Indian Penal Code - Practice Test

(A) Explanation V to Section 300

(B) Explanation I to Section 299

(C) Explanation II to Section 299

(D) Explanation III to Section 299

(D) Explanation III to Section 299

(A) Not liable for attempt to commit theft as the box being empty, commission of theft was impossible

(B) Not liable for attempt to commit theft as he did not do the penultimate act towards commission of theft

(C) Not guilty of attempt to commit theft as he made only preparation to commit theft

(D) Guilty of attempt to commit theft as he had an intention to commit theft and did an act towards

(D) Guilty of attempt to commit theft as he had an intention to commit theft and did an act towards

(A) 15 years

(B) 16 years

(C) 17 years

(D) 18 years

(D) 18 years

(A) Bahurao v. State of Maharashtra

(B) Dr. A. N. Mukherji v. State

(C) Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India

(D) P. V. Venkatraman v. State

(C) Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India

(A) Emasculation

(B) Permanent disfiguration of face

(C) Privation of any member or joint

(D) All the above

(D) All the above

Indian Penal Code - Study Mode