Skip to content
सं Samvidhan
किंवा ऑनलाईन, वेळेअंतर्गत द्या →
संSamvidhan

सराव पेपर — BNS Chapter XV — Of Offences Affecting The Public Health, Safety, Convenience, Decency And Morals

50 questions · answer key at the end · no time limit · 90 more on the site

ऑनलाइन सरावासाठी स्कॅन करा

samvidhan.co.in

  1. 1.Under Section 270 of the BNS, a person is guilty of public nuisance if his act or illegal omission causes what?

    • (A) Injury only to a specific individual
    • (B) Common injury, danger or annoyance to the public or to people who dwell or occupy property in the vicinity
    • (C) Loss to the Government exchequer
    • (D) Damage exclusively to public property

  2. 2.A factory owner argues that his operations, though causing constant annoyance to the residents of the neighbourhood, provide employment and cheap goods to the locality. Under Section 270 BNS, this defence is:

    • (A) Valid, because convenience to the public excuses a nuisance
    • (B) Invalid, because a common nuisance is not excused on the ground that it causes some convenience or advantage
    • (C) Valid, provided the advantage outweighs the annoyance
    • (D) Valid, if the factory is licensed

  3. 3.Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the offence in IPC Section 268 (Public nuisance) of the IPC now corresponds to which section?

    • (A) BNS Section 318 (Cheating)
    • (B) BNS Section 125 (Act endangering life or personal safety)
    • (C) BNS Section 270 (Public nuisance)
    • (D) BNS Section 63 (Rape)

  4. 4.Which of the following best captures the mental-state and objective requirements under Section 271?

    • (A) Any negligent act is sufficient regardless of what the person knew
    • (B) Only an unlawful act with intent to infect is covered
    • (C) The Act applies only if the person intentionally infects another
    • (D) The person must do an act unlawfully or negligently, and that act must be one which he "knows or has reason to believe" is likely to spread a disease dangerous to life

  5. 5.Which mental state or combination is explicitly required by Section 272 for the offence?

    • (A) The act must be done malignantly and the offender must know or have reason to believe it is likely to spread infection.
    • (B) Mere negligence in causing the spread of infection is sufficient.
    • (C) Strict liability applies regardless of the offender's state of mind.
    • (D) Only intention to kill or cause grievous harm is required.

  6. 6.Which of the following best describes the elements that must coexist for liability under Section 272?

    • (A) Malignantly doing an act that is likely to spread infection, even if the person lacks any belief about that likelihood.
    • (B) Knowing or having reason to believe an act is likely to spread infection, even if the act was not done malignantly.
    • (C) Both: the act must be done malignantly, and the person must know or have reason to believe it is likely to spread infection.
    • (D) Either malignancy or knowledge/reason to believe is sufficient on its own.

  7. 7.Which of the following acts is specifically criminalised by Section 273?

    • (A) Accidentally failing to report symptoms of illness
    • (B) Knowingly disobeying a government rule for putting any mode of transport into a state of quarantine
    • (C) Making false statements to public health officials
    • (D) Refusing medical treatment ordered by a doctor

  8. 8.What mental element does Section 273 require for the offence it creates?

    • (A) Knowledge — the accused must knowingly disobey the rule
    • (B) Negligence — mere carelessness suffices
    • (C) Absolute liability — no mental element is required
    • (D) Intention to spread the disease specifically

  9. 9.If a person mixes a harmless additive into a food item that does not render it noxious, but intends to sell the item as food, is that act punishable under Section 274?

    • (A) Yes — any adulteration with intent to sell falls under Section 274.
    • (B) Yes — intent to sell makes the act punishable even if the item is not noxious.
    • (C) No — Section 274 requires the adulteration to make the article noxious as food or drink.
    • (D) No — Section 274 applies only after the adulterated article has been sold.

  10. 10.Which mental element is required for an offence under Section 275 (Sale of noxious food or drink)?

    • (A) Strict liability (no mental element required)
    • (B) Simple negligence
    • (C) Knowing or having reason to believe that the article is noxious as food or drink
    • (D) Intention to cause harm to the buyer

  11. 11.If an article sold as food was fit at the time of sale but became noxious after the sale (due to later spoilage), is the seller liable under Section 275?

