Indian Penal Code - Practice Test

[#686] The offence of word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman under Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is triable by

(A) Any Magistrate

(B) Magistrate of First Class

(C) Court of Sessions

(D) None of the above

Correct Answer

(A) Any Magistrate

[#687] Right to private defence under section 99

(A) Extends to causing more harm than is necessary for the purpose of defence

(B) Does not extend to causing more harm than is necessary for the purpose of defence

(C) Does not extend to causing the harm necessary for the purpose of defence

(D) Restricts the harm caused to be less than the one necessary for the purpose of defence

Correct Answer

(B) Does not extend to causing more harm than is necessary for the purpose of defence

[#688] If the act abetted is committed in consequence, the abettor is punishable with punishment provided for the offence

(A) If the offence committed is the same as abetted

(B) If the offence committed is different from the one abetted, for the offence committed

(C) If the doer commits the offence with different intention than the abettor

(D) All the above

Correct Answer

(D) All the above

[#689] With respect to the difference between kidnapping from lawful guardianship and abduction which of the following statements is correct?

(A) Kidnapping is committed only in respect of a minor or a person of unsound mind. Abduction is committed in respect of a person of any age

(B) In former, the person kidnapped is removed out of lawful guardianship. Abduction has reference exclusively to the person abducted

(C) In kidnapping, consent of the person kidnapped or entitled is immaterial. In abduction, consent of the person moved, if freely and voluntarily given, condones abduction

(D) All of these

Correct Answer

(D) All of these

[#690] In P. Rathinam v. Union of India (1994) 3 SCC 394 the Supreme Court held Section 309 Indian Penal Code as unconstitutional. Was this judgment overruled and if so in which case?

(A) Yes, Smt. Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab, (1996) 2 SCC 648

(B) Yes, Sachidanand Singh v. State of Bihar, (1998) 2 SCC 493

(C) Yes, Sucha Singh v. State of Punjab, (2003) 7 SCC 643

(D) No, it was not overruled

Correct Answer

(A) Yes, Smt. Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab, (1996) 2 SCC 648

Indian Penal Code - Study Mode

[#686] The offence of word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman under Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is triable by

Correct Answer

[#687] Right to private defence under section 99

Correct Answer

[#688] If the act abetted is committed in consequence, the abettor is punishable with punishment provided for the offence

Correct Answer

[#689] With respect to the difference between kidnapping from lawful guardianship and abduction which of the following statements is correct?

Correct Answer

[#690] In P. Rathinam v. Union of India (1994) 3 SCC 394 the Supreme Court held Section 309 Indian Penal Code as unconstitutional. Was this judgment overruled and if so in which case?

Correct Answer