हिंदी

Which Was the Law Introduced by Sir William Bentinck to Prohibit the Practice of Sati?

Advertisements
Advertisements

प्रश्न

Which was the law introduced by Sir William Bentinck to prohibit the practice of Sati?

विकल्प

  • Bengal Sati Regulation, 1829

  • U.P. Sati Prohibition Act, 1828

  • Indian Sati Prohibition Act, 1827

  • Rajasthan Sati (Prevention) Act, 1830

MCQ
Advertisements

उत्तर

Bengal Sati Regulation, 1829

shaalaa.com
Indian Constitution (Entrance Exams)
  क्या इस प्रश्न या उत्तर में कोई त्रुटि है?
2017-2018 (May) Set 1

संबंधित प्रश्न

The question consists of two statements, one labelled as Assertion (A) and other as Reason (R).
You are to examine the two statements carefully and select the best option.

Assertion: We the people of India. having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a Democratic Republic.

Reason: A republic will ensure we have a head of state that is democratically elected and accountable to voters. As a result, the head of state will be a more effective constitutional safeguard.


Article 1 of a legal instrument reads: “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood”.

Which is the legal instrument being referred to above?


Which Article is related to Equality before law ?


By how many times the Citizen Act, 1955 has been amended?


In the question given below are two statements labelled as Assertion (A) and Reason (R). In the context of the two statements, which of the following is correct?
Assertion (A): Home Ministry is the nodal agency for citizenship of any person.
Reason (R): Home Ministry has to maintain the internal security, census, law and order and other safety concerns for India.


The founder member of the movement for Right to Information is


Which of the following Article constitute the Legislative Assembly?


Answer the question which follows from the application of the under mentioned legal principle.

X' s farm house in outskirts of Delhi was attacked by a gang of armed robbers. X without informing the police, at first warned the robbers by firing in the air. As they were fleeing from the farm, he fired and killed one of them. At the trial–

I. X can avail the right of private defence as he was defending his life and property
II. X cannot avail the right as he failed to inform the police
III. X cannot avail the right as he caused more harm than was necessary to ward off the danger
IV. X can avail of the right as at first he only fires in the air.


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 an 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, every person has the same right of private defence against that act, which he would have if the act were that offence. Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence.

Facts: A, under the influence of madness, attempts to kill B. B in order to save his life causes grievous hurt to A.


How many duties are provided under Part-IV of the Constitution?


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×