Law Legal Studies · Civics Polity

Legal Principles and Doctrines

2,539 Questions

Legal principles and doctrines establish the foundational rules of jurisprudence and civil rights. Questions cover constitutional reasonable restrictions, courtroom evidence standards, and property laws. These topics are strictly necessary for law legal studies exams and judicial services prelims.

Constitutional doctrinesGuardianship rightsExpert testimony standardsCriminal trial instructionsContractual authorityRegistration law principles

Legal Principles and Doctrines Questions

Multiple choice

An agency can be terminated by

  1. the principle revoking his authority

  2. the agent renouncing the business of agency

  3. either the principle or agent dying

  4. All of these
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
D Correct answer
Explanation

Agency relationships can terminate multiple ways: by the principal revoking authority (Section 203), by the agent renouncing the business (Section 204), or by death of either party (Section 209). Option D correctly recognizes that all three are valid modes of termination.

Multiple choice

Which of the following qualifies to be treated as “Fact” within the meaning assigned to it under the Evidence Act?

  1. That a man heard or saw something.

  2. That a man holds a certain opinion.

  3. That a man acts in good faith.

  4. All of these
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
D Correct answer
Explanation

Under the Evidence Act, 'fact' encompasses a broad range of information including physical occurrences (what a person saw or heard), mental states (opinions a person holds), and behavioral states (whether a person acted in good faith). All three options - sensory perceptions, opinions, and good faith actions - qualify as facts within the statutory meaning. The Act's definition is comprehensive and inclusive.

Multiple choice

According to the Evidence Act, a fact is said to be “not proved”, when the

  1. court believes that the fact does not exist

  2. fact is vague

  3. fact is neither proved nor disproved

  4. All of these
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
C Correct answer
Explanation

Under Section 3 of the Evidence Act, a fact is 'not proved' when it remains in a state of uncertainty - neither established by evidence nor disproved. This is distinct from 'disproved' (shown not to exist) or 'proved' (established by evidence). The court has formed no belief either way about the fact's existence or non-existence. 'Not proved' represents the middle ground where evidence is insufficient.

Multiple choice

Which of the statement given below is/are correct?

  1. In civil cases, the character to prove the conduct imputed to a party is not relevant.

  2. In criminal proceedings bad character of the accused is not relevant, unless evidence of good character has been given.

  3. In criminal proceedings previous conviction of accused is relevant as evidence of bad character.

  4. All of these
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
D Correct answer
Explanation

In civil cases, character evidence to prove conduct imputed to a party is generally irrelevant as civil liability depends on facts, not character. In criminal proceedings, the accused's bad character is irrelevant unless good character evidence has been introduced first, and previous convictions are relevant as evidence of bad character. All three statements correctly reflect the Evidence Act's character evidence rules.

Multiple choice

‘A’ is on trial for the murder of ‘C’. There is evidence to show that ‘C’ was murdered by ‘A’ and ‘B’, and that ‘B’ said – ‘A’ and I murdered ‘C’. As against ‘A’, this evidence is

  1. not to be taken into consideration as the evidence is hearsay

  2. to be taken in to consideration as it is direct

  3. not to be taken into consideration as ‘A’ and ‘B’ are not being jointly tried

  4. to be taken into consideration as ‘A’ and ‘B’ are accomplices
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
C Correct answer
Explanation

A co-accused's statement implicating another accused is admissible only when they are tried jointly. When A and B are tried separately, B's confession 'A and I murdered C' becomes hearsay evidence against A and cannot be used to establish A's guilt. This rule prevents one accused from effectively becoming a prosecution witness against another without the safeguards of a joint trial where both can cross-examine each other.

Multiple choice

Mark the incorrect statement.

A court may take the assistance of expert for forming opinion on point of

  1. foreign law

  2. art

  3. Both (1) and (2)

  4. Neither (1) nor (2)
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
D Correct answer
Explanation

According to evidence law, a court is explicitly permitted to seek the assistance of experts to form an opinion on points of foreign law, science, art, handwriting, or finger impressions. Thus, stating that a court may not take assistance for foreign law or art is incorrect.

Multiple choice

Which of the following statements is correct?

  1. Confession caused by inducement, threat or promise flowing from person in authority, giving reasonable impression to the accused that he would thereby avoid punishment, is relevant.

  2. Confession by accused while in custody of police, even if made in the immediate presence of a magistrate, shall not be proved.

  3. The confession of the accused made while in custody of police may be proved if as a consequence of information received thereby a relevant fact is discovered.

  4. None of these
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
D Correct answer
Multiple choice

The evidence of contents of the information recorded or stored in a computer may be given through computer output, without production of the original, provided certain conditions are satisfied. The said conditions include that

  1. if the computer was not operating properly during the material part of the period over which it was used to store or process the information for purposes of the relevant activities, it was not such as to affect the electronic record or the accuracy of its content

  2. the information contained in the electronic record is derived from such information fed into the computer in the ordinary course of such activities

  3. Neither (1) nor (2)

  4. Both (1) and (2)
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
D Correct answer
Explanation

Option D is correct. Under Section 65A and 65B of the Evidence Act (amended by IT Act), computer output is admissible without original if conditions are satisfied: (1) The computer was operating properly during the material period, and any improper operation would not have affected the electronic record's accuracy; (2) The information was derived from data fed into the computer in the ordinary course of activities. Both conditions mentioned in options A and B are legally required, making 'Both (1) and (2)' the right answer.

