Law of Crimes MCQ Quiz - Objective Question with Answer for Law of Crimes - Download Free PDF

The correct answer is 'Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug V. Union of India'

Key Points

• Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug V. Union of India:
  • This landmark case dealt with euthanasia and the right to die with dignity. The Supreme Court of India examined the legal implications of Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which criminalizes attempted suicide.
  • During the proceedings, the Court noted that Section 309 IPC is an anachronism and observed that the time has come for Parliament to consider deleting this provision.
  • The Court emphasized that individuals attempting suicide often do so under extreme mental stress or trauma and deserve care and compassion, not punishment.
  • This case highlighted the need for reform in laws regarding suicide, advocating for a humane and supportive approach rather than penal action.

Additional Information

• Gian Kaur Vs. State of Punjab:
  • In this case, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of Section 309 IPC, stating that the "right to life" under Article 21 does not include the "right to die."
  • However, the Court clarified that euthanasia and assisted suicide could be permissible under certain circumstances but require legislative sanction.
  • While the case discussed the broader context of euthanasia and suicide, it did not advocate for the deletion of Section 309 IPC directly.
• Both of the above:
  • This option is incorrect as only the Aruna Shanbaug case explicitly recommended the deletion of Section 309 IPC.
• None of the above:
  • This option is incorrect as the Aruna Shanbaug case did advocate for the deletion of Section 309 IPC.

The correct answer is 'Section 40 of the Indian Penal Code defines the term "offence".'

Key Points

• Definition of Offence in Section 40:
  • Section 40 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) provides the legal definition of the term "offence."
  • According to this section, the term "offence" denotes a thing punishable by the IPC unless the context indicates otherwise.
  • This definition is crucial for understanding what constitutes a punishable act under the IPC and helps in establishing criminal liability.
  • The term "offence" is used extensively in the IPC to describe acts that are considered illegal and subject to penalties.

Additional Information

• Explanation of other Sections:
  • Section 39: Section 39 of the IPC defines the term "voluntarily." It explains when an act is said to be done voluntarily, a concept important in determining intent or knowledge in criminal actions. This section does not define "offence."
  • Section 41: Section 41 defines the term "special law," which refers to laws that are applicable to a particular subject matter or class of persons. This section does not relate to the definition of "offence."
  • Section 42: Section 42 addresses the term "local law," referring to laws applicable only to a specific part of India. It does not provide the definition of "offence."
• Importance of Section 40:
  • Section 40 is foundational in criminal law as it helps in identifying acts that fall within the scope of criminal liability.
  • It ensures clarity and consistency in interpreting what constitutes a punishable act under the IPC.

The correct answer is 'Mithu Vs. State of Punjab'

Key Points

• Mithu Vs. State of Punjab:
  • In the case of Mithu Vs. State of Punjab (1983), the Supreme Court of India declared Section 303 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) unconstitutional.
  • Section 303 IPC mandated the death penalty for a person serving a life sentence if they committed murder. The Supreme Court found this provision to be arbitrary and violative of the right to equality and life under Articles 14 and 21 of the Indian Constitution.
  • The court held that the mandatory death penalty deprived the judiciary of its discretion to award a lesser sentence based on the circumstances of each case.

Additional Information

• Darshan Singh Vs. State of Punjab:
  • This case did not involve the constitutionality of Section 303 IPC. It dealt with different legal issues not related to the mandatory death penalty for life convicts.
• Mahabir Ghosh Vs. State of Tamil Nadu:
  • In this case, the Supreme Court addressed issues related to criminal law, but it did not declare Section 303 IPC unconstitutional.
• Sita Ram Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh:
  • This case also did not pertain to Section 303 IPC or its constitutionality. It involved different legal matters.

The correct answer is Extortion

Key Points

• Section 383 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which defines extortion.
• It says, whoever intentionally puts any person in fear of any injury to that person or to any other, and thereby dishonestly induces the person so put in fear to deliver to any person any property or valuable security, commits "extortion."
• A threatens to publish defamatory libel (this is an injury to reputation).
• The threat induces Z to give money (i.e., delivery of property).
• This satisfies both elements:
  • Putting in fear of injury (to reputation).
  • Dishonest inducement to deliver money.

The correct answer is Rustom

Key Points

• Rustom:
  • The movie 'Rustom' is based on the real-life incident of Naval Officer K.M. Nanavati, who was tried for the murder of his wife's lover.
  • The film explores the theme of 'grave and sudden provocation,' which is a legal defense in cases of homicide.
  • Rustom's storyline delves into the complexities of human emotions and the circumstances that lead to the tragic event.
  • The movie highlights how the judicial system interprets and deals with cases of sudden and grave provocation.