    • (A) Yes — seller is always liable once the article becomes noxious
    • (B) Yes — but only if the buyer suffers harm
    • (C) No — the provision targets sale/offer/exposure of an article that "has been rendered or has become noxious, or is in a state unfit" at the time of sale with knowledge or reason to believe
    • (D) Yes — if the seller was negligent in packaging

  12. 12.Which of the following best describes the offence under Section 276 (Adulteration of drugs)?

    • (A) Any alteration of a drug or medical preparation, whatever its effect or the actor's intent.
    • (B) Adulterating a drug or medical preparation in a way that lessens efficacy, changes its operation, or makes it noxious, intending or knowing it will be sold or used for medicinal purpose as if unadulterated.
    • (C) Only adulteration of a drug that causes death or serious bodily harm.
    • (D) Adulteration is an offence only when the adulterated substance is sold (not when used).

  13. 13.If a person adulterates a medical preparation but does so intending it will be used for a non‑medicinal industrial purpose (not for any medicinal purpose), does Section 276 apply?

    • (A) Yes — any adulteration of a medical preparation is covered.
    • (B) Yes — provided it changes the operation of the preparation.
    • (C) No — the provision applies only where the adulterated article is intended or known likely to be sold or used for any medicinal purpose.
    • (D) No — unless the adulteration makes the preparation noxious.

  14. 14.Which of the following acts are expressly covered as offences under Section 277?

    • (A) Only selling an adulterated drug
    • (B) Selling or offering an adulterated drug for sale
    • (C) Selling, offering or exposing for sale, issuing from a dispensary as unadulterated, or causing it to be used by a person not knowing of the adulteration
    • (D) Only issuing an adulterated drug from a dispensary

  15. 15.Which kinds of adulteration are covered by Section 277 so as to attract liability if the other elements are present?

    • (A) Only adulteration that renders the drug noxious
    • (B) Only adulteration that changes the drug's operation or renders it noxious, but not mere lessening of efficacy
    • (C) Adulteration that lessens efficacy, that changes its operation, or that renders it noxious — any one of these suffices
    • (D) Only adulteration that both lessens efficacy and renders it noxious

  16. 16.Does Section 278 apply when a dispensary issues a drug for non-medicinal purposes?

    • (A) No. The provision applies only when the issue from a dispensary is 'for medicinal purposes.'
    • (B) Yes. It applies whenever a dispensary issues a drug, irrespective of purpose.
    • (C) Yes, but only if the issuer acted knowingly for non-medicinal purposes.
    • (D) Only if the issuance results in actual harm to the recipient.

  17. 17.Does the adverb 'knowingly' in Section 278 apply to all the listed acts (sells; offers or exposes for sale; issues from a dispensary for medicinal purposes)?

    • (A) Yes. 'Knowingly' qualifies all the listed acts in the provision.
    • (B) No. It applies only to 'sells' and not to the other acts.
    • (C) It applies only to 'sells' and 'offers or exposes for sale', but not to 'issues from a dispensary.'
    • (D) The provision is silent about which specific acts 'knowingly' qualifies.

  18. 18.Does Section 279 cover accidental contamination of a public spring or reservoir that renders the water less fit for ordinary use?

    • (A) Yes — any contamination is covered whether accidental or not
    • (B) No — the section requires the person to have voluntarily corrupted or fouled the water
    • (C) Yes — but only if the contamination was caused by a public authority
    • (D) No — it applies only to contamination that causes physical injury

  19. 19.Which act is expressly made punishable by Section 280 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023?

    • (A) Voluntarily vitiating the atmosphere so as to make it noxious to the health of persons in general
    • (B) Causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapon
    • (C) Defamation by spoken words
    • (D) Obstructing a public way

  20. 20.If only animals (and no persons) are harmed by the vitiated atmosphere, is the act punishable under Section 280?

    • (A) Yes, harm to animals is covered
    • (B) Yes, but only if animals are in a public way
    • (C) Depends on local municipal rules
    • (D) No, the provision refers to harm to the health of persons in general

  21. 21.Section 281 BNS applies to driving a vehicle or riding in a rash or negligent manner on which of the following?

