(/)

 Account 

Home (/) / Top Stories (/top-stories) / Important MCQs Based On Latest...

Important MCQs Based On Latest Supreme Court

Judgments For Law Examinations
Yash Mittal
(/yash-mittal)
24 Mar 2024 9:39 AM

Share this


Listen to this Article

0:00 / 12:49
Q 1. Against an accused, a non-bailable warrant and proclamation under Section 82
Cr.P.C. is pending. Whether an application of the accused seeking anticipatory bail is
maintainable before the court?

a. Yes, the right to seek anticipatory bail is a statutory right under Cr.P.C.

b. Yes, anticipatory bail cannot be denied because it should be heard on its merit
uninfluenced by the pending non-bailable warrant and proclamation.

Also Read - Karnataka Govt Moves Supreme Court Seeking To Direct Union Government To
Release Drought Relief Funds (/top-stories/karnataka-govt-moves-supreme-court-seeking-to-
direct-union-government-to-release-drought-relief-funds-253298?utm_source=internal-
artice&utm_medium=also-read)

c. No, the application seeking anticipatory bail isn't maintainable.

d. Both (a) and (b)

Answer: Option (c)

Explanation: The Supreme Court held that an accused would not be entitled to pre-
arrest bail if the non-bailable warrant and the proclamation under Section 82(1)
Cr.P.C. is pending against him.

“Thus, it is obvious that the position of law, which was being followed with alacrity, is
that in cases where an accused against whom non-bailable warrant is pending and
the process of proclamation under Sections 82/83, Cr.PC is issued, is not entitled to
the relief of anticipatory bail.”, the court said.

Also Read - Livestream Video Was Doctored To Show I Walked Out Of Court, Was Subjected To
Trolls : CJI DY Chandrachud (/top-stories/livestream-video-was-doctored-to-show-i-walked-out-
of-court-was-subjected-to-trolls-cji-dy-chandrachud-253289?utm_source=internal-
artice&utm_medium=also-read)
No Anticipatory Bail To Accused Against Whom Non-Bailable Warrant & Proclamation
Under Section 82 CrPC Are Pending: Supreme Court (https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-
court/no-anticipatory-bail-to-accused-against-whom-non-bailable-warrant-
proclamation-under-section-82-crpc-are-pending-supreme-court-252358)

Q 2. A court directs the absconded accused to be present on the next day of the
hearing. However, the accused registered its presence through his advocate by filing
an anticipatory bail application. Find out the appropriate option from the available
options below.

a. The accused hasn't defied the court's direction as it has shown appearance
through an advocate.

Also Read - If PMLA Is Misused, Nation Will Suffer; Negative Perceptions May Arise About ED :
SC Judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan (/top-stories/if-pmla-is-misused-nation-will-suffer-negative-
perceptions-may-arise-about-ed-sc-judge-justice-ujjal-bhuyan-253282?utm_source=internal-
artice&utm_medium=also-read)

b. Filing an anticipatory bail application through an advocate isn't enough to show the
presence of the accused before the court.

c. Filing an anticipatory bail application through an advocate cannot be considered as

an accused appearance before the court against whom proclamation under Section
82 Cr.P.C. is pending.

d. Both (b) and (c)

Answer: Option (d)

Explanation: The Supreme Court held that filing of an anticipatory bail through an
advocate would not and could not be treated as an appearance before a court by a
person against whom proclamation proceedings are pending.
Also Read - Arvind Kejriwal Moves Delhi High Court Challenging Arrest, ED Remand In Liquor
Policy Case (/high-court/delhi-high-court/arvind-kejriwal-moves-delhi-high-court-challenging-
arrest-ed-remand-in-liquor-policy-case-253276?utm_source=internal-artice&utm_medium=also-
read)

Filing Of Anticipatory Bail Application Through Advocate Can't Be Considered As

Appearance Of Absconding Accused: Supreme Court
(https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/filing-of-anticipatory-bail-application-through-
advocate-cant-be-considered-as-appearance-of-absconding-accused-supreme-court-
252512)

Q 3. A complainant made a complaint of cheque dishonor under Section 138 of N.I.

