Advertisements
Advertisements
प्रश्न
Principle: A spouse is not permitted to put in evidence in any court, any communication during the marriage between the spouses without the consent of the person who made the communication.
Facts: X who is the wife of Y saw her husband (Y) coming out of the neighbour‘s house at 6.00 am in the morning. Y told his wife X that he has murdered the neighbour and handed over the jewellery of that neighbour to his wife.
विकल्प
X is allowed to appear as a witness in court to depose that her husband has told her that he committed a murder
X is not allowed to appear as a witness at all in any court
X is not allowed to appear as a witness to depose what was told by the husband to her, however, she can depose what she saw
X is an independent woman and she can do whatever she wants
Advertisements
उत्तर
X is not allowed to appear as a witness to depose what was told by the husband to her, however, she can depose what she saw
Explanation:
According to the principle, a spouse is prevented from stating the communication between her and her husband without his consent. However, she is not prevented from stating what she saw.
APPEARS IN
संबंधित प्रश्न
Principle: A man is guilty of not only for what he actually does but also for the consequences of his doing.
Facts: A wanted to kill the animal of B. He saw B standing with his animal and fired a gunshot at the animal. The gunshot killed B.
Principle: Killing is not murder if it is committed in a sudden fight without pre-meditation in a heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel.
Facts: X and Y were buying liquor from a liquor shop at 7 pm. Y abused X and there was the quarrel between them. X told Y that he will not spare him and Y shouted that his house is adjoining the shop only and if X had the guts, he can come anytime. X went back to his shop which was nearby, procured a knife and went to Y‘s residence at 9 pm and stabbed him to death.
Consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this Section. In other words, in answering these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles that are given herein below for every question.
Further, you must not assume any facts other than those stated in the question. The objective of this section is to test your interest in the study of law, research aptitude, and problem-solving ability, even if the 'most reasonable conclusion' arrived at may be absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of the law.
Therefore, to answer a question, the principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option.
Principle: Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code provides that ‘When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone.’
Facts: Three vagabonds, Sanju, Dilbag, and Sushil decided to commit burglary. In the night, Sushil opened the lock and they broke into a rich man’s house when the entire family was on a pilgrimage. Sanju had gone to that house earlier in connection with some cleaning job. Ther e was only a servant lady in the house. Hearing some sounds from the master bedroom, the servant switched on the lights and went up to the room from where she heard the sound. Noticing that the servant was going to cry for help, Sanju grabbed her and covered her mouth with his hands and dragged her into the nearby room. The other two were collecting whatever they could from the room. When they were ready to go out of the house, they looked for Sanju and found him committing rape on the servant. They all left the house and the servant reported the matter to the police and identified Sanju. Subsequently, all three were arrested in connection with the offences of housebreaking, burglary, and rape. Identify the legal liability of the three.
Mark the best option:
Assertion (A): X and Y independently entertained the idea to kill Z. Accordingly, each of them separately inflicted wounds on Z who died as a consequence. X and Y are liable for murder under IPC since they had a common intention to kill.
Reason (R): When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable as if the whole act was done by him alone.
Abetting the commission of suicide is dealt under :
Under section 45 of IPC, life denotes
The effect caused partly by act and partly by an omission is
An accused is entitled to statutory bail (default bail) if the police failed to file the charge-sheet ___________ within of his arrest for the offence punishable with 'imprisonment up to 10 years'.
Principle: Conspiracy is a combination between two or more persons formed for the purpose of doing either an unlawful act or a lawful act by unlawful means.
Facts: X and Y conspire to poison Z. X in pursuance of the conspiracy procures the poison and delivers it to Y in order that he may administer it to Z. Y in pursuance of the conspiracy administers the poison in the presence of X and thereby causes Z's death.
The gist of the offence of criminal conspiracy is
The question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.
Principle: 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 the person doing that act, or by reason of any misconception on the part of that person, every person has the same right of private defence against that act which he would have if the act were that offence.
Facts: 'X', under the influence of madness, attempts to kill 'Y'.