    • (A) Any private compound
    • (B) Any public way
    • (C) Only national highways
    • (D) Only roads within municipal limits

  22. 22.A drives at high speed through a crowded public street, narrowly missing pedestrians, but no one is actually hurt. Under Section 281 BNS, A is:

    • (A) Not liable, because no injury occurred
    • (B) Liable, because the section punishes driving likely to cause hurt or endangering human life, without requiring actual injury
    • (C) Liable only if a pedestrian files a complaint
    • (D) Not liable, because speed alone can never amount to rashness

  23. 23.What is the maximum term of imprisonment that Section 282 provides?

    • (A) Three months
    • (B) One year
    • (C) Six months
    • (D) No imprisonment; only a fine

  24. 24.If negligent navigation of a vessel causes only damage to cargo and there was no danger to human life and no likelihood of causing hurt to any person, is the conduct punishable under Section 282?

    • (A) Yes, because negligence in navigation alone is sufficient under the section
    • (B) No, because Section 282 requires endangering human life or being likely to cause hurt or injury to a person
    • (C) Yes, but only if the fine exceeds ten thousand rupees
    • (D) No, because Section 282 applies only to collisions between vessels

  25. 25.If a person exhibits a false buoy but neither intends nor knows that it is likely to mislead, is he punishable under Section 283?

    • (A) Yes — any exhibition of a false mark or buoy is punishable regardless of mental state
    • (B) No — the provision requires intending or knowing it to be likely to mislead
    • (C) Yes — only if a navigator was actually misled
    • (D) Only if the exhibition causes physical injury

  26. 26.Which mental states are specified in Section 284 as sufficient to attract liability for conveying a person by water in an unsafe or overloaded vessel?

    • (A) Only intentionally (knowingly) doing so
    • (B) Only recklessness or gross negligence
    • (C) Knowingly or negligently
    • (D) Strict liability (no mental state required)

  27. 27.Is actual bodily harm required for Section 284 to apply, or is endangerment sufficient?

    • (A) Endangerment is sufficient — the offence requires the vessel to be in such a state or so loaded as to endanger life, not that harm occurred
    • (B) Actual injury is required before the offence can be made out
    • (C) Only if the person transported knew about the danger will the offence apply
    • (D) Only if the vessel owner acted knowingly will the offence apply

  28. 28.Which of the following describes conduct covered by Section 285?

    • (A) Either doing any act, or omitting to take order with any property in his possession or under his charge, that causes danger, obstruction or injury to any person in a public way or public line of navigation
    • (B) Only doing a deliberate act that causes injury in a public way
    • (C) Only omission to take order with property that causes damage to public property
    • (D) Only acts that cause injury to property (not persons) in public places

  29. 29.Does Section 285 apply when danger or obstruction is caused only to public property (and not to any person) in a public way or public line of navigation?

    • (A) Yes — damage to public property is sufficient under the section
    • (B) No — the provision is directed to danger, obstruction or injury "to any person" in a public way or line of navigation
    • (C) Yes — if the proprietor of the property complains
    • (D) No — unless the obstruction also interferes with governmental functions

  30. 30.Does Section 286 make omission to take safety measures punishable when the poisonous substance is in the person's possession?

    • (A) No, omission is not covered; only active acts are punished.
    • (B) Yes, knowingly or negligently omitting to take such order with any poisonous substance in his possession is punishable.
    • (C) Only if actual injury results from the omission.
    • (D) Only if the possession is for sale or commercial purposes.

  31. 31.Which state of mind does Section 287 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita require for an act with fire or combustible matter to be punishable?

    • (A) Intent to cause harm
    • (B) Rashly or negligently
    • (C) Strict liability (no mental element required)
    • (D) Maliciously

  32. 32.Does Section 287 apply where a person 'knowingly or negligently omits to take such order' with a fire in his possession?

    • (A) Yes — if the omission is knowing or negligent and not sufficient to guard against probable danger to human life
    • (B) Yes — regardless of whether the fire was in the person's possession
    • (C) No — the section applies only to positive acts, not omissions
    • (D) No — it applies only if actual hurt or injury has occurred

  33. 33.Which mental states are expressly mentioned in Section 288 (Negligent conduct with respect to explosive substance)?

    • (A) Imprudent conduct only, without reference to knowledge
    • (B) Act done rashly or negligently; omission done knowingly or negligently
    • (C) Strict liability irrespective of any mental state
    • (D) Intention to cause harm or malicious conduct only

  34. 34.A person finds an explosive device in a public place but does not have it in his possession and fails to take steps to guard against its danger. Does Section 288 apply to this omission?

