A Scenario-Based Mock Test – Level 2 for the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA),

-

 a Scenario-Based Mock Test – Level 2 for the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), tailored for Judicial Services Prelims. These questions simulate real exam reasoning with mini case facts and test your understanding of legal applicability under BSA.

⚖️ Scenario-Based MCQ Mock Test (Set 2 – Advanced)

Total Questions: 10 | Type: Fact-based | Topic: Relevancy, Admissions, Confessions, Electronic Evidence, Witnesses

Q1.

A is accused of murdering B. During investigation, the police recover a knife from A's house based on A’s disclosure while in custody.
Under BSA, the part of the statement leading to recovery is:

A. Fully inadmissible as it's made in custody
B. Fully admissible as it’s voluntary
C. Partly admissible to the extent it relates to the discovery of the knife
D. Admissible only if made before a Magistrate

Answer: C
Explanation: Section 27 principle (preserved in BSA): confession made in custody is admissible only to the extent it leads to discovery of a fact.

Q2.

C, a witness in a trial, turns hostile and starts giving a version contrary to his police statement. The prosecution seeks permission to cross-examine him.
Under BSA, the Court:

A. Cannot allow prosecution to cross-examine its own witness
B. May allow cross-examination after declaring the witness hostile
C. Must discard the testimony
D. Can treat the statement as confession

Answer: B
Explanation: A court may allow cross-examination of a hostile witness after declaring him so. His earlier statement can be used to impeach credibility.

Q3.

An electronic mail is submitted in a case, but only a printed screenshot is available. No certificate under Section 65B is produced.
This email:

A. Is fully admissible as it is printed
B. Is inadmissible unless accompanied by a certificate under Section 65B
C. Does not need certification
D. Can be proved by oral evidence

Answer: B
Explanation: A Section 65B certificate is mandatory when electronic evidence is produced in secondary form (e.g., a printout or copy).

Q4.

A dying declaration was recorded by a police officer without a magistrate present. The victim later died. There’s no contradiction in the statement.
Is this admissible?

A. No, police officers cannot record dying declarations
B. Yes, if found to be voluntary and reliable
C. Only admissible if signed by two witnesses
D. Admissible only in the presence of a doctor

Answer: B
Explanation: Dying declarations can be recorded by anyone, including police, as long as they are voluntary and reliable.

Q5.

During cross-examination, a witness is asked about a previous civil case in which he was found dishonest. The other party objects.
Is such a question permissible?

A. No, past cases are irrelevant
B. Yes, to impeach credibility
C. Only if approved by the judge
D. No, unless the witness is hostile

Answer: B
Explanation: BSA permits questions in cross-examination that challenge the credibility or character of the witness.

Q6.

A contract dispute involves WhatsApp messages exchanged between the parties. The messages are screenshots without any metadata or certificate.
Are these admissible?

A. Yes, if both parties agree to them
B. No, unless certified as per Section 65B
C. Yes, because they are public documents
D. Only admissible in criminal cases

Answer: B
Explanation: Electronic messages used as secondary evidence require a Section 65B certificate for admissibility.

Q7.

In a murder trial, the prosecution seeks to admit A’s statement about seeing the accused with a weapon shortly after the murder.
This is relevant under which principle?

A. Hearsay rule
B. Dying declaration
C. Res gestae
D. Hostile witness doctrine

Answer: C
Explanation: Statements forming part of the same transaction (res gestae) are relevant even if not made in court.

Q8.

A person gives a statement under police pressure implicating himself and another. The statement is recorded without magistrate presence.
Can this be used?

A. Yes, fully
B. Only against the other person
C. Only the discovery part is admissible
D. Entirely inadmissible

Answer: C
Explanation: Confessions made in police custody are inadmissible, except for the portion that leads to discovery of a fact (Sec 27 logic).

Q9.

A party admits in a letter that he owes the opposite party ₹1 lakh, but later denies it in court.
Is the earlier letter admissible?

A. No, as it is not made under oath
B. Yes, as an admission
C. No, because it was not made in court
D. Only admissible if signed before a magistrate

Answer: B
Explanation: Admissions made in writing are relevant facts under BSA and can be used against the maker.

Q10.

A person submits a USB containing CCTV footage. He also files a certificate from the system administrator under Section 65B.
Is this evidence admissible?

A. Yes, as it is supported by a 65B certificate
B. No, unless the footage is shown in court
C. No, USBs are not reliable
D. Only if it’s from a government camera

Answer: A
Explanation: Electronic records must be certified under Section 65B, and once properly certified, are admissible as secondary evidence.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Important sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) along with key points:

-
Important sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) along with key points: Chapter-wise Important Sections of BNS, 2023 General Principles & Definitions Section 1 – Short title, extent, and commencement Section 2 – Definitions (similar to IPC, but some terms updated) Section 3 – Punishment of offenses committed beyond India but by Indian citizens General Exceptions (Defense to Criminal Liability) Section 20 – Act done by a child below 7 years is not an offense Section 21 – Act done by a child above 7 but below 12, considering maturity Section 24 – Right of private defense (self-defense provisions) Section 25 – Right of private defense extending to causing death in certain cases Offenses Against the State Section 111 – Waging war against the Government of India Section 113 – Sedition (modified from IPC; now called "acts endangering sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India") Offenses Affecting Public Tranquility ...
Read more

MCQs on Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

-
Here is a set of 20 multiple-choice questions (MCQs) based on the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, focusing on both conceptual understanding and practical application. Each question is followed by an explanation. MCQs on Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 General Principles & Definitions Which of the following is a fundamental principle introduced in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023? a) Rehabilitation-focused punishment b) Community service as an alternative to imprisonment c) Stringent punishment for organized crime and terrorism d) Legalization of certain offenses under previous laws Answer: c) Stringent punishment for organized crime and terrorism Explanation: The BNS 2023 enhances penalties for offenses like terrorism, mob lynching, and organized crime to strengthen national security. Under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, which term replaces the word ‘offense’ used in IPC, 1860? a) Crime b) Illegality c) Apradh d) Wrongdoing Answer: c) Apradh Explanation: The term...
Read more

The Hon'ble Supreme Court Landmark rulings on Impleadment of Parties (Striking out or adding parties at any stage of a proceeding) necessary and Proper Party Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC, 1908

-
Image
Hon'ble Supreme Court Landmark rulings on Impleadment of Parties (necessary and Proper Party ) order 1 rule 10 of the CPC, 1908  Mumbai International Airport Pvt. Ltd. v. Regency Convention Centre , Kasturi v. Iyyamperumal , and Sumtibai v. Paras Finance Co. , focusing on impleadment of parties under Order I Rule 10(2), CPC in specific performance suits . Comparative Case Analysis: Impleadment of Parties in Specific Performance Suits Case Name Key Issue Held Position on Impleadment Mumbai International Airport Pvt. Ltd. v. Regency Convention Centre (2010) 7 SCC 417 Can a third party with prospective interest in the suit property be impleaded? ❌ No impleadment A party with only expectation of acquiring interest (not an existing right) is not a proper or necessary party . The plaintiff's choice of whom to sue is respected unless the twin test is met. Kasturi v. Iyyamperumal (2005) 6 SCC 733 Can a person claiming adverse title to both plaintiff and defendant be impleaded? ...
Read more