Name:………………… Roll No:……………………….

THE NATIONAL LAW INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY, BHOPAL

B.A.LL.B. (Hons.) X Trimester
End Term Examination, September 2015
Criminal Law-IV
Maximum Marks: 50 Time: 3 Hours
Instructions:
1. All questions are compulsory and marks carried by each question are mentioned
against it.
2. No overwriting/alteration is allowed in the answers of Question No.1. The option
chosen by the student should be written in full.
3. The students may seek clarification regarding the questions in the first thirty (30)
minutes of the examination and no request in this regard will be entertained
thereafter.

Q. 1. Multiple Choice Questions

(i). Discharge of offender on submission of apology is covered under

a. Section 339 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
b. Section 458 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
c. Section 388 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
d. Section 348 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
(ii). The word 'vitiate' means
a. to make good, pure or effective
b. to make bad, impure or effective
c. to make bad, pure or effective
d. to make bad, impure or defective
(iii). The statutory exemption from personal attendance of the accused provided for in the
Code of Criminal procedure is with respect to
a. Sessions Cases
b. Summons Cases
c. Warrant Cases
d. All of the above
(iv). The remedies available to a party against whom capital punishment is awarded in India
are given below. Arrange them in sequence of usage using the code given below:
i. Curative Petition
ii. Appeal to Supreme Court
iii. Reference to High Court
iv. Mercy petition to President

a. ii, i, iii, iv
b. ii, iii, i, iv
c. iii, ii, iv, i
d. iv, ii, iii, i
(v). After the evidence is led by both the parties, the stage is fixed for hearing and after the
prosecution is heard, the defence has ---------- to present oral arguments
a. statutory right
b. statutory authority
c. privilege
d. statutory duty

1
(vi). The subject matter in a ‘Complaint’ may relate to
a. a cognizable offence in which the police has refused to register the complaint
b. a non – cognizable offence only
c. a non- cognizable offence in which police has refused to register the complaint
d. both cognizable and non – cognizable offences
(vii). Which of the following statements are correct?
Statement I: Withdrawal of prosecution must be made in respect of all accused persons
in a criminal case.
Statement II: Withdrawal of prosecution can be for any one or more offences in a
criminal case.
Statement III: Withdrawal of prosecution must be for all offences in a criminal case.
a. I and II are correct
b. I and III are correct
c. II and III are correct
d. I, II and III are correct
(viii). An appeal can be withdrawn at any time
a. before it is heard and dismissed
b. before it is heard
c. before it is admitted
d. before it is dismissed
(ix). The compensation to the victim under Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
can be passed by
a. the trial court only
b. the appellant court
c. the revision court
d. Any of the above courts
(x). When the approver willfully suppresses material facts or gives false evidence
a. the court has inherent power to proceed against the approver
b. the defence counsel can recommend the magistrate to initiate proceedings against the
approver
c. police can take action against the approver
d. all of the above
(xi). In plea bargaining, a judgment delivered can be questioned only through
a. Appeal from conviction under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
b. Revision Petition under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
c. Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Indian Constitution
d. Any of the above alternatives is possible
(xii). In a criminal case, filing of a Vakalatnama in order to be defended by a pleader is
a. mandatory
b. not required
c. discretionary
d. directory
(xiii). An offence created by a special law is
a. compoundable if it is expressly provided in the special law
b. compoundable if it is provided in the Code of Criminal Procedure
c. compoundable if it is provided in the Code of Criminal Procedure as well as the
special law.
d. not compoundable