Multiple choice

Leading questions may be asked in examination-in-chief

  1. with permission of the court as to matters which are introductory

  2. if in the opinion of the court the matter involved has been already sufficiently proved

  3. Neither (1) nor (2)

  4. Both (1) and (2)
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
D Correct answer
Explanation

Option D is correct. While the general rule under Section 136 is that leading questions cannot be asked in examination-in-chief (your own witness), Section 137 provides exceptions: (1) with court permission on introductory matters; (2) if the court is satisfied the matter has already been sufficiently proved. Both exceptions in options A and B are recognized by law. Therefore 'Both (1) and (2)' is correct - leading questions may be asked in examination-in-chief in either of these circumstances.

Multiple choice

‘A’ is accused of receiving stolen goods knowing them to be stolen. He offers to prove that he refused to sell them below their value.

Which of the following is correct?

  1. ‘A’ may prove the statements, though in the nature of admission, because they are explanatory of conduct influenced by facts in issue.

  2. ‘A’ may not prove the statements because they are self-serving admissions.

  3. ‘A’ may not prove the statements because as accused he cannot be a witness in his own defence.

  4. All these are incorrect.
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
A Correct answer
Explanation

Option A is correct. Section 8 of the Evidence Act provides that conduct (including statements) is relevant when influenced by any fact in issue or relevant fact. Here, A's refusal to sell below value is conduct explaining his state of mind (lack of guilty knowledge). Section 21 states admissions are relevant and can be proved by the person who made them or on whose behalf they were made. A can prove his own explanatory statements about conduct that are admissions. This is not 'self-serving' - it's relevant to the fact in issue (guilty knowledge).

Multiple choice

In which case oral evidence cannot be given?

  1. ‘A’ hired lodgings of ‘B’ and gives to ‘B’ a card on which he wrote “Rooms, Rs. 2000/- a month”. ‘A’ in a suit wants to prove verbal agreement that the terms included partial board.

  2. ‘A’ hired lodgings of ‘B’ for a year. A regularly stamped agreement was drawn up by an attorney and signed by both of them. The document is silent on the subject of board. ‘A’ in a suit wants to prove verbal agreement that the terms included partial board.

  3. Both in (1) and in (2)

  4. Neither in (1) nor in (2)
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
B Correct answer
Explanation

Option B is correct. Section 91 of the Evidence Act provides that when terms of a contract or grant are reduced to writing, oral evidence cannot be given to contradict, vary, add to, or subtract from its terms. The regularly stamped signed agreement is a formal written contract covering the material terms. Since it's silent on board, oral evidence cannot add that term under Section 91. In option A, the card 'Rooms Rs. 2000/- a month' is not a formal written contract of all terms - it's a mere acknowledgment, so oral evidence may be given to explain partial board terms.

Multiple choice

Which of the following is/are correct statement(s)?

  1. Evidence excluded by the Evidence Act is inadmissible even if it seems essential for ascertainment of truth.

  2. Parties cannot contract themselves out of the provisions of the Evidence Act.

  3. Both (1) and (2)

  4. Neither (1) nor (2)
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
C Correct answer
Multiple choice

For deciding whether or not a witness shall be compelled to answer questions, the court shall have regard to considerations which include as to whether such questions are

  1. proper if the truth of imputation conveyed thereby would seriously affect the opinion of the court as to the credibility of the witness on the subject matter of his deposition

  2. improper if the truth of imputation conveyed thereby would affect in a slight degree the opinion of the court as to the credibility of the witness on the subject matter of his deposition

  3. Both (1) and (2)

  4. None of these
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
C Correct answer
Explanation

Under Section 132 of the Evidence Act, a witness may be compelled to answer questions that would expose the witness to a criminal charge or penalty if the question is proper for establishing the witness's credibility. Courts consider both whether the imputation's truth would seriously affect credibility (making the question proper) and whether it would only slightly affect credibility (making it improper). The law balances the need for truthful testimony against witness protection. Both statements correctly reflect the court's dual consideration of seriousness and the degree of impact on credibility.

Multiple choice

The court may presume that

  1. when a document creating an obligation is in the hands of the obligor, the obligation has been discharged

  2. judicial and official acts have not been regularly performed

  3. a bill of exchange, accepted or endorsed, was accepted or endorsed for deficient consideration

  4. All these are incorrect
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
A Correct answer
Explanation

Under Section 114 of the Evidence Act, courts may presume certain facts from circumstances. Illustration (a) to Section 114 states that when a document creating an obligation is in the hands of the obligor (the person who owes the obligation), the court may presume that the obligation has been discharged - it would be natural for the obligor to return such documents once their obligation is fulfilled. Options B and C describe scenarios where courts presume NEGATIVE facts (acts NOT regularly performed, deficient consideration), which are not among the standard presumptions under Section 114 illustrations.

Multiple choice

All persons are competent to testify unless the court considers that they are prevented from understanding the questions put to them because of

  1. tender years

  2. extreme old age

  3. mental disease

  4. All these
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
D Correct answer
Explanation

Under Section 118 of the Evidence Act, all persons are competent to testify unless the court considers that they are prevented from understanding questions or giving rational answers due to tender years (extreme youth), extreme old age, or disease (whether mental or physical) affecting their mental faculties. The law presumes competency but allows the court to assess whether these conditions actually prevent comprehension. All three conditions listed (tender years, extreme old age, mental disease) are valid grounds for the court to find a person incompetent to testify.