Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

Related Questions

Photofit, i.e. superimposed photograph of the deceased over the skeleton of a human body (skull) recover from a tank to prove the fact that the skeleton was that of the deceased was held to be admissible by the Supreme Court of India in the case of
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.
"Too often we try to solve human problem with non-human tools and in terms of non-human data. It is my simple thesis that a human problem requires a human solution. First we have to learn to recognise a human problem when we see one; and second, upon recognising it, we have to learn to deal with it as such and not as it were something else. A human problem to be brought to a human solution requires human data and human tools". Who said this?
Under the Evidence Act facts not otherwise relevant are relevant . . . . . . . .
1. If they are significant
2. If they are inconsistent with any fact in issue or relevant fact
3. If they make the existence or nonexistence of any fact in issue or relevant fact highly probable or improbable
Choose correct answer:
Simplify : $${{{5 \over 3} \times {7 \over {51}}{\text{ of }}{{17} \over 5} - {1 \over 3}} \over {{2 \over 9} \times {5 \over 7}{\text{ of }}{{28} \over 5} - {2 \over 3}}}$$
In the question below, a statement is given, followed by three courses of actions numbered I, II and III. On the basis of the information given, you have to assume everything in the statement to be true, and then decide which of the suggested course of action logically follow (s) for pursuing. Statement: Led by a strong response to its first super sports utility vehicle Urus, Italian sports car maker Lamborghini is likely to more than double its volumes in India by the end of 2019, a year ahead of its plan, and cross the milestone of 50-60 vehicles per annum. The company, which began deliveries for Urus in India in September, said the vehicle is already booked for the coming six-nine months in India much like the global markets, and it will help Lamborghini get new. customers into its fold. Courses of action: I. The company is planning not to increase the price of its vehicle despite significant rupee depreciation and wants to protect the attractive price of Urus for prospective buyers.  II. The super sports utility vehicle will drive volumes, super sports cars such as Huracan and Aventador will grow by 8-10%. The company feels an 8-10% growth in the segment is a realistic expectation in spite of the challenges.  III. More than 68% of Urus buyers are first-time Lamborghini buyers and makers are sure that this will have a positive rub-off effect on the super sports car segment too.
Consider the following statements in respect of the offence of robbery:
1. Causing fear of death may be relevant
2. Causing hurt may be relevant
3. Causing fear of hurt may be relevant
4. Causing wrongful restraint may be relevant
Which of the statements given above are correct?
Three sentences are given. You need to find if they are grammatically correct or incorrect and mark the answer accordingly. (P) The bewildered boys had been following a scientist who had just discovered how to make the human body transparent (Q) Griffin, the scientist, had carried out experiment after experiment to prove the human body could become invisible (R) Finally, he swallowed certain rare drugs and his body became as transparent as a sheet of glass.
A' is the executor of a will of a deceased person. As per the will, the property of the deceased is to be divided equally between 'X' and 'Y'. Instead of doing so, 'A' dishonestly divides the property of the deceased equally between 'Y' and 'Z'. 'A' is guilty of:
A is a Hindu male. He dies intestate leaving a son B, two grand sons M and N of deceased son C and three great grandsons X, Y and Z of deceased grandson P of deceased son D. What will be share of M and X?