Principle: Whoever, Being Legally Bound to Furnish Information on Any Subject to Any Public Servant, - Legal Reasoning

Advertisements
Advertisements
MCQ

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: Whoever, being legally bound to furnish information on any subject to any public servant, as such, furnishes, as true information, on the subject which he knows or has reason to believe to be false, has committed a punishable offense of furnishing false information.

Facts: Sawant, a landholder, knowing of the commission of a murder within the limits of his estate, willfully misinforms the Magistrate of the district that the death has occurred by accident in consequence of the bite of a snake.

Options

  • Sawant is not guilty of the offence of furnishing false information to the Magistrate

  • Sawant is guilty of the offense of furnishing: false information to the Magistrate

  • Sawant is not legally bound to furnish true information to the Magistrate

  • Sawant has the discretion to furnish true information to the Magistrate, as the murder was committed within the limits of his estate

Advertisements

Solution

Sawant is guilty of the offense of furnishing: false information to the Magistrate

Explanation:

Section 177 of the Indian penal code, deals with the provisions of furnishing false information, according to which, whoever, being legally bound to furnish information on any subject to any public servant, as such, furnishes, as true, information on the subject which he knows or has reason to believe to be false,  shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a  term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.  
Here, Sawant is guilty of the offense of furnishing false information to the magistrate, because he willfully misinforms the magistrates that the death has occurred by accident in consequence of the bite of a snake.

Concept: Criminal Law
  Is there an error in this question or solution?

RELATED QUESTIONS

Ignorance of the law is


Unlawful homicide includes


Extortion is almost equal to the offence of


If the things removed temporarily with dishonest intention amount to


PRINCIPLE The right of private defence entitles one to do harm to a proportional extent provided it is done in good faith, it is proportional and is inflicted only to the extent is necessary to stop a person from committing harm against oneself.

FACTS A doctor with the intention of saving a terminal patient's life decides to administer an experimental drug to the patient without informing the patient or taking consent from the patient's relatives leading to the patient's death.


FACTS 'A' was known to have violent tendencies to got drunk and was forced to get such by 'B'. When 'A' got drunk and tried to attack 'B', 'B' injured 'A' in using as much force as was proportional and only to the extent necessary to stop 'A' from injuring 'B'.


PRINCIPLE Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at the time of doing it, is, by reason of intoxication, incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law: provided that the thing which intoxicated him was administered to him without his knowledge or against his will.

FACTUAL SITUATION 'A' was having a get together with his old friends and on his friend's suggestions, he consumed some alcohol. On his way back home at, night, 'A' heard some footsteps and turning back, he imagined he saw a figure moving towards him with a spear. In fact, it was only a man, 'B' with an umbrella. who was telling 'A' to walk carefully since 'A' appeared to be unsteady?

However, 'A' proceeded to attack 'B' with an iron rod leading to grave injuries to 'B', Is 'A' guilty of causing grievous hurt to 'B'?


PRINCIPLE Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence. Every person has a right to defend his property, against any act of theft, robbery, mischief or criminal trespass. This right of private defence of property extends to causing of death of the wrong-doer if the person exercising the right apprehends that death or grievous hurt shall be the consequence is such right of private defence is not exercised.

FACTUAL SITUATION 'A's cattle was being regularly stolen and 'A' was unable to apprehend the thief. One night, 'A' finally manages to catch 'B' untying his cow from the cowshed under the cover of darkness. 'A' slowly crept up to 'B' and slashed his neck with a sickle leading to the death of 'B'. Is 'A' guilty of the offence of culpable homicide?


Which of the following is not a feature of the criminal justice system in India?


The Penal code in force in the territory of Jammu and Kashmir is known as the


In India, 'identity theft' has been made punishable under the


An accused under the age of 18 years can be tried for committing an offence under 


Assertion (A) X, because of unsound state of mind and not knowing the nature of the act, attacks Y, who in self-defense and in order to ward off the attack hits him thereby injuring him .Y has not committed an offence.

Reason (R) Y had a right of private defense against X under the Indian Penal Code.


What is true with the rights of the private defence in Criminal law?


When a convict is temporarily released from the prison for a fixed period of time, it is called ____________.


The question contains some basic principles and fact situations in which these basic principles have to be applied. A list of probable decisions and reasons are given. You have to choose a decision with reasons.

Principles:

1. Copying including attempt to copy in examinations is a serious offence.
2. One shall not take any unauthorized materials into the examination hall.

Facts:

Rohini, an examinee in PUC., was thoroughly checked while entering into the examination hall. She did not have anything other than authorized materials such as pen, instrument box, etc., with her. As she was writing her paper, an invigilator found close to her feet a bunch of chits. The invigilator on scrutiny found that the chits contained answers to the paper being written by Rohini. Rohini's answers tallied with the answers in the chits. A charge of copying was levelled against Rohini.

Probable decisions:

(a) Rohini shall be punished for copying.
(b) Rohini cannot be punished for copying.

Probable reasons for the decision:

(i) Something lying near the feet does not mean that the person is in possession of that thing.
(ii) The fact that she was checked thoroughly while getting into the hall must be conclusive.
(iii) Similarities between her answers and the answers in the chit indicate that she used those chits.
(iv) After using those chits, she must have failed to dispose of them properly.


Z is carried off by a tiger. X fires at the tiger, knowing that the shot might kill Z, but with no intention to kill Z, and in good faith trying to save Z. X’s shot, however, gives Z a mortal wound. Choose the correct option


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: Whoever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or with, the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death, commits the offense of culpable homicide.

Facts: 'A' knows 'Z' to be behind a bush. 'B' does not know it. 'A', intending to cause, or knowing it to be likely to cause Z's death, induces 'B' to fire at the bush. 'B' fires and kills 'Z'.


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: Every person shall be liable to punishment under the Indian Penal Code and not otherwise for every act or omission contrary to the provisions of the Code of which he shall be guilty within the territory of India. In other words, the exercise of criminal jurisdiction depends upon the locality of the offense committed, and not upon the nationality or locality of the offender

Facts: 'X', a Pakistani citizen, while staying at Karachi, made false representations to 'Y' the complainant, at Bombay through letters, telephone calls and telegrams and induced the complainant to part with money amounting to over rupees five lakh to the agents of 'X' at Bombay, so that rice could be shipped from Karachi to India as per agreement; But the rice was never supplied to the complainant.


Given below is a statement of legal principle followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer.

LEGAL PRINCIPLE: No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of commission of the act charged as an offence, nor subjected to a penalty greater than which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of commission of the offence.

FACTUAL SITUATION: A boy of 16 years was convicted of house trespass and theft. He was sentenced to imprisonment for 6 months and fine was also imposed. After the judgement, the Probation of Offenders Act came into force. It provided that a person below 21 years may not ordinarily be sentenced to imprisonment. Now the boy claims the benefit of this Act. Should he get it? 


Share
Notifications



      Forgot password?
Use app×