2
(xiv). The provision for medical examination of victim of rape was inserted into the Code of
Criminal Procedure by
a. Amendment Act of 2002
b. Amendment act of 2005
c. Amendment Act of 2009
d. Amendment Act of 2013
(xv). The investigation in relation to rape of a child may be completed within a period of -----
----- from the date on which the information was recorded by the officer in charge of the
police station.
a. two months
b. three months
c. six months
d. twelve months
(xvi). For the authorization of detention in any custody
a. the accused need not necessarily be produced before the Magistrate
b. the accused must be produced before the Magistrate
c. the accused need not be produced before the Magistrate at all
d. may or may not be produced
(xvii). Choose the wrong statement:
a. An accused is not bound to respond to the questions put to him under Section 313 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure
b. An accused who is sentenced to imprisonment is entitled to a free copy of the
judgment immediately after its pronouncement
c. When the judgment is pronounced the accused need not be present if his personal
attendance has been dispensed with and the sentence is fine only
d. When an accused is examined as a witness oath must be administered to him.
(xviii). Offences cannot be compounded if
a. the application is made after charges are framed
b. the accused is by reason of a previous conviction liable to enhanced punishment
c. the examination of prosecution witnesses is over
d. both a and c
(xix). Which of the following remedies lie against a Committal proceeding?
a. Appeal
b. Revision
c. Inherent power of the High Court
d. All the above
(xx). In which of the following cases taking cognizance by a criminal court is expressly
barred?
a. A complaint filed by the father of a man with whose wife the accused has committed
adultery
b. A complaint filed by the father on behalf of a woman whose husband has committed
the offence of bigamy
c. A complaint filed by the mother of a woman whose husband has committed the
offence of cruelty
d. A complaint filed by a plaintiff against the defendant on the allegation that in a suit
the defendant used as genuine a fabricated document.

Q. 2. On 19.09.2010, Prithipal Singh (PS), a human rights activist, having allegiance to a

certain national party, was abducted at about 1500 hrs from his residential house Agra. Mrs.
Geeta Singh(GS), wife of PS, was present in the house at the time of abduction and saw the

3
abductors dressed in police uniform barging into the house, gagging her husband and
forcefully dragging him into a Maruti van. She went to the police station on the same day at
about 1845 hrs making a statement to the Inspector Amir Ali (AA) at Kabir Park that her
husband had been kidnapped at about 1500 hrs by some persons who were in police uniform
and was taken into a Maruti van of white color. On the basis of the said statement, AA
registered a case of abduction against CS, SK and MK. The investigation did not make a
progress and the whereabouts of PS could not be known.
Mrs. GS filed a petition before the High Court, New Delhi wherein the Court vide order dated
15.11.2012 transferred the investigation to Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). CBI
registered a case RC No. 14/S/02/SCB-I/Delhi dated 19.11.2012 under the relevant
provisions of Indian Penal Code. In spite of the best efforts made by CBI, the whereabouts of
the PS could not be traced. Even an award of Rupees Five Lakhs was announced for anyone
giving information regarding his whereabouts. On 29.11.2012, one Ompal Singh (OS) came
to the CBI office and revealed that he had certain information about PS. He stated that he had
been detained in a case under the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
(NDPS) on 18.09.2010 by the police officials of the police station, Agra. PS was also brought
to the said police station on 19.09.2010 by Chander Singh(CS) , Sunderpal Kumar (SK) and
Mohan Kumar (MK). PS had disclosed his identity to OS and told him that he had no idea as
to why he had been brought to the police station. The CBI focused their investigation on CS,
SK and MK and found out that their designations were Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Additional Sub Inspector and Head Constable respectively. Finally on 11.05.2013 the CBI
filed charge sheet against them under Sections 120 B, 365 and 220 of the Indian Penal Code.
When the matter came for preliminary hearing on 22.06.2013, the CBI made a submission
before the court that they have received concrete information that PS had been murdered and
therefore they require more time to find the culprits. So the prosecution was directed to file a
supplementary report by the Court.
On 21.09.2013, Ram Singh (RS) a retired police constable, revealed to the CBI investigating
officer that he was privy to all that happened with the deceased PS from the time he was
brought to the police station Rajghat till his death. He was the Special Police Officer (SPO)
attached to MK, Station House Officer, Police Station, Rajghat and was promised to be
inducted into the Delhi Police permanently. PS was brought to the police station on
19.09.2010 and had been detained in a room in the same police station. RS was assigned the
duty to serve him meals etc. He had been directed to keep the matter most secret and not to
disclose anything to anybody. He had been serving the meals to PS who had become very
weak and fragile and was having the scratch marks on his body. For the next four-five days,
PS was regularly beaten up by CS, SK and MK. On 29.09.2010, Senior Superintendent of
Police Ajith Kumar (AK) came to the police station along with CS, SK and MK and talked to
PS in a closed room. Afterwards they started beating PS. RS was standing outside the room
the entire time. He was summoned in later and asked to bring some hot water. As he went out
of the room to arrange the same, he heard a slow noise of gun firing twice. The life of PS
came to an end. His dead body was kept in the dicky of the van while blood was oozing from
his body. All of them including RS went in the Van and a car and the dead body of PS was
thrown in the canal and all the vehicles came back. RS could not reveal the incident to
anybody as he was apprehensive about the safety of his own life.
The CBI filed the charge sheet on 11.12.2014. The prosecution examined 22 witnesses
including OS and RS to prove its case against CS, SK, MK and other accused persons. The
Additional Sessions Judge vide judgment and order dated 18.08.2015 convicted all the
accused persons under Section 364/34 IPC for abduction and convicted AK, CS, SK and MK
under 302/34 IPC and 201/34 along with 120B IPC for murder, destroying evidence and
criminal conspiracy respectively. The court awarded them the following sentence; for the