Act, and moved an application under Section 143A NI Act before the court seeking
interim compensation from the accused. Find out the most appropriate option from
the given set of options below.

a. Yes, the application should succeed as the accused must provide interim
compensation to the complainant.

b. No, the application shouldn't succeed every time, as the power of the court to
direct payment of interim compensation isn't mandatory but discretionary.

c. The court is bound to accept the complainant's application seeking interim

compensation.

d. None of the above

Answer: Option (b)

Explanation: The Supreme Court observed that mere filing of the cheque dishonor
complaint under the Negotiable Instruments Act would not grant a right to a
complainant to seek interim compensation under Section 143A (1) of the N.I. Act, as
the power of the court to grant interim compensation, isn't mandatory but
discretionary and needs to be decided after prima facie evaluating the merits of the
case.

S.143A NI Act | Interim Compensation In Cheque Dishonour Cases Isn't Mandatory:

Supreme Court Lays Down Broad Parameters (https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-
court/s143a-ni-act-interim-compensation-in-cheque-dishonour-cases-isnt-mandatory-
supreme-court-252443)

Q 4. A complaint for cheque dishonor under Section 138 NI Act was made against
'Mr. X', the director of the company. However, Mr. X is not involved in the day-to-day
affairs of the company. Decide the liability of Mr. X.

a. Being a director of the company Mr. A would be held liable.

b. Mr. A couldn't be held liable as he was not responsible for the day-to-day affairs of
the company.

c. Holding a position of director in a company is sufficient to hold a person liable for

cheque dishonor.

d. Both (a) and (c)

Answer: Option (b)

Explanation: The Supreme Court observed that the Director of the company not
responsible for its day-to-day affairs cannot be held liable for dishonor of cheque
under the Negotiable Instruments Act, of 1882.

NI Act | Director Not Responsible For Day-To-Day Affairs Of Company Can't Be Held
Liable For Cheque Dishonour: Supreme Court (https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-
court/ni-act-director-not-responsible-for-day-to-day-affairs-of-company-cant-be-held-
liable-for-cheque-dishonour-supreme-court-252539)

Q 5. Based on the filing of an incomplete chargesheet against another accused, the

main accused sought default bail under Section 167 (2) Cr.P.C. Find out the most
appropriate option.

a. Default bail cannot be provided to the accused merely because an incomplete

chargesheet is submitted against the other accused.

b. Right to be released on default bail is a statutory right of an accused, thus default

bail cannot be denied because an investigation is pending against another accused.

c. The accused can't exercise the right to get default bail on the ground that the
chargesheet was incomplete or not filed as per Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C.

d. Both (a) and (c)

Answer: Option (d)

Explanation: The Supreme Court held that “the pendency of the further investigation
qua the other accused or for production of some documents not available at the time
of filing of chargesheet would neither vitiate the chargesheet, nor would it entitle the
accused to claim right to get default bail on the ground that the chargesheet was an
incomplete chargesheet or that the chargesheet was not filed in terms of Section
173(2) of Cr.P.C.”

Pending Investigation Against Co-Accused Wouldn't Give Right To Default Bail To

Accused, SC Clarified (https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/chargesheets-
submitted-by-police-officers-must-have-all-necessary-details-as-per-section-1732-
crpc-supreme-court-252049?infinitescroll=1)
Q 6. In which of the following cases did the Supreme Court recently dismiss the
Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking the declaration of voting rights as part of
fundamental rights?

a. Devadipta Das v. Union of India

b. Devapriya Das v. Union of India

c. Deepa Das. v. Union of India

d. Devangi Das v. Union of India

Answer: Option (a)

Explanation: The Supreme Court refused to entertain a Public Interest Litigation (PIL)
seeking the declaration of voting rights as part of fundamental rights.

Chief Justice of India (CJI) highlighted the necessity for a live controversy to be
present before the court, emphasizing the need for a "live lis" (legal dispute) to
warrant jurisdiction under Article 32.