The correct answer is 'Agreement'

Key Points

• Agreement:
  • In the context of criminal conspiracy, an agreement between two or more persons to commit an illegal act or to achieve a lawful objective by illegal means is essential.
  • The essence of a conspiracy is the agreement; the conspirators must have a common design and intention to commit the crime.
  • Even if the illegal act is not carried out, the mere agreement constitutes the offense of conspiracy.

Additional Information

• Knowledge:
  • Knowledge of the conspiracy or the intent to commit a crime is important but not sufficient alone to constitute a criminal conspiracy.
  • There must be a clear agreement or plan among the conspirators.
• Meeting:
  • A meeting can be a part of forming a conspiracy, but it is not the defining element.
  • The crucial aspect is the agreement to commit a criminal act, not just the act of meeting.
• Common Intention:
  • While common intention is important in criminal law, it refers to the shared intention of individuals to commit a crime.
  • For conspiracy, the focus is on the agreement to commit the crime rather than just the shared intention.

The correct answer is Option 3.

Key Points

• Section 498-A IPC was introduced with the avowed object to combat the menace of dowry deaths and harassment to a woman at the hands of her husband or his relatives
• The following elements must be present for an offence under Section 498A to be committed:
  • The woman must be married;
  • She must have experienced abuse or harassment; and 
  • The abuse or harassment must have been perpetrated by the woman’s spouse or a relative of her husband.

Additional Information

•  In Pawan Kumar v. Haryana, the victim, Urmil, returned to her parents’ house within a few days after her marriage owing to dowry demands for a refrigerator, scooter, and other items. Her husband and in-laws treated her cruelly and harassed her, resulting in her death. The spouse was found guilty under Sections 304B, 306, and 498A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to jail and penalties. The court ruled that the demand for dowry is an offence in and of itself, and that the desire to buy a refrigerator or bike falls within the scope of seeking dowry. The other two appellants were found not guilty.

The correct answer is Option 4.

Key Points

Infanticide under the Indian Penal Code

• Section 315 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, relates to ‘ Act done with the intent to prevent child being born alive or to cause it to die after birth'. It is the only provision in the Indian Penal Code that mentions infanticide as an offence, that is, killing of a child who is of 0 to 2 years of age.
• According to this Section, an act done by a person with the intention of preventing a child from being alive when he/she is born or causing it die after he/she was born alive, causes the child to die before or after birth, will be punished for a term of imprisonment extending to ten years, or will be charged with fine, or both. Such act, when committed, does not include an act done to save the life of a pregnant woman, that is an act done in good faith.

The correct answer is option 3: '(a) - (iii), (b) - (i), (c) - (iv), (d) - (ii)'.

Key Points

• (a) Criminal force - Section 350, I.P.C.
  • Section 350 of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.) defines criminal force as intentionally using force to any person, without that person’s consent, in order to commit an offence or to cause injury, fear, or annoyance to the person.
• (b) Kidnapping or abduction in order to murder - Section 364, I.P.C.
  • Section 364 of the I.P.C. deals with kidnapping or abduction with the intention of murder. It provides for punishment for anyone who kidnaps or abducts any person with such intention.
• (c) Stolen property - Section 410, I.P.C.
  • Section 410 of the I.P.C. defines stolen property as property possession of which has been transferred by theft, extortion, or robbery, and property which has been criminally misappropriated or in respect of which criminal breach of trust has been committed.
• (d) Property mark - Section 479, I.P.C.
  • Section 479 of the I.P.C. defines property mark as a mark used for denoting that movable property belongs to a particular person.

Therefore the correct pairing is:

(a) - (iii): Criminal force - Section 350, I.P.C.

(b) - (i): Kidnapping or abduction in order to murder - Section 364, I.P.C.

(c) - (iv): Stolen property - Section 410, I.P.C.

(d) - (ii): Property mark - Section 479, I.P.C.

The correct answer is 'Section 121, I.P.C.'

Key Points

• Section 121, I.P.C.:
  • Section 121 of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.) deals with the offence of waging, or attempting to wage war, or abetting waging of war, against the Government of India.
  • It states that whoever wages war against the Government of India, or attempts to wage such war, or abets the waging of such war, shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to fine.
  • This section is specifically meant to address acts of insurrection and rebellion against the state authority.

