संSamvidhan

Practice paper — BNSS Chapter XII — Preventive Action Of The Police

25 questions · answer key at the end · no time limit

samvidhan.co.in

1.Under Section 168 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, who is required to prevent the commission of cognizable offences?
- (A) Only officers‑in‑charge of police stations
- (B) Every police officer
- (C) Any magistrate
- (D) All citizens
2.Which action does Section 168 explicitly permit a police officer to take for the purpose of prevention?
- (A) Arrest without warrant in all cases
- (B) Commence prosecution
- (C) Refer the matter to a magistrate only
- (D) Interpose for the purpose of preventing
3.Does the duty in Section 168 apply to non‑cognizable offences?
- (A) It applies only to cognizable offences
- (B) It applies to all offences (cognizable and non‑cognizable)
- (C) It applies only to serious offences irrespective of cognizability
- (D) It applies only after the offence has been committed
4.What is the legal standard of obligation placed on a police officer by Section 168 when preventing cognizable offences?
- (A) An absolute guarantee to prevent every cognizable offence in all circumstances
- (B) No obligation to prevent; only a discretionary power
- (C) A duty to prevent to the best of his ability
- (D) Only an obligation to report offences to higher authorities
5.Which is the correct interpretation of the two phrases in Section 168: 'may interpose for the purpose of preventing' and 'shall, to the best of his ability, prevent'?
- (A) Both phrases are mandatory; the officer must interpose and must prevent
- (B) Interposition is permitted (not mandatory), while prevention is mandatory subject to 'best of his ability'
- (C) Both phrases are merely permissive and create no obligation
- (D) Interposition is mandatory but prevention is only permissive
6.What event triggers the duty under Section 169 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023?
- (A) Receiving information of a design to commit any cognizable offence
- (B) Receiving information of the commission of any offence
- (C) Receiving information of a non‑cognizable offence
- (D) Forming a mere suspicion without information
7.Under Section 169, to whom must the police officer communicate the information received about a design to commit a cognizable offence?
- (A) Only to the police officer to whom he is subordinate
- (B) Only to any officer whose duty it is to prevent or take cognizance
- (C) To the police officer to whom he is subordinate and to any other officer whose duty it is to prevent or take cognizance of the commission of any such offence
- (D) Only to a magistrate
8.If a police officer receives information about a design to commit a non‑cognizable offence, does Section 169 impose a duty to communicate that information?
- (A) Yes — the duty applies to all offences
- (B) No — the provision applies to designs to commit cognizable offences only
- (C) Yes — but only to the officer to whom he is subordinate
- (D) Yes — but only if the offence appears serious
9.Does Section 169 make communicating information of a design to commit a cognizable offence optional or mandatory for the receiving police officer?
- (A) Mandatory — the provision uses 'shall communicate', creating a duty to communicate
- (B) Optional — the provision allows the officer to decide whether to communicate
- (C) Mandatory only if the officer's superior approves
- (D) Optional unless there is immediate danger
10.If a police officer informs the police officer to whom he is subordinate about the design, is he still required under Section 169 to inform other officers whose duty it is to prevent or take cognizance?
- (A) No — informing the subordinate alone suffices
- (B) Yes — the officer must communicate to both his subordinate officer and any other officer whose duty it is to prevent or take cognizance
- (C) Only if the subordinate refuses to act
- (D) Only if the other officers are in the same station
11.Under Section 170 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which of the following actions is expressly permitted to a police officer?
- (A) Arrest, without orders from a Magistrate and without a warrant, a person designing to commit any cognizable offence.
- (B) Arrest only after the cognizable offence has been committed.
- (C) Arrest a person designing to commit a cognizable offence only with a Magistrate's prior order.
- (D) Arrest a person for a non-cognizable offence without a warrant.
12.What is the maximum period a person arrested under Section 170(1) may be detained in custody without further authorization?
- (A) Twelve hours from the time of arrest.
- (B) Twenty-four hours from the time of arrest.
- (C) Forty-eight hours from the time of arrest.
- (D) Seventy-two hours from the time of arrest.
13.Under Section 170(1), when may a police officer lawfully make the preventive arrest described in that subsection?
- (A) Whenever the officer merely suspects a design to commit a cognizable offence.
- (B) Only if the officer has a prior written order from a Magistrate.
- (C) Only if it appears to the officer that the commission of the offence cannot be otherwise prevented.