'No Live Issue Existing': Supreme Court Dismisses PIL To Declare Right To Vote As
Fundamental Right (https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/no-live-issue-existing-
supreme-court-dismisses-pil-to-declare-right-to-vote-as-fundamental-right-251862)

Q 7. A contract is entered between 'A' and 'B', where A has to supply certain goods at
a decided price to B. The contract doesn't contain an arbitration clause but only
provides a resolution of a dispute through a civil court. However, a general reference
was made to another contract, which mentions the arbitration clause, that the supply
will take place as per the terms and conditions enshrined in another contract. A
dispute occurred and 'A' wanted to initiate the arbitration proceedings based on the
arbitration clause contained in another contract. Find out the most appropriate
option.

a. A dispute can be referred to arbitration as a reference was made to another

contract that contained an arbitration clause.

b. A dispute can be settled only through the civil court as the main contract doesn't
make specific reference to incorporate the arbitration clause of another contract into
the main contract.

c. In a two-contract case, specific reference to the arbitration clause of another

contract is required to settle the dispute through arbitration.

d. Both (b) and (c)

Answer: Option (d)

Explanation: The Supreme Court reiterated that a dispute cannot be referred to

arbitration based on the arbitration clause contained in another contract unless a
specific reference was made in the main contract to incorporate the arbitration
clause into the main contract.

The Bench Comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta held that unless a
specific reference is made in the main contract to incorporate the arbitration clause
of another contract then the parties are bound to settle their dispute through the
mode of settlement agreed to in the main contract.

General Reference Won't Have Effect Of Incorporating Arbitration Clause In Another

Contract, Specific Reference Needed: Supreme Court
(https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/general-reference-wont-have-effect-of-
incorporating-arbitration-clause-in-another-contract-specific-reference-needed-
supreme-court-252905)

Q 8. Person 'X' claims an adverse possession over a property based on the fact that
he was in interrupted continuous possession of the property for more than 12 years.
However, in the plaint 'X' didn't disclose the actual owner of the property against
whom the adverse possession is claimed. State the correct option.

a. Claim for an adverse possession wouldn't survive as X failed to prove who the
actual owner of the property was.

b. Claim for an adverse possession would survive as he was living continuously for
more than 12 years.

c. Claim for adverse possession wouldn't survive as X's adverse possession was in
the knowledge of the actual owner of the property.

d. None of the above.

Answer: Option (a)

Explanation: The Supreme Court held that a plaintiff cannot seek ownership over the
property based on the claim of an adverse possession if he fails to prove (i) who was
the actual owner of the property and (ii), an uninterrupted possession for more than
12 years was in the original owner's knowledge.

Party Claiming Adverse Possession Must Know Who The Actual Owner Of Property
Is: Supreme Court (https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/party-claiming-adverse-
possession-must-know-who-the-actual-owner-of-property-is-supreme-court-252884)
Q 9. 'X' was convicted for the offence of murder based on the testimony of the
'injured witness', who also happens to be an 'interested witness' in the outcome of the
case. Decide whether the conviction can be sustained.

a. Yes, the conviction can be sustained as the testimony of the interested witness
can't be rejected just because he was injured by the accused himself.

b. No, the conviction can't be sustained based on the testimony of the injured witness
because he was interested in the outcome of the case.

c. Yes, the conviction can be sustained as the evidence of an injured witness is

considered to be on a higher pedestal than that of a witness simplicitor.

d. Both (a) and (c)

Answer: Option (b)

Explanation: The Supreme Court overturned the conviction of the accused while
observing that conviction cannot be sustained based on the testimony of the 'injured
witness' who happens to be an 'interested witness' in the outcome of the case. The
court observed that although the evidence of an injured witness is considered to be
on a higher pedestal than that of a witness simpliciter yet the courts need to strike a
balance between the testimony provided by the injured witness who happens to be
also interested in the outcome of the case.

Court Has To Strike Balance Between Testimony Of Injured Witness & Interested
Witness: Supreme Court (https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/court-has-to-strike-
balance-between-testimony-of-injured-witness-interested-witness-supreme-court-
252805)

Q 10. An anticipatory bail was denied to an accused on the ground that a custodial
interrogation of an accused is required. Find out the correct option.
a. Anticipatory bail can be denied.

b. Anticipatory bail can't be claimed as a right, as it is the discretion of the Judge to

release on anticipatory bail.

c. Anticipatory bail cannot be denied on the mere ground that custodial interrogation
is required.

d. Both (a) and (b)

Answer: Option (c)

Explanation: Recently, the Supreme Court held that anticipatory bail can't be denied
merely because the custody of the accused is required by the State for custodial
interrogation.

