IPC - Test 1

1. The motive under section 81 of IPC should be:

1 point

(a) prevention of harm to person

(b) prevention of harm to property

(c) both (a) and (b)

(d) either (a) or (b).

Clear selection

2. ‘Infancy’ as an exception has been provided under:

1 point

(a) section 80

(b) section 81

(c) section 82

(d) section 84.

Clear selection

3. Section 82 of IPC provides that nothing is an offence which is done by a child under:

1 point

(a) six years of age

(b) seven years of age

(c) nine years of age

(d) ten years of age.

Clear selection

4. Section 82 of IPC enunciates:

1 point

(a) a presumption of fact

(b) a rebuttable presumption of law

(c) a conclusive or irrebuttable presumption of law

(d) none of the above.

Clear selection

5. A person is stated to be partially incapax under section 83, IPC if he is aged:

1 point

(a) above seven years and under twelve years

(b) above seven years and under ten years

(c) above seven years and under sixteen years

(d) above seven years and under eighteen years.

Clear selection

6. Section 83 of IPC lays down:

1 point

(a) a presumption of fact

(b) an inconclusive or rebuttable presumption of law

(c) conclusive or irrebuttable presumption of law

(d) irrebuttable presumption of fact.

Clear selection

7. Section 82 of IPC lays down the rule of:

1 point

(a) wholly incapax

(b) partially incapax

(c) both (a) & (b)

(d) either (a) or (b).

Clear selection

8. Under section 82 & section 83 of IPC an offence is punishable if it is done by a child:

1 point

(a) of below seven years of age

(b) of above seven years of age but below twelve years if he has not attained sufficient maturity and understanding

(c) of above seven years of age but below twelve years having attained sufficient maturity and understanding

(d) all the above.

Clear selection

9. Which of the following pair is not correctly matched:

1 point

(a) Mens Rea – R. v. Prince

(b) Necessity – D.P.P. v. Beard

(c) Insanity – Mc’Naughten case

(d) Intoxication – Basudeo v. State of Pepsu.

Clear selection

10. The maxim ‘actus non facit rea nisi mens sit rea’ means:

1 point

(a) crime has to be coupled with guilty mind

(b) there can be no crime without a guilty mind

(c) crime is the result of guilty mind

(d) criminal mind leads to crime.

Clear selection

11. “In every statute, mens rea is to be implied unless the contrary is shown.”: This view was expressed in-

1 point

(a) Sherras v. De Rutzen

(b) R. v. Dudley & Stephen

(c) Harding v. Price

(d) R. v. Prince.

Clear selection

12. Which of the following is correct for the aforesaid: I. The physical aspect of crime is actus reas. II. The mental aspect of crime is mens rea. III. The motive is the desire to commit crime

1 point

(a) I & II are correct but III is not correct

(b) only II & III

(c) only II & III

(d) all the above.

Clear selection

13. Section 84 of IPC provides for:

1 point

(a) medical insanity

(b) legal insanity

(c) moral insanity

(d) unsoundness of mind of any kind.

Clear selection

14. Irresistible impulse is a defence:

1 point

(a) in India

(b) in England

(c) in India and England both

(d) neither in India nor in England.

Clear selection

15. A hangman who hangs the prisoners pursuant to the order of the court is exempt from criminal liability by virtue of:

1 point

(a) section 77 of IPC

(b) section 78 of IPC

(c) section 79 of IPC

(d) section 76 of IP(c)

Clear selection

16. Insanity as a defence means that a person at the time of doing an act, by reason of unsoundness of mind is incapable of knowing:

1 point

(a) the nature of the act

(b) that what he is doing is wrong

(c) that what he is doing is contrary to law

(d) either (a) or (b) or (c).

Clear selection

17. Which of the following is correct:

1 point

(a) the burden of proof that the accused was not insane at the time of commission of offence is on the prosecution

(b) the burden of proving that the accused was insane at the time of commission of offence is on the accused

(c) there is a rebuttable presumption of fact that accused was insane at the time of commission of the offence

(d) it is a matter of inference to be drawn by the court on the facts proved by the prosecution.

Clear selection

18. For unsoundness of mind, the impairment of the cognitive faculty of mind to escape criminal liability:

1 point

(a) must be total

(b) must be partial

(c) both (a) & (b)

(d) none of the above.

Clear selection

19. Intoxication as defence is contained in:

1 point

(a) section 85 of IPC

(b) section 86 of IPC

(c) section 87 of IPC

(d) both (a) & (b).

Clear selection

20. For a defence of intoxication, to escape criminal liability, the degeneration of mental faculties:

1 point

(a) must be total

(b) must be partial

(c) both (a) & (b)

(d) only (b) above is correct & (a) is incorrect.

Clear selection

21. For a defence of intoxication, to escape criminal liability, the intoxication:

1 point

(a) can be self-administered

(b) administered against his will or knowledge

(c) should not be self-administered

(d) all the above.

Clear selection

22. In cases where the act involves a specific mens rea, in cases of intoxication under section 86 of IPC:

1 point

(a) the existence of mens rea is presumed

(b) the specific mens rea is not presumed

(c) the specific mens rea depends upon the attending circumstances & the degree of intoxication

(d) none of the above.

Clear selection

23. The doctrine ‘volenti nonfit injuria’ is contained in:

1 point

(a) section 87 of IPC

(b) section 88 of IPC

(c) section 89 of IPC

(d) all the above.

Clear selection

24. The defence of ‘consent’ applies to:

1 point

(a) private wrongs

(b) public wrongs

(c) both (a) & (b)

(d) neither (a) nor (b).

Clear selection

25. The defence of ‘consent’ is restrictive in its applicability in cases involving:

1 point

(a) alienable rights

(b) inalienable rights

(c) both (a) & (b)

(d) neither (a) nor (b).

Clear selection