- (D) Only after the accused has committed elements of the cognizable offence.
14.According to Section 170(2), detention beyond the initial twenty-four hours is permissible when which of the following applies?
- (A) Only if a Magistrate personally authorises further detention by a written order.
- (B) If further detention is required or authorised under any other provisions of the Sanhita or of any other law for the time being in force.
- (C) Only if a senior police officer certifies that further detention is necessary.
- (D) Detention cannot be extended beyond twenty-four hours under any circumstances.
15.Does Section 170 allow preventive arrest on mere suspicion that someone may design a cognizable offence?
- (A) Yes — mere suspicion by the officer is sufficient to arrest under Section 170.
- (B) Yes — but only if the suspicion is recorded in writing by the officer.
- (C) No — arrest is allowed only after a Magistrate confirms the suspicion.
- (D) No — the provision requires that the officer know of a design and that it appears the offence cannot be otherwise prevented.
16.Under Section 171 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, what power is explicitly given to a police officer?
- (A) He may arrest any person without a warrant for damage to property.
- (B) He may, of his own authority, interpose to prevent any injury attempted to be committed in his view to any public property, movable or immovable, or the removal or injury of any public landmark, buoy or other mark used for navigation.
- (C) He may seize public property suspected to be used in an offence only after obtaining court approval.
- (D) He may order immediate demolition of public property to prevent injury.
17.Which of the following is protected against attempted injury under Section 171?
- (A) Any public property, movable or immovable, and public landmarks, buoys or other marks used for navigation.
- (B) Private property owned by individuals.
- (C) Only immovable public property such as buildings and monuments.
- (D) Only buoys used for navigation, not other public property.
18.If damage to public property is being attempted but it occurs out of a police officer's sight, does Section 171 permit that officer to "of his own authority interpose" to prevent it?
- (A) Yes, the officer may interpose regardless of whether he saw the attempt.
- (B) Only if an eyewitness immediately informs the officer.
- (C) No — the power applies where the injury is attempted "in his view."
- (D) Only after obtaining authorization from a senior officer.
19.Does Section 171 require prior permission from a superior officer before a police officer may interpose to prevent injury to public property?
- (A) Yes — prior written permission is required.
- (B) Only during declared emergencies is permission unnecessary.
- (C) Yes — but only verbal permission from a superior is enough.
- (D) No — the officer may act "of his own authority" to interpose.
20.Would the removal of a privately owned buoy used for navigation fall within the protection of Section 171?
- (A) Yes — any buoy used for navigation is protected under the section regardless of ownership.
- (B) No — the provision refers to "any public landmark, buoy or other mark used for navigation," indicating it protects public landmarks/buoys.
- (C) Only if the private buoy is located on public property.
- (D) Only if the officer reasonably believes the private owner intends public harm.
21.Who is required to conform to the lawful directions of a police officer under Section 172?
- (A) All persons
- (B) Only persons suspected of an offence
- (C) Only persons in a public place
- (D) Only persons who are detained
22.When are the directions of a police officer binding under Section 172(1)?
- (A) Only when given in the presence of a magistrate
- (B) When they are lawful and given in fulfilment of any of his duty under this Chapter
- (C) Only when the officer is in uniform
- (D) When they are issued in writing
23.If a person refuses or disregards a lawful direction under Section 172, what power does the police officer have?
- (A) The officer may only warn the person and cannot detain them
- (B) The officer must immediately hand the person to a magistrate without detaining
- (C) The officer may detain or remove the person and may either take them before a Magistrate or, in petty cases, release them within twenty‑four hours
- (D) The officer may fine the person on the spot but cannot remove them
24.Under Section 172(2), within what period may a police officer release a person in petty cases after detaining them for non‑compliance?
- (A) Twelve hours
- (B) Forty‑eight hours
- (C) Seventy‑two hours
- (D) Twenty‑four hours
25.Are individuals bound to follow a police officer's directions that are not given "in fulfilment of any of his duty under this Chapter" under Section 172(1)?
- (A) Yes, all directions of a police officer are always binding
- (B) No, only directions that are lawful and given in fulfilment of duties under this Chapter are covered by Section 172(1)
- (C) Yes, but only if the officer identifies his rank
- (D) No, unless a magistrate later validates them