Anticipatory Bail Can't Be Denied On Mere Assertion Of State That Custodial

Interrogation Of Accused Is Required: Supreme Court
(https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/anticipatory-bail-cant-be-denied-on-mere-
assertion-of-state-that-custodial-interrogation-of-accused-is-required-supreme-court-
251950?infinitescroll=1)

Tags Law Exams (https://www.livelaw.in/tags/law-exams)

mcq based exams (https://www.livelaw.in/tags/mcq-based-exams)

Judicial Service Examination (https://www.livelaw.in/tags/judicial-service-examination)

Legal GK (https://www.livelaw.in/tags/legal-gk)

Legal Education (https://www.livelaw.in/tags/legal-education)

 (https://www.whatsapp.com/channel/0029Va4PBvv5EjxsW8MeA63j)

Similar Posts

Karnataka Govt Moves Supreme Court Seeking To Direct Union Government To Release Drought
Relief Funds
The State of Karnataka has filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court alleging that the Central
Government was denying financial assistance for drought management to the State under the Disaste
Management Act, 2005 and the Manual for Drought Management.The State has contended that the
actions of the Centre violate the fundamental rights of the...
(/top-stories/karnataka-govt-moves-supreme-court-seeking-to-direct-union-government-to-release-drought-
relief-funds-253298)

(/top-stories/livestream-video-was-doctored-to-show-i-walked-out-of-court-was-subjected-to-trolls-cji-dy-
chandrachud-253289)
Livestream Video Was Doctored To Show I Walked Out Of Court, Was Subjected To Trolls : CJI DY
Chandrachud
Chief of Justice of India Dr DY Chandrachud in a recent address cleared the air regarding a doctored
video of the live proceedings in the electoral bonds case.The CJI said that the video was doctored to
'troll' & 'viciously abuse' him on social media space while the reality was far from the reels. " 4-5 days
ago, when I was hearing a case,...

(/top-stories/if-pmla-is-misused-nation-will-suffer-negative-perceptions-may-arise-about-ed-sc-judge-
If PMLA Is Misused, Nation Will Suffer; Negative Perceptions May Arise About ED : SC Judge Justice
Ujjal Bhuyan
Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan spoke on the need to judiciously use the powers under the
Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and cautioned that if the law is misused, negative
perceptions may rise against the Enforcement Directorate. The nation will suffer if the law is misused,
he stressed.Justice Bhuyan appealed to all...
justice-ujjal-bhuyan-253282)

Arvind Kejriwal Moves Delhi High Court Challenging Arrest, ED Remand In Liquor Policy Case

Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal has moved the Delhi High Court challenging his arrest by
Enforcement Directorate (ED) and six days of remand in the money laundering case related to the
alleged liquor policy scam case.Kejriwal was arrested by ED on March 21 at around 9 PM. Yesterday,
the trial court had remanded him to ED custody till...
(/high-court/delhi-high-court/arvind-kejriwal-moves-delhi-high-court-challenging-arrest-ed-remand-in-liquor-
policy-case-253276)

(/top-stories/section-420-ipc-person-cheated-must-have-been-dishonestly-induced-to-deliver-property-
supreme-court-253264)
Section 420 IPC| Person Cheated Must Have Been Dishonestly Induced To Deliver Property: Supreme
Court
The Supreme Court (on March 20) held that to attract the offence of cheating, it must be shown that
the person who cheated was dishonestly induced to deliver the property to any person. Further, a
dishonest intention must be on the part of a person accused of such an offence. The three-judge Benc
of Justices B.R Gavai, Rajesh Bindal, and...

