Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

Related Questions

Consider the following statements:
A person abets the doing of a thing, who
1. Instigates any person to do that thing.
2. Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
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.
Any act or omission, to be an act of a firm, within the meaning of section 2(a) of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 must be act or omission of
PRINCIPLES: 1. Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defense.
2. When an act, which would otherwise be a certain offence, is not that offence, by reason of the youth, the want of maturity of understanding, the unsoundness of mind or the intoxication of that person or by reason of misconception on the part of that person, every person has the same right of private defense against that act, which he would have if that act were an offence.
3. Everyone has the right to defend their life and property against criminal harm provided it is not possible to approach public authorities and more harm than that is necessary has not been caused to avert the danger.
4. If in the exercise of right of private defense against an assault which reasonably causes the apprehension of death, the defender be so situated that he cannot effectually exercise that right without risk of harm to an innocent person, his right of private defense extends to the running of that risk.
5. The right of private defense continues as long as apprehension of danger continues.
FACT: A enters by night a house which he is legally entitled to enter. Z, in good faith, taking A for a housebreaker, attacks A.
Consider the following statement(s).
A police officer has the power to arrest any person without an order from a magistrate or warrant of arrest, if he has reason to suspect his complicity in a cognizable offence punishable with imprisonment which may extend to seven years, provided that he is satisfied for reasons in writing that such arrest is necessary
1. To prevent such person from committing any further offence.
2. For proper investigation of the offence.
3. To prevent such person from tampering with or causing the evidence of the offence to disappear.
4. To compel the absconding co-accused to surrender.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
When two or more persons agree to do or cause to be done an illegal act, or an act which is not illegal, by illegal means, such an agreement is
Conspiracy has been defined as an agreement between two or more persons to do an illegal act or an act which is not illegal by illegal means, under
When two or more persons agree to do an illegal act or an act which is not illegal by illegal means such an agreement is designated as:
A' instigates 'B', to instigate 'C' to murder 'Z', 'B' accordingly instigates 'C' to murder 'Z' and 'C' Commits that offence in consequence of B's instigation A is:
A instigates B to instigate C to murder Z. B accordingly instigates C to murder Z, and C commits that offence in consequence of B's instigation. Which one of the following would be the correct statement