DAMO DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

VISAKHAPATNAM

SEMESTER-III End – Semester Repeat Examinations, July -2024

Instructions:
1. Answer all questions.
2. Any overwriting in answering question No. I will invalidate the relevant answer.
3. Do not write anything on the question paper. It will be treated as malpractice.
Total Marks - 50
Time: 2½ Hours

I. Choose the correct answer from the following MCQ’s (20 x 0.5 marks = 10 marks)

1. ‘D’, wants to kill ‘H’ and he is also trying to abet ‘J’, ‘J’ refuses to do the act.
A. D would be considered not guilty as he did not commit the offence
B. D would be guilty of murder
C. D would be considered guilty of abetting J to commit murder
D. No offence is committed

2. _________ is a kind of conspiracy in which ‘X’ talks to ‘A’, ‘A’ talks to ‘B’, and ‘B’ talks to
‘C’. ‘X’ and ‘C’ never meet.
A. Chain Conspiracy
B. Wheel Conspiracy
C. Single Conspiracy
D. Group Conspiracy

3. Concealing with an intent to facilitate design to wage war shall be punished with_______.
A. Imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to eight years, and shall
also be liable to fine.
B. Imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall
also be liable to fine.
C. Imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six years, and shall
also be liable to fine.
D. Imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall
also be liable to fine.

4. ‘A’, a surgeon performs plastic surgery on ‘B’ to remove the defect in the nose with his
consent. ‘B’ dies during the surgery. The liability of ‘A’ under Indian Penal Code is
________.
A. A is liable for gross negligence
B. A is liable for murder
C. A is not liable as he acted in good faith for the benefit of B with his consent
D. as B’s consent was an implied consent, hence A is liable

Page 1 of 5
5. Identify the case where the Supreme Court of India has held that when an offence relates to
the modesty of a woman, under no circumstances can it be termed trivial.
A. State of M.P v Mohandas, 1992 Cr LJ 101 (MP)
B. Rao Harnarain Singh Sheoji Singh v The State, 1958 CriLJ 563
C. Rupan Deol Bajaj v KPS Gill, AIR 1996 SC 309
D. Darshan Singh v State of Punjab, (2010)2 SCC 333

6. As per________, anything done in good faith to prevent or avoid other harm to any person or
property without any criminal intent believing or knowing that it is likely to cause harm will
not be considered an offence.
A. Section 80 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
B. Section 82 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
C. Section 83 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
D. Section 81 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860

7. ‘A’, a child aged 10 years goes to his friend ‘B’s house and picks up his mother’s silver
bracelet worth Rs.7000 which was lying on the table and immediately sold it for Rs.3000 and
misappropriated the said money. The conduct of ‘A’ shows that he was sufficiently mature to
understand the nature and consequences of his actions and therefore was guilty of theft under
Section 378 of I.P.C.
A. A has partial immunity
B. A is guilty of theft
C. A has absolute immunity
D. A has no maturity to understand the offence he committed

8. Section _______deals with public servant voluntary allowing prisoner of State or war to
escape
A. 127 of Indian Penal Code, 1860
B. 128 of Indian Penal Code, 1860
C. 129 of Indian Penal Code, 1860
D. 126 of Indian Penal Code, 1860

9. In ________the Supreme Court observed that “if acts are done which merely influence voter
in making his choice between one candidate or another, they will not amount to interference
with free exercise of the electoral rights”
A. Gobind Singh v Shanti Sarup , AIR 1979 SC 143
B. Dr. Nebu John Varghese vs P.K. Babu, 2000 CriLJ 1903
C. K. Ramakrishnan v. State of Kerala, AIR 1999 Ker 385
D. Shiv Kirpal Singh v. V.V. Giri, (1971) 2 SCR 197

10. The maxim sic uteretuout rem publicam non laedas, means _________.
A. Enjoy others property in such a way as not to injure the rights of the public
B. Enjoy your property in such a way as not to injure the rights of the public
C. Causing injury, obstruction, danger or annoyance to persons who may have any occasion to
use any public right
D. Interference with the peaceful possession of the others property
Page 2 of 5
11. Under the ordeal of ______a hot ball of iron had to be carried across a certain distance in the
palm of the hand using pupil leaves. If the hand did not end up getting burnt the person was
declared innocent. If the hand was burnt the person was found guilty.
A. Ordeal by water
B. Ordeal by fire
C. Ordeal by poison
D. Ordeal by Leaves

12. Intentionally letting a patient die by withholding artificial life support such as a ventilator or
feeding tube is called _______.
A. Active euthanasia
B. Passive euthanasia
C. Self-administered euthanasia
D. Other-administered euthanasia

