also a relevant fact." It is laid down in Section . . . . . . . . of Evidence Act.

A

Section 14, Explanation 1

B

Section 14, Explanation 2

C

Section 15

D

Section 16

Consider the following statements with regard to protection in respect of conviction for offences:
1. In the case of Sampath Kumar v. Enforcement Directorate, Madras, it was held that it is unconstitutional to give a caution to speak the truth.
2. No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once.
3. No person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
4. Criminal law in India can be enacted retrospectively.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A

1, 2 and 4

B

2, 3 and 4

C

2 and 3

D

3 only

In the following question, somestatements is followed by some conclusions,you have to take the given statements to betrue even if they seem to be at variance with
commonly known facts and then decide whichof the given logically follow. Choose thatconclusion as the answer. Statements:
Some roads are not good.
Some railways are good.
All airways are good.
Some roads are bad. Conclusions:
I. At least some bad are good.
II. No bad is good.

A

Only conclusion I follow.

B

Only conclusion II follow.

C

Either conclusion I or II follows.

D

Neither conclusion I or II follows.

Assertion (A): In criminal cases the fact that accused is of good character is relevant.
Reason (R): In criminal cases bad character of the accused is always irrelevant.
Select the correct answer:

A

Both A and R are true and R is the correct explanation of A

B

Both A and R are true but R is not the correct explanation of A

C

A is true but R is false

D

A is false but R is true

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

A

1 and 2 are correct

B

1 and 3 are correct

C

1, 2 and 3 all are correct

D

2 and 3 all are correct

Consider the following statements in respect of the offence of robbery:
1. Causing fear of death may be relevant
2. Causing hurt may be relevant
3. Causing fear of hurt may be relevant
4. Causing wrongful restraint may be relevant
Which of the statements given above are correct?

A

1 and 2

B

2 and 4

C

1 and 3

D

3 and 4

Which of the followingconditions has to be satisfied for the application of Section 14, Limitation Act, 1963?
1. Both the prior and subsequent proceeding are civil proceedings prosecuted by the same party
2. The prior proceedings had been prosecuted with due diligence and in good faith
3. The failure of the prior proceedings was due to defect of jurisdiction or cause of the nature
4. The earlier proceedings and later proceeding must relate to the same matter in issue
5. Both the proceedings are in Court

A

1, 3, 5

B

2, 4, 5

C

1, 5

D

All of these