4
offence of 302/34 life imprisonment and fine of 5000 Rupees each, in default of payment of
fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for five months; for the offence of 120B,
rigorous imprisonment of five years; for 364/34, rigorous imprisonment of seven years and
fine of Rs. 5000 each; for 201/34, rigorous imprisonment of two years and fine of 2000 Rs
each.
The State of Delhi was not satisfied with the finding of the court and challenged the sentence
on the grounds of inadequacy before the High Court, New Delhi. Mrs. GS wanted to get the
sentence enhanced as well as get compensation and therefore has approached the High Court.
The accused (AK, CS, SK and MK) on the other hand has approached the High Court
challenging their conviction. All the petitions were filed within the limitation period and are
available before you. Decide the matter on the
i) maintainability of the petitions specifying the procedure for the same
ii) remedies sought by each party. 10 Marks

Q. 3. What is the purpose of examination of an accused by the trial court under Section 313
of the Code of Criminal Procedure? How is the procedure of examination under Section 313
different from that of Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure? Is it necessary that the
court should previously warn the accused when he is questioned? Is it mandatory in any case
to examine the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
(2+4+2+2 = 10 Marks)
Q. 4. “Chapter XIX of the Code of Criminal Procedure deals with the procedure of trial of
Warrant cases and lays down distinct and separate procedure for trial when a case is instituted
on a police report and on a private complaint. The distinction between the procedure of trial
as to police report and private complaint is only provided in respect of Warrant trials before
the Magistrate.” Substantiate the statement by identifying the procedural differences between
the trial in a warrant case instituted on a police report and on a private complaint. 10 Marks

Q.5. “The Code of Criminal Procedure authorizes the Judge to hear the accused on the
question of sentence and then pass sentence on him according to law unless he proceeds in
accordance with the provision of Section 360.” Is this provision in consonance with the
modern trends of penology and sentencing procedures. Explain the statement by analyzing
the relevant provisions. 10 Marks

Q. 6. “A compromise of a compoundable case deprives the Magistrate of his jurisdiction to

try it while the withdrawal of prosecution gives a general executive direction to withdraw
from the prosecution subject to the consent of the court.” Explain the statement by analyzing
the relevant provisions highlighting the powers and duties of the Court in permitting
compounding and giving consent for withdrawal of prosecution. Point out the effects of the
two on the legal status of an accused. 10 Marks

Q.7.What is meant by Cognizance of Offences? Who can take cognizance? How can
cognizance of offences be taken? Is taking cognizance obligatory on Courts? Draw the
distinction between taking cognizance and initiation of proceedings.
(2+ 1+ 2 + 1+ 4 =10 Marks)