    • (A) Yes — omission to guard against danger is always punishable under Section 288
    • (B) Yes — provided the person knew about the danger
    • (C) Only if the omission caused actual injury
    • (D) No — the provision applies to omissions regarding an explosive "in his possession"

  35. 35.What is the maximum punishment provided under Section 289 for negligent conduct with respect to machinery?

    • (A) Imprisonment which may extend to one year and fine up to ten thousand rupees.
    • (B) Imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees, or with both.
    • (C) Only a fine which may extend to five thousand rupees.
    • (D) Imprisonment which may extend to two years, without fine.

  36. 36.Does Section 289 require that actual hurt or injury occur for an offence to be made out?

    • (A) Yes — actual hurt or injury must have occurred for Section 289 to apply.
    • (B) No — it suffices that the act endangers human life or is likely to cause hurt or injury; actual injury is not required.
    • (C) Yes — only omissions that have already caused injury are punishable.
    • (D) No — Section 289 applies only to property damage and not to risk of injury.

  37. 37.Which of the following activities are covered by Section 290?

    • (A) Pulling down, repairing or constructing any building
    • (B) Only constructing buildings
    • (C) Only pulling down (demolition) of buildings
    • (D) Only repairing or routine maintenance of buildings

  38. 38.If a person takes some safety measures while constructing a building but those measures are inadequate to prevent probable danger to human life, does Section 290 still apply?

    • (A) Yes; omitting to take "such measures... as is sufficient" includes taking measures that are inadequate
    • (B) No; omission requires total failure to take any safety measures
    • (C) Only if the inadequate measures were taken knowingly, not negligently
    • (D) Only if the building actually collapses and endangers life

  39. 39.Does Section 291 apply where the omitted measures expose only property (and not human life or grievous hurt) to probable danger?

    • (A) Yes, any probable danger from an animal is covered
    • (B) Yes, but only if the property belongs to a person present
    • (C) No, the provision covers probable danger to human life or probable danger of grievous hurt only
    • (D) Yes, if the owner of the animal was negligent

  40. 40.What is the maximum penalty prescribed by Section 292 for a public nuisance not otherwise punishable by the Sanhita?

    • (A) A fine which may extend to one thousand rupees
    • (B) Imprisonment for up to one year
    • (C) A fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees
    • (D) Community service

  41. 41.If another provision of the Sanhita prescribes imprisonment for a particular public nuisance, may a court instead impose only the fine under Section 292?

    • (A) Yes, the court may substitute the fine under Section 292
    • (B) Yes, but only with the prosecution's consent
    • (C) Only if the imprisonment is for less than one month
    • (D) No, Section 292 applies only when the act is not otherwise punishable by this Sanhita

  42. 42.Under Section 293 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, what is the maximum term of simple imprisonment that may be imposed for repeating or continuing a public nuisance after an injunction?

    • (A) Six months
    • (B) One year
    • (C) Three months
    • (D) Two years

  43. 43.Which combination of elements must be present for liability under Section 293?

    • (A) (a) The act is a public nuisance, (b) the person was enjoined by a public servant with lawful authority not to repeat or continue it, and (c) the person repeats or continues the nuisance after that injunction
    • (B) (a) Any nuisance (public or private), (b) any warning by any person, and (c) continuation afterwards
    • (C) (a) Public nuisance, (b) enjoined by a private citizen, (c) repetition afterwards
    • (D) (a) Private nuisance, (b) enjoined by a public servant, (c) continuation afterwards

  44. 44.Does the definition of an obscene object under this section include display of content in electronic form (for example, an image shown on a website)?

    • (A) Yes. The definition expressly includes display of any content in electronic form.
    • (B) No. The section applies only to physical books, pamphlets and drawings.
    • (C) Only if the electronic content is printed and sold in physical form as well.
    • (D) Only if the electronic content is circulated on a mass scale.

  45. 45.Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the offence in IPC Section 292 (Sale, etc., of obscene books, etc.) of the IPC now corresponds to which section?