Answer key

1. B2. D3. A4. C5. B6. A7. C8. B9. A10. B11. A12. B13. C14. B15. D16. B17. A18. C19. D20. B21. A22. B23. C24. D25. B

Explanations

1. (B) The provision begins with the words 'Every police officer' and imposes the duty to prevent cognizable offences: 'shall, to the best of his ability, prevent, the commission of any cognizable offence.' This shows the duty is on every police officer.
2. (D) The provision states that 'Every police officer may interpose for the purpose of preventing,' which expressly permits a police officer to interpose to prevent offences. Other actions (e.g., arrest, prosecution) are not mentioned in the text.
3. (A) The provision specifically refers to preventing 'the commission of any cognizable offence,' so its scope as written is limited to cognizable offences. It does not state application to non‑cognizable offences.
4. (C) Section 168 says the officer 'shall, to the best of his ability, prevent, the commission of any cognizable offence,' which imposes a duty limited by the officer's abilities rather than an absolute guarantee. The text therefore sets a 'best of ability' standard.
5. (B) The provision uses 'may interpose' (permissive) for the act of interposing and 'shall, to the best of his ability, prevent' (mandatory) for the duty to prevent. Thus interposition is allowed but not compelled, while prevention is required as far as the officer is able.
6. (A) The provision states: 'Every police officer receiving information of a design to commit any cognizable offence shall communicate such information...'. Thus the duty is triggered by information of a design to commit a cognizable offence, not by mere suspicion or non‑cognizable matters.
7. (C) Section 169 requires communication 'to the police officer to whom he is subordinate, and to any other officer whose duty it is to prevent or take cognizance of the commission of any such offence.' Both categories are expressly mentioned in the provision.
8. (B) The text applies specifically to 'a design to commit any cognizable offence.' Therefore Section 169 does not impose the stated duty where the information concerns a non‑cognizable offence.
9. (A) The provision uses the word 'shall communicate', which imposes a mandatory duty on the police officer receiving such information to communicate it as specified.
10. (B) Section 169 directs communication 'to the police officer to whom he is subordinate, and to any other officer whose duty it is to prevent or take cognizance.' The use of 'and' indicates that both communications are required under the provision.
11. (A) Section 170(1) states that a police officer knowing of a design to commit any cognizable offence may arrest, without orders from a Magistrate and without a warrant, the person so designing. The provision therefore permits preventive arrest of the person designing the cognizable offence without magistrate or warrant.
12. (B) Section 170(2) provides that no person arrested under sub-section (1) shall be detained in custody for a period exceeding twenty-four hours from the time of his arrest unless further detention is required or authorised under other provisions. Thus the maximum without further authorization is 24 hours.
13. (C) Section 170(1) conditions the power to arrest on the officer knowing of a design and that it appears to the officer that the commission of the offence cannot be otherwise prevented. The provision therefore requires the specific appearance that prevention cannot be achieved by other means.
14. (B) Section 170(2) expressly permits further detention beyond twenty-four hours when such detention "is required or authorised under any other provisions of this Sanhita or of any other law for the time being in force." It does not limit the authorisation to only magistrates or police officers.
15. (D) Section 170(1) uses the phrase "A police officer knowing of a design" and further requires that "it appears to such officer that the commission of the offence cannot be otherwise prevented." Thus the text requires knowledge of a design plus the appearance that prevention is not otherwise possible, not mere unelaborated suspicion.
16. (B) The provision states that "a police officer may of his own authority interpose to prevent any injury attempted to be committed in his view to any public property, movable or immovable, or the removal or injury of any public landmark, buoy or other mark used for navigation." It grants the power to interpose to prevent such injury, not the other actions listed in the distractors.
17. (A) The provision specifically references "any public property, movable or immovable, or the removal or injury of any public landmark, buoy or other mark used for navigation." Thus it covers public property (movable and immovable) and public landmarks/buoys used for navigation.
18. (C) Section 171 permits a police officer to interpose "to prevent any injury attempted to be committed in his view." The wording limits the power to situations the officer actually sees, so attempts outside his sight are not covered by that phrase.
19. (D) The provision says a police officer "may of his own authority interpose," which indicates he can act on his own authority without needing prior permission from a superior. The text does not impose a requirement of prior authorization.
20. (B) Section 171 explicitly mentions the "removal or injury of any public landmark, buoy or other mark used for navigation." The qualifier "public" indicates the provision covers public landmarks/buoys, so a privately owned buoy would not be covered by this wording.
21. (A) Sub‑section (1) states that "All persons shall be bound to conform to the lawful directions of a police officer"; it does not limit this duty to suspects, location, or detained individuals.
22. (B) Section 172(1) specifies that persons are bound to conform to the "lawful directions of a police officer given in fulfilment of any of his duty under this Chapter," so the binding requirement is lawfulness and relation to the officer's duties under the Chapter.
23. (C) Section 172(2) authorises a police officer to detain or remove any person resisting, refusing, ignoring or disregarding directions, and to either take the person before a Magistrate or, in petty cases, release them as soon as possible within twenty‑four hours.
24. (D) Section 172(2) provides that in petty cases the police officer may release the person "as soon as possible within a period of twenty‑four hours," so twenty‑four hours is the specified period.
25. (B) Section 172(1) limits the duty to conform to "lawful directions of a police officer given in fulfilment of any of his duty under this Chapter," so directions outside those duties are not covered by this provision.