13. The Doctrine of Rarest of Rare was established in the case of _________
A. Jag Mohan Singh vs the State of U.P, AIR 1973 SC 947
B. Bachan Singh v State of Punjab AIR 1980 SC 898
C. Machhi Singh v State of Punjab, AIR 1983 SC 957
D. Mithu v. State of Punjab, (1983) 2 SCC 277

14. ‘A’, a public officer, is authorized by a warrant by Court of justice to apprehend ‘Z’. ‘B’,
knowing that fact that ‘C’ is not ‘Z’, wilful represent to ‘A’ that ‘C’ is ‘Z’, and thereby
intentionally causes ‘A’ to apprehend ‘C’. The offence committed by B is _____.
A. Abetment by aid
B. Abetment by instigation
C. Abetment by conspiracy
D. No offence committed

15. Treating under section 171-E of Indian Penal code,1860 means_____

16. Disobedience to quarantine rule is mentioned under _____of Indian Penal Code,1860.
A. Section 269
B. Section 270
C. Section 271
D. Section 272

17. Nothing is an offence done by a child of ______years under Indian Penal code,1860.
A. Eighteen
B. Twelve
C. Seven
D. Fourteen
Page 3 of 5
18. The constitutional validity of Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code,1860 was challenged for
the first time in the case of __________.
A. Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar 1962 AIR 955
B. Ram Nandan v. State AIR 1959 All 101
C. State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu @ Afsan Guru AIR 2005 SC 3820
D. Gurjatinder Pal Singh v. State of Punjab, (2009) 3 RCR (Cri) 224.

19. If an accident occurs while doing an unlawful act, then the act would not be deemed to be an
accident but there may be no liability of the harm caused if there is no connection between the
harm and the act. Identify the provision under Indian Penal code, 1860.
A. Section 80
B. Section 81
C. Section 82
D. Section 83

20. ‘D’ instructs ‘B’ to put a house on fire, and because ‘B’ is insane, he does so, inflicting death
and other crimes as he is unaware of the nature of the act. Decide the liability of ‘D’ and ‘B’.
A. B and D are guilty of the offences.
B. D can be exempted from liability using the defence of insanity
C. B cannot be held liable as he is insane, but D will be found guilty of the offences
D. Both can be held liable of the offences

II. Anan is the brother of Pankajam wife of the deceased Sailesh. The marriage between
Pankajam and Sailesh took place in 2003. Immediately after marriage Pankajam was
subjected to continuous ill-treatment by Sailesh and the family members forcing her to live
separately along with her husband and children for about a year. Thereafter, she went to her
parent’s house and started living with her brother Anan. About two months prior to the
incident, the appellant advised the deceased to take his sister back to her matrimonial house
and treat her properly. On 5th August, 2008 Anan visited the place of the parents of the Sailesh
and pleaded them that Pankajam should be rehabilitated in the matrimonial home and should
not be physically ill-treated or harassed. It is also alleged that on that day the Anan also said to
have threatened the parents of the Sailesh that if they do not mend their behaviour towards
Pankajam, he would be compelled to resort to filing a complaint under Section 498 A of the
Indian Penal Code, to which the parents of the deceased expressed helplessness as Silesh had
been living separately from them. The mother of Sailesh asked him to bring back Pankajam to
avoid any police case against them, Sailesh went to the house of the parents of Anan followed
by a quarrel between them. Thereafter, Sailesh returned alone and told his brothers and other
acquaintances that Sailesh had threatened and abused him by using filthy words. On the next
day, Sailesh was found hanging with a rope by neck in his house and he was found dead.
Sailesh left a suicide note on a stray piece of wrapping paper. The autopsy on the body was
held and it was revealed that the death was due to asphyxia as a result of hanging. Determine
Anan’s liability based on the aforementioned facts by citing the relevant legal provisions and
using the parties' arguments and significant court rulings as support.
(1 x 10 marks = 10 marks)

Page 4 of 5
III. Write a case analysis of Amjad Khan v. State of MP, AIR 1952 SC 165
(1 x 10 marks = 10 marks)

IV. Describe the various forms of abetment offences in the context of rulings by the courts.

(1 x 10 marks = 10 marks)

V. Answer any two of the following (Out of the three). (2 x 5 marks = 10 marks)

i) Write a note on the concept of Consent under Indian penal code, 1860.
ii) Discuss whether intoxication under the Indian criminal law is exempted from liability
with relevant judicial pronouncements.
iii) Explain the offences relating to elections in India.

Page 5 of 5