Additional Information

• Section 121A, I.P.C.:
  • Section 121A pertains to conspiracy to commit offences punishable by Section 121.
  • It deals with the conspiracy to wage war against the Government of India but does not cover the actual act of waging war itself.
• Section 124A, I.P.C.:
  • Section 124A deals with sedition, which involves words, signs, or visible representation that incite hatred or contempt against the Government of India.
  • While sedition is a serious offence, it does not equate to the act of waging war against the government.
• Section 126, I.P.C.:
  • Section 126 addresses the offence of committing depredation on territories of power at peace with the Government of India.
  • This section is not relevant to the act of insurrection against the Government of India.

The correct answer is Option 1.

Key Points

• If a common intention is proved but no overt act is attributed to the individual accused, Section 34 will be attracted as essentially it involves vicarious liability but if participation of the accused in the crime is proved and a common intention is absent, Section 34 cannot be invoked.

Additional Information

• Common intention
  • This means that there was a prearranged plan or community of purpose between the people involved in the crime. This common intention must exist before the act is committed, but it can develop on the spur of the moment. 
• Overt act
  • An overt act is an act that can be clearly proven by evidence and from which criminal intent can be inferred. However, section 34 can still be invoked if the common intention is proven but no overt act is attributed to the accused.

The correct answer is chapter - 23.

Key Points

• The Indian Penal Code (IPC) is the official criminal code of India.
• It is a comprehensive code intended to cover all substantive aspects of criminal law.
• The IPC was drafted in 1860 on the recommendations of the first law commission of India established in 1834 under the Charter Act of 1833 under the Chairmanship of Thomas Babington Macaulay.
• Chapter 23 of the IPC is the last chapter, which deals with attempts to commit offences and includes sections 511.

Additional Information

• Indian Penal Code (IPC)
  • The Indian Penal Code, commonly known as IPC, is the main criminal code of India.
  • It was enacted in 1860 and came into force on 1st January 1862.
  • The code covers various offences and provides punishments for them, and it is applicable to the entire country, except Jammu and Kashmir, where the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC) was applicable until 2019.
  • The IPC has undergone several amendments to address the changing needs of society and to incorporate new types of crimes.
• Structure of IPC
  • The IPC is divided into 23 chapters, comprising 511 sections.
  • Each chapter deals with specific types of offences and their respective punishments.
  • For instance, Chapter 16 deals with offences affecting the human body, Chapter 17 covers offences against property, and Chapter 23 deals with attempts to commit offences.
• Amendments and Reforms
  • Over the years, the IPC has been amended multiple times to address new forms of crime and changing societal norms.
  • Some notable amendments include the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, which introduced stricter laws for crimes against women following the Nirbhaya case.
  • Another important amendment is the decriminalization of Section 377, which decriminalized consensual homosexual acts.

Key Points The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam that will replace the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898; and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, respectively, received President Droupadi Murmu’s assent on December 25, 2023. The three new criminal laws that were passed by Parliament in 2023 will come into effect from July 1, 2024, according to a notification by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). 

To provide a solution to the question of arranging certain sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in chronological order of their insertion, we will examine each of the mentioned sections:
Key PointsSection 124A: This section deals with sedition. It was introduced in 1870 by the British to suppress freedom of expression.
Section 153A: This section pertains to promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony. It was introduced in 1898.
Section 120A: This section defines criminal conspiracy. It was inserted into the IPC in 1913.
Section 304B: This section deals with dowry death and was added to the IPC in 1986.
Therefore, the correct answer is:
- Option 1: (A) Section 124A, (B) Section 153A, (C) Section 120A, (D) Section 304B
- Solution Statement: The correct chronological order of the insertion of the provisions in the Indian Penal Code is Section 124A first, followed by Section 153A, then Section 120A, and finally Section 304B. Hence, Option 1 is correct.

The correct answer is clause (k) of sub-section (1) of Section 2 of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

Key Points

• Computer Resource Definition:
  • The term 'computer resource' under the Indian Penal Code, 1860, refers to the definition provided in clause (k) of sub-section (1) of Section 2 of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
  • This clause defines 'computer resource' comprehensively, including computer systems, computer networks, data, databases, software, and other related resources.
  • Understanding the correct clause is crucial for accurately interpreting legal provisions related to cybercrimes and offenses involving computer resources.

Additional Information

• Incorrect Options Overview:
  • Clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 2: This clause defines 'access' and does not relate to 'computer resource.'
  • Clause (e) of sub-section (1) of Section 2: This clause defines 'communication device,' which is different from 'computer resource.'
  • Clause (j) of sub-section (1) of Section 2: This clause defines 'computer network,' a subset of 'computer resource,' but not the comprehensive definition required under the Indian Penal Code.