(/supreme-court/corporate-entitys-complaint-maintainable-under-consumer-protection-act-1986-supreme-
Corporate Entity's Complaint Maintainable Under Consumer Protection Act 1986 : Supreme Court

In a significant development, the Supreme Court held that the corporate entity/company wouldn't be
barred under the old Consumer Protection Act of 1986 to be treated as a 'person' for filing a consumer
complaint.Setting aside the order of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, the
Bench Comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta...
court-253255)

Kerala Govt Moves Supreme Court Against President Withholding Assent For 4 Bills, Terms It
Arbitrary
The State of Kerala has approached the Supreme Court challenging the action of the President of India
in withholding assent for four out of the seven bills referred by the Kerala Governor.In its writ petition
filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, the State also challenged the Governor's action of referring
the bills to the President, arguing...
(/top-stories/kerala-govt-moves-supreme-court-challenging-presidents-refusal-of-assent-for-4-bills-as-
arbitrary-253252)

(/news-updates/liquor-policy-delhi-court-remands-brs-leader-k-kavitha-to-further-ed-custody-till-march-26-
253235)
Liquor Policy: Delhi Court Remands BRS Leader K Kavitha To Further ED Custody Till March 26

A Delhi Court on Saturday further remanded Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) leader K Kavitha to
Enforcement Directorate (ED) custody till March 26 in the money laundering case connected with the
alleged liquor policy scam.Special CBI judge Kaveri Baweja of Rouse Avenue Courts passed the order
after Kavitha was produced in court on the expiry of her ED...

(/top-stories/supreme-court-telangana-prevention-detention-order-quashed-solitary-incident-253233)
Mere Involvement In Sexual Offence Not Sufficient: Supreme Court Quashes Preventive Detention
Order
In a case involving allegations of rape and extortion, the Supreme Court recently quashed a preventive
detention order under the Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1986 observing that mere
involvement in a sexual offence (including gang rape) is not itself sufficient to invoke Section 3 of the
Act (giving power to pass detention...

Preventive Detention Orders Passed Capriciously Must Be Nipped In The Bud By Advisory Board :
Supreme Court
In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court discussed the role and duty of the Advisory Boards
constituted under the Preventive Detention Laws, on their capricious exercise of power while
scrutinizing the preventive detention order of the Detaining Authority passed in a routine and
mechanical manner. “preventive detention being a draconian measure,...
(/supreme-court/preventive-detention-orders-passed-capriciously-must-be-nipped-in-the-bud-by-advisory-
board-supreme-court-253232)

(/top-stories/legal-job-vacancy-live-law-hiring-reporter-lawyers-supreme-court-bombay-high-court-gujarat-
252912)
LiveLaw Is Hiring Supreme Court & High Court Reporters- Apply Today- Work With India's Number 1
Legal News Portal
Live Law is hiring for the position of correspondents for the following courts:• Supreme Court• Bomba
High Court• Gujarat High Court• Madhya Pradesh High CourtRoles & ResponsibilitiesAs a legal
correspondent, you would be expected to keep track of all the developments from the courts and
submit timely news reports after attending the hearings....

(/top-stories/supreme-court-declines-stay-election-commissioners-act-2023-reasons-253198)
Would Disrupt Lok Sabha Elections : Supreme Court On Refusal To Stay Election Commissioners' Act

The Court also expressed concerns about the procedure adopted by the Union in appointing new ECs.

(/)

(https://play.google.com/store/apps/details? (https://apps.apple.com/in/app/livelaw/id910652359)
id=com.sinergialabs.livelaw&hl=en_IN)

Top Stories (/top-stories) Law Schools (/lawschool) Tax (/tax-cases)

Supreme Court (/supreme-court) IBC News (/ibc-cases) Digests (/digests)

High Court (/high-court) Arbitration (/arbitration-cases) Know The Law (/know-the-law)

Consumer cases (/consumer-cases) Job Updates (/job-updates) Environment (/environment)

Round Ups (/round-ups) Book Review (/book-reviews) Podcast (/podcast)

International (/more/international) Events Corner (/events-corner) Videos (/videos)

Law Schools Corner

(/more/law-schools-corner) 

Law Firms
(/law-firms) 
 Who We Are Contact Us Advertise with usCareers Privacy Policy T&C
| | | |
(/who-we-are) (/contact-us) (/advertise) (/career) (/privacy-statement) (/terms-and-conditions)

 
(https://www.facebook.com/livelawindia/) 
(https://twitter.com/LiveLawIndia)


(https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Va4PBvv5EjxsW8MeA63j) (https://www.youtube.com/livelawindia)

 
(https://www.linkedin.com/company/livelaw/) 
(https://www.instagram.com/livelaw.in/)
(https://t.me/livelawindia)

2024 © All Rights Reserved @LiveLaw

Powered By Hocalwire (http://www.hocalwire.com)