CRPC Mains Questions Series Part VI: Important Questions for Judiciary, APO & University Exams | Part - VI of XI
Legal Bites brings to you CRPC Mains Questions Series Part VI.
Legal Bites brings to you CRPC Mains Questions Series Part VI. The questions enlisted here are arranged section-wise and will aid the students in preparing for Judiciary, APO or University Exams. The list of questions curated by Legal Bites will help candidates identify the important and frequently asked questions and give them good practice for their aptitude and knowledge.
CRPC Mains Questions Series Part VI of XI
We know answer writing is a continuous exercise that is an inalienable part of the preparation process for any Examination. A well-written answer reflects not only the knowledge of an aspirant but also his/her ability to tailor the content in a manner suited to meet the expectations of the question.
Rigorous preparation for this exam is mandatory in order to crack it. In the last few months prior to the exams, it is sufficient for candidates to keep practicing these questions in order to gain mastery over the subjects studied. Not only the candidate’s confidence level but also their scores will show good improvement upon following it.
CRPC Mains Questions Series | Part – VI of XI
Three accused persons namely A, B and C commit the offence of cheating under Section 420 of I.P.C. in furtherance of their common intention. The trial court frames the charge against them under Section 420 of I.P.C. but does not mention Section 34 of I.P.C. (common intention) in the charge. After the trial, the court convicts them. A, B and C prefer an appeal against such a conviction. In the appellate court, the argument was advanced by the convicts that the non-mentioning of Section 34 in the charge misled them.
The appellate court is of the view that in the facts and circumstances of the case omission of Section 34 in the charge by the trial court does not mislead the accused person. Should the appellate court set aside the conviction of the appellants on the ground that Section 34 of I.P.C. was not mentioned in the charge? Give reasons, and also refer to the case law, if any, on this point.
A is charged by the trial court for a certain offence. During the trial, the trial court added a charge of another offence also against the accused A. Is the addition of a new charge during a trial by the trial court valid? If so, refer to the relevant provision.
A is accused of a theft on one occasion, and of causing grievous hurt on another occasion. A gives an application in writing to try both the offences at one trial. Can the Magistrate do so? [RJS, 1991]
A is accused of six offences of the same kind committed within a space of twelve months from the first to last of such offences in respect of the same person. Can he be tried at one trial for all those offences? [RJS, 1976.]
A is alleged to have ‘attempted.’ to commit the murder of B and also alleged to have committed the murder of B, one month after alleged attempt to murder. Can A be tried for an attempt to commit murder (under Section 307 I.P.C.) and for murder (under Section 302 I.P.C.) at one trial? Give reasons and also refer to the judicial decision, if any, on the point.
A is charged for murder by the trial court under Section 302 I.P.C. But court convicts him for ‘abetment for murder’ without framing the charge for same. A prefers an appeal for setting aside the conviction on the ground that no charge was framed for ‘abetment for murder’.
Prosecution opposes the admission of appeal on the ground that it is a minor offence and it is not necessary to frame the charge specifically in view of Section 222(2). Will the prosecution succeed? Give reasons for your answer.
A and B are said to have committed the offence of cheating under Section 420 I.P.C. in furtherance of common intention (Section 34, I.P.C.). The charge is framed against them by the trial court under Section 420, I.P.C. But after trial, the trial court convicts only A under Section 420 I.P.C.
A prefers an appeal for setting aside the conviction on the ground that while the charge was framed under Section 420 read with Section 34 of I.P.C., he alone cannot be convicted under Section 420 of I.P.C. Is the conviction of A sustainable at law? Give reasons and refer to the case law, if any, on the point.
Offence under Section 302 of I.P.C. is proved against A, beyond all shadows of reasonable doubt. The Sessions Judge proceeds to convict the accused and sentenced him to imprisonment for life without hearing him on the question of sentence. Can such judgement stand on appeal? [WB J.S. 1998]
A Sessions Judge convicts an accused X without hearing him on ‘question of sentence’, while the case has been proved beyond all reasonable doubts. On appeal in the High Court, the argument advanced by X is that conviction is liable to be set aside as he was not heard by the Sessions Judge on ‘question of sentence’ which is a mandatory provision under Section 235(2). Is the conviction of X is liable to be quashed on the aforesaid ground? Give reasons for your answer.
On a complaint made by C, a Court of Session takes cognizance of the offence under sub- Section (2) of 199 of the Cr. P.C. and tries the accused. The Court finds that there was no reasonable cause for making the accusation and hence orders C to pay Rs. 2,500 to the accused by way of compensation. C challenges the said order. Decide. [U.P.C.J. 1997]
Suppose you are a Public Prosecutor in a Sessions Court. A murder case has been entrusted to you. What steps will you take during the course of the trial till its conclusion? What steps shall the court take? State in detail. [HJS 1996]
In a trial of summons-case, the accused A pleads guilty to the Magistrate trying the case. However, the Magistrate does not believe the plea of guilt as true and does not convict the accused on the basis of such pleading and proceeds with the trial. Can the Magistrate do so? Give reasons and also refer to the case law, if any, on this point.
In a ‘summons’ trial, an accused pleads guilt under Section 252 of Cr. P.C. After such pleading of guilt, the Magistrate convicts the accused and does not follow the procedure under Section 281 (record of the examination of accused) of Cr. P.C. Is the conviction illegal? Give reasons and refer to the case law, if any, on this point.
In a trial of summons-case, the accused A pleads guilty to the Magistrate trying the case. The Magistrate records the plea of guilt but he records the same in his own words and not in the words of the accused and convicts the accused A on the basis of such pleading. Is the conviction valid? Give reasons and also refer to the case law, if any, on the point.
In a trial of summons case, the accused A pleads guilty to the magistrate. The Magistrate records the plea of guilt but does not record it immediately, but later on the basis of his memory. After recording ‘plea of guilt’, the Magistrate convicts A. Is the conviction of A valid? Give reasons and also refer to the case law on the point.
A, a complainant seeks permission for withdrawal of the complaint from the Magistrate under Section 257, Cr. P.C. in a summons case. Is the Magistrate bound to give permission for such withdrawal? Give reasons and also refer to case law, if any, on the point.
In a summons case, triable by a magistrate, there are four accused persons. The complainant wants to withdraw the case in respect of only one accused. Can the Magistrate allow him to do so? Give reasons and also refer to the case law, if any, on the point.
In a summons case, triable by a magistrate, there are four accused persons namely A, B, C, and D. The complainant wants to withdraw the case against all four accused persons. Can he (complainant) do so with the permission of court? Give reasons.