Related Questions

Consider the following statements:
1. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code requires two persons whereas Section 149 of Indian Penal Code require five persons.
2. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code requires common intention, whereas Section 149 of Indian Penal Code requires common object
3. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 149 of Indian Penal Code both require presence of a prior consent
4. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and section 149 of Indian Penal Code. Both create specific offence
Which of the above statements are correct?
Carefully read following statements:
1. According to Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, requirement is of two persons, whereas under Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, requirement is of five persons.
2. According to Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, common intention is required whereas under Section 149 Indian Penal Code, common object is required
3. Previous consent is required under Section 34 & 149 of Indian Penal Code
4. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 149 of Indian Penal Code constitutes a specific offence
Which of the above statements is true:
Under Indian Penal Code, when the offence is punishable with both imprisonment and fine a sentence of imprisonment for nonpayment of fine shall not exceed
The Chief Judicial Magistrate has punished the accused with imprisonment of five years and fine of ten thousand rupees under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code. The maximum imprisonment under the Section 325 is seven years. On nonpayment of fine, the Magistrate can give him maximum imprisonment upto:
Provisions of Chapter XXIA Criminal Procedure Code are not applicable to cases where the final report discloses:
1. Offences punishable for death
2. Offences punishable for imprisonment of life
3. Offences punishable for a term exceeding seven years' imprisonment
4. Offences punishable for a term exceeding three years' imprisonment
Which of the following is correct:
In case of an offence punishable with fine only, imprisonment for nonpayment of fine . . . . . . . .
To prove both the parts of the offence contemplated in Section 116 of the Indian Penal Code, which of the following must be proved by the prosecution?
1. To prove the first part, the accused did abet the offence either by instigation or by conspiracy or by intentional aiding or by illegal omission.
2. To prove the first part, the offence was such which is punishable with imprisonment.
3. To prove the second part, the person abetted was a public servant during the period he was abetted.
4. To prove the second part, it was the duty of such public servant to prevent the commission of such an offence.
Generally preparation of an offence defined in Indian Penal Code is not punishable but preparation of . . . . . . . . is punishable under Indian Penal Code as an offence.
Under Indian Penal Code, 1860, if the offence is punishable with fine only and accused has been awarded with fifty rupees fine the period of imprisonment in default shall
Under Indian Penal Code if the offence is punishable with fine only, the imprisonment in default of payment of fine shall be