Sahayata & Sahayata

1 0 more important illustration-based MCQs from the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 , covering areas such as electronic evidence, estoppel, documentary proof, and examination of witnesses — ideal for Judicial Services Exam revision. ⚖️ Illustration-Based MCQs (Part 2: Questions 21–30) 💻 Section 39 – Expert Opinion (including electronic evidence) A document’s authorship is in question. A comparison is made with another known document of A. This is: A. Inadmissible B. Relevant opinion of layperson C. Expert opinion admissible under Section 39 D. Only relevant if both parties agree ✅ Answer: C 🧑‍💼 Section 45 – Grounds of Opinion An expert gives opinion on a cause of death and narrates experiments conducted. This is: A. Hearsay B. Irrelevant unless certified C. Relevant as grounds of expert opinion D. Inadmissible unless peer-reviewed ✅ Answer: C 🖋️ Section 66 – Proof of Electronic Signature Certifying Authority's opinion about electronic signature is: A. ...

30 most important MCQs based on illustrations from the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 , prepared specifically for Judicial Services Examination . Each question is rooted in an actual illustration provided in the Act, testing your application and interpretation skills — a frequent pattern in judicial exams. ⚖️ Most Important Illustration-Based MCQs – BSA, 2023 🧩 Section 4 – Same Transaction A is accused of murdering B by beating him. Statements made by bystanders during the beating are: A. Inadmissible hearsay B. Relevant as dying declaration C. Relevant as part of same transaction D. Not relevant ✅ Answer: C 🔗 Section 6 – Motive, Preparation, Conduct A is tried for the murder of C. A had previously murdered B and C knew about it and tried to blackmail A. This is: A. Not relevant B. Relevant as motive C. Inadmissible as character evidence D. Relevant only if A confesses ✅ Answer: B A absconds after receiving a letter warning that police inquiry is underwa...

Summary of Judgment with Key Points & Law Laid Down Case Title: Anish Pramod Patel vs. Kiran Jyot Maini Court: Delhi High Court Judge: Hon’ble Ms. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma Date of Judgment: 01 December 2023 Citation: CRL.REV.P. 298/2023 Key Facts: The respondent (wife) filed a domestic violence case under Section 12 of the PWDV Act, 2005 , seeking interim maintenance. The Magistrate awarded ₹35,000/month, later enhanced to ₹45,000 for wife and ₹55,000 for daughter by Sessions Court. The petitioner (husband) challenged these orders under Sections 397, 401, and 482 CrPC . The petitioner claimed the respondent is financially independent, earning ₹1.2 lakh/month, and deliberately concealed her employment. He also argued he isn’t liable to maintain the wife’s daughter from her previous marriage. Key Issues: Maintainability of petition before Delhi High Court after withdrawal from Allahabad High Court. Legality of interim maintenance without Income Di...

Summary of the Judgment: Rakesh Sachdeva vs Rajesh Sachdeva (Delhi High Court, 12 March 2024) Bench: Justice Dharmesh Sharma Case No.: C.R.P. 217/2023 & CM Appl. 41227/2023 Background: Parties: Rakesh Sachdeva (Petitioner/Defendant) vs. Rajesh Sachdeva (Respondent/Plaintiff) Relation: Real brothers Dispute: Ownership of a suit property. The plaintiff (Rajesh) claims ownership, while the defendant (Rakesh) alleges that the supporting documents are forged. Core Issue: Rakesh challenged the Trial Court's order (dated 02.06.2023) denying him the right to cross-examine two official witnesses summoned by Rajesh solely to produce certain documents (Special Power of Attorney and a receipt from 1983). Legal Reasoning: The High Court upheld the Trial Court's reliance on: Section 139 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872: A person summoned only to produce documents is not a witness unless formally called as such and cannot be cross-examined . Precedents from: ...

Tricky multiple-choice questions (21–50) with answers and explanations based on the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 : ⚖️ Tricky Questions on Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (Contd.) PART E: Estoppel & Witnesses A tenant denying the title of the landlord is barred under which principle? A. Res judicata B. Admission C. Estoppel D. Confession ✅ Answer: C 🔍 Section 122: Estoppel of tenant and licensee. Who among the following is not a competent witness under Section 124? A. Blind person B. Child of 5 years C. Deaf and mute person who cannot communicate D. Accused person ✅ Answer: C Spouses are competent witnesses against each other: A. In all cases B. In civil proceedings only C. Only in cases involving cruelty or assault D. In cases specified under Section 126 ✅ Answer: D Communication during marriage is: A. Inadmissible even after divorce B. Admissible if spouse permits C. Not privileged D. Admissible in civil cases ✅ Answer: A Which comm...

50 tricky multiple-choice questions (MCQs) based on the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA 2023) , with answers and explanations . These are crafted to test nuanced understanding and practical interpretation, especially useful for judicial services and legal exams . ⚖️ Tricky Questions on Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 PART A: Relevancy of Facts Which of the following is not relevant under Section 6 as conduct? A. A complaint made after a crime. B. Mere statement of having been robbed. C. Immediate reaction to being assaulted. D. Running away after being accused in public. ✅ Answer: B 🔍 Explanation: A statement without complaint (Section 6, Illustrations j & k) is not conduct under Section 6. Facts forming part of the same transaction are admissible even if: A. They are hearsay. B. They occurred at different places. C. They occurred at different times. D. All of the above. ✅ Answer: D Under Section 8, conspiracy can be proved even if the conspirator...

Final set of Punishment-Focused Questions (Q61–Q75) based on the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — this batch includes edge-case scenarios, judicial discretion, and interpretation of penalties. ⚖️ BNS 2023 – Punishment-Based MCQs (Set 5: Q61–Q75) 61. Which of the following is not a discretionary punishment and must be imposed as per the statute? (A) Life imprisonment for murder (B) Fine for defamation (C) Death for rape causing death (D) Minimum sentence for acid attack 62. Under Section 9, what is the maximum term of simple or rigorous imprisonment if no minimum is specified? (A) 3 years (B) 5 years (C) 7 years (D) As prescribed by the specific offence provision 63. If a person is convicted for a second time under the same offence, the punishment may be: (A) Reduced by court discretion (B) Doubled under Section 13 (C) Enhanced at court’s discretion under Section 13 (D) Converted to fine 64. A person is sentenced to death . Execution is postponed due to pre...

Case Overview: In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court of India delivered a significant judgment on the distinction between ancestral and self-acquired property in the case of Angadi Chandranna v. Shankar & Ors. (2025) . The case involved a dispute over a property purchased by Defendant No.1 (C. Jayaramappa) from his brother, C. Thippeswamy, in 1989. The plaintiffs, who were the children of Defendant No.1, claimed the property as ancestral and sought partition and separate possession. The property was initially allocated to C. Thippeswamy in a family partition deed in 1986, and subsequently sold to Defendant No.1. Defendant No.1 later sold it to Defendant No.2 (Angadi Chandranna) in 1993. The plaintiffs argued that the property was bought using joint family funds and thus, should be treated as ancestral. The legal battle spanned multiple courts, with the trial court favoring the plaintiffs, the First Appellate Court overturning the decision, and the High Court restoring the ...