    • (A) BNS Section 74 (Assault or use of criminal force to woma)
    • (B) BNS Section 294 (Sale, etc., of obscene books, etc)
    • (C) BNS Section 329 (Criminal trespass and house-trespass)
    • (D) BNS Section 114 (Hurt)

  46. 46.Does Section 295 punish merely offering or attempting to sell an obscene object to a child where no actual sale occurs?

    • (A) No — only a completed sale is punishable
    • (B) Yes — but only if the offer is made in public
    • (C) Yes — but only after a prior conviction for a similar offence
    • (D) Yes — offering or attempting to sell to a child is punishable

  47. 47.Which of the following correctly states the punishment on a second or subsequent conviction under Section 295?

    • (A) Cumulative imprisonment of up to 10 years and fine up to 7,000 rupees
    • (B) Only a fine up to 5,000 rupees, with no imprisonment
    • (C) Imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and also with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees
    • (D) Imprisonment up to 7 years but the fine is limited to 2,000 rupees

  48. 48.A sings an obscene song inside his own house, which is situated adjacent to a busy public market, and it annoys passers-by. Under Section 296 BNS, A's act is:

    • (A) Not punishable, because the singing did not occur in a public place
    • (B) Punishable, because clause (b) covers obscene songs sung in or near any public place
    • (C) Punishable only if A intended to be heard
    • (D) Not punishable, because songs are protected expression in all circumstances

  49. 49.Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the offence in IPC Section 294 (Obscene acts and songs) of the IPC now corresponds to which section?

    • (A) BNS Section 318 (Cheating)
    • (B) BNS Section 80 (Dowry death)
    • (C) BNS Section 296 (Obscene acts and songs)
    • (D) BNS Section 316 (Criminal breach of trust)

  50. 50.A person publishes an advertisement offering to deliver goods to anyone who draws a winning number in a private lottery that is not authorised by the State Government. Under Section 297, what is the correct legal consequence?

    • (A) No penalty because offering goods is not covered.
    • (B) Imprisonment for up to six months but no fine.
    • (C) A fine which may extend to five thousand rupees.
    • (D) A fine which may extend to fifty thousand rupees.

उत्तर की

1. B2. B3. C4. D5. A6. C7. B8. A9. C10. C11. C12. B13. C14. C15. C16. A17. A18. B19. A20. D21. B22. B23. C24. B25. B26. C27. A28. A29. B30. B31. B32. A33. B34. D35. B36. B37. A38. A39. C40. A41. D42. A43. A44. A45. B46. D47. C48. B49. C50. C

स्पष्टीकरणे

  1. 1. (B) Section 270 defines public nuisance as an act or illegal omission causing any common injury, danger or annoyance to the public or to the people in general who dwell or occupy property in the vicinity. The essence of the offence is injury to the community, not to a particular individual.
  2. 2. (B) Section 270 expressly declares that 'a common nuisance is not excused on the ground that it causes some convenience or advantage.' The benefit conferred by the activity is therefore no defence to the charge of public nuisance.
  3. 3. (C) IPC Section 268 (Public nuisance) maps to BNS Section 270 (Public nuisance) in the BNS.
  4. 4. (D) The provision requires that the accused "unlawfully or negligently does any act which is, and which he knows or has reason to believe to be, likely to spread" a life‑dangerous disease. Thus both the mode (unlawful or negligent act) and the knowledge/reason‑to‑believe element about likelihood are prescribed.
  5. 5. (A) The provision states that "Whoever malignantly does any act which is, and which he knows or has reason to believe to be, likely to spread the infection..."—requiring both malignantly and knowledge or reason to believe. It does not impose mere negligence or strict liability, nor does it require intention to kill.
  6. 6. (C) Section 272 describes the offence as: "Whoever malignantly does any act which is, and which he knows or has reason to believe to be, likely to spread the infection..."—indicating that both malignantly doing the act and knowing or having reason to believe its likely to spread infection are required. It does not make the elements alternative.
  7. 7. (B) The provision criminalises "Whoever knowingly disobeys any rule made by the Government for putting any mode of transport into a state of quarantine..." It therefore targets knowing disobedience of such government rules.
  8. 8. (A) The offence is defined as "Whoever knowingly disobeys any rule..." which shows that knowledge is the required mental element. The provision does not describe the offence as negligence, absolute liability, or require a specific intent to spread disease.
  9. 9. (C) Section 274 requires that the article be adulterated 'so as to make such article noxious as food or drink' in addition to the intention to sell or knowledge of likely sale. If the additive does not make the article noxious, the text of Section 274 is not attracted.
  10. 10. (C) The provision requires that the person sells (or offers/exposes for sale) an article "knowing or having reason to believe that the same is noxious as food or drink." This expressly imposes a knowledge/reason-to-believe mental element rather than strict liability or mere negligence.
  11. 11. (C) Section 275 penalises selling/offering/exposing for sale an article which "has been rendered or has become noxious, or is in a state unfit for food or drink," with the seller "knowing or having reason to believe" it is noxious. If the article became noxious only after a lawful sale and the seller had no knowledge or reason to believe it was noxious when selling, the section does not apply.
  12. 12. (B) The provision penalises adulterating a drug or medical preparation so as to lessen efficacy, change its operation, or make it noxious, where the actor intends it shall be sold or used for medicinal purposes or knows it is likely to be so sold or used. The other options either overbroadly generalise or add requirements not in the text.
  13. 13. (C) Section 276 is specifically directed at adulteration where the actor intends it shall be sold or used for any medicinal purpose, or knows it likely will be. If the intended use is non‑medicinal, the element in the provision is not satisfied.
  14. 14. (C) The section lists multiple acts: selling, offering or exposing for sale, issuing it from any dispensary for medicinal purposes as unadulterated, or causing it to be used by a person not knowing the adulteration. All these are covered under the provision.
  15. 15. (C) The provision refers to a drug 'adulterated in such a manner as to lessen its efficacy, to change its operation, or to render it noxious.' Any one of these described forms of adulteration is sufficient to fall within the section, per the text.
  16. 16. (A) The provision specifically criminalises issuance 'from a dispensary for medicinal purposes.' Therefore issuance for non-medicinal purposes is not covered by the text of this section.
  17. 17. (A) The provision reads 'Whoever knowingly sells, or offers or exposes for sale, or issues from a dispensary for medicinal purposes...' which shows 'knowingly' precedes the series of verbs and therefore qualifies all the listed acts.
  18. 18. (B) The section uses the word "voluntarily" ("Whoever voluntarily corrupts or fouls the water..."), which indicates that the provision requires a voluntary act; accidental contamination would therefore not fall under this clause as written.
  19. 19. (A) Section 280 states: 'Whoever voluntarily vitiates the atmosphere in any place so as to make it noxious to the health of persons in general ... shall be punished ...' The provision therefore penalises making the atmosphere noxious to health.
  20. 20. (D) The provision penalises vitiating the atmosphere 'so as to make it noxious to the health of persons in general dwelling or carrying on business ... or passing along a public way.' It specifies harm to persons, not animals.
  21. 21. (B) Section 281 covers whoever drives any vehicle, or rides, 'on any public way' in a rash or negligent manner. The situs of the offence is a public way, not private premises.
  22. 22. (B) Section 281 is complete once the driving is rash or negligent enough to endanger human life or to be likely to cause hurt or injury to another. Actual hurt is not required for the offence.
  23. 23. (C) Section 282 prescribes "imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months." Thus the maximum imprisonment under this section is six months.
  24. 24. (B) Section 282 applies where navigation is so rash or negligent as to "endanger human life, or to be likely to cause hurt or injury to any other person." If only cargo/property is damaged and there is no danger to persons or likelihood of hurt, the elements set out in the provision are not met.
  25. 25. (B) Section 283 penalises whoever exhibits a false light, mark or buoy "intending or knowing it to be likely that such exhibition will mislead any navigator." Absent that intention or knowledge, the provision does not, on its face, apply.
  26. 26. (C) Section 284 states liability applies to whoever "knowingly or negligently conveys, or causes to be conveyed for hire...". Thus either knowing conduct or negligent conduct is sufficient for the offence.
  27. 27. (A) The provision penalises conveying "when that vessel is in such a state or so loaded as to endanger the life of that person." It does not require actual harm to have occurred; the state or loading that endangers life is the culpable condition.
  28. 28. (A) The section begins "Whoever, by doing any act, or by omitting to take order with any property in his possession or under his charge, causes danger, obstruction or injury to any person in any public way or public line of navigation..." Thus both an act and an omission regarding property in one's possession/charge can constitute the offence when they cause danger/obstruction/injury to a person.
  29. 29. (B) Section 285 criminalises causing "danger, obstruction or injury to any person in any public way or public line of navigation." The wording targets harm to persons; harm limited to property (without harm to any person) falls outside the specific terms of the provision.
  30. 30. (B) The provision explicitly punishes one who "knowingly or negligently omits to take such order with any poisonous substance in his possession as is sufficient to guard against any probable danger to human life". It does not condition liability on actual injury or commercial purpose.
  31. 31. (B) The provision punishes whoever does, with fire or any combustible matter, any act so 'rashly or negligently' as to endanger human life or be likely to cause hurt. Thus the specified mental state is rashness or negligence, not intent or strict liability.
  32. 32. (A) The provision covers cases where a person 'knowingly or negligently omits to take such order with any fire or any combustible matter in his possession as is sufficient to guard against any probable danger to human life.' Thus omission in possession, when knowing or negligent and insufficient to guard against probable danger, is covered.
  33. 33. (B) The provision refers to acts done "so rashly or negligently" and to omissions done "knowingly or negligently." Thus it expressly mentions rashness/negligence for acts and knowledge/negligence for omissions.
  34. 34. (D) Section 288 criminalises omission when a person "omits to take such order with any explosive substance in his possession." The requirement that the substance be "in his possession" means omissions regarding explosives not in the person's possession are not covered by this clause.
  35. 35. (B) The provision states punishment as imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees, or with both. This exactly matches option B.
  36. 36. (B) Section 289 covers acts done so rashly or negligently as to endanger human life or to be likely to cause hurt or injury, so proof of actual hurt is not required; endangerment or likelihood of causing hurt is sufficient.
  37. 37. (A) The provision expressly lists the activities covered as "pulling down, repairing or constructing any building." Therefore all three listed activities in option A are covered by the text. The other options restrict the scope contrary to the provision's wording.
  38. 38. (A) The provision criminalises whoever "omits to take such measures with that building as is sufficient to guard against any probable danger to human life." Failing to take measures that are sufficient—i.e., taking measures that are inadequate—falls within that omission. The text therefore covers inadequate precautions, not only a complete absence of measures.
  39. 39. (C) The text limits the protected interest to 'any probable danger to human life, or any probable danger of grievous hurt from such animal.' There is no mention of property, so risks to property alone are not covered by this section.
  40. 40. (A) Section 292 states that whoever commits a public nuisance in any case not otherwise punishable by this Sanhita shall be punished with a fine which may extend to one thousand rupees. The provision prescribes only a fine and caps it at one thousand rupees.
  41. 41. (D) The provision applies "in any case not otherwise punishable by this Sanhita," so where another provision of the Sanhita prescribes imprisonment, Section 292 does not apply and the court should not substitute its fine. The section is a residuary penalty when the Sanhita is otherwise silent.
  42. 42. (A) The provision states the offender "shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months," so six months is the maximum term of imprisonment specified.
  43. 43. (A) Section 293 requires a public nuisance, an injunction issued by "any public servant who has lawful authority to issue such injunction not to repeat or continue such nuisance," and that the person "repeats or continues" the nuisance after that injunction; all three elements are therefore necessary.
  44. 44. (A) Sub‑section (1) expressly includes 'display of any content in electronic form' within the class of things that shall be deemed to be obscene if they meet the test. The provision is not limited to physical media.
  45. 45. (B) IPC Section 292 (Sale, etc., of obscene books, etc.) maps to BNS Section 294 (Sale, etc., of obscene books, etc) in the BNS.
  46. 46. (D) Section 295 explicitly includes ‘or offers or attempts so to do’ after listing the prohibited acts. Therefore an offer or attempt to sell, etc., to a child is punishable under the provision even if no completed sale occurs.
  47. 47. (C) The provision states that ‘in the event of a second or subsequent conviction, with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and also with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees.’ Thus the correct penalty is imprisonment up to seven years together with a fine up to 5,000 rupees.
  48. 48. (B) Unlike clause (a) which requires the obscene act to be 'in any public place,' clause (b) extends to obscene songs, ballads or words uttered 'in or near' any public place. Singing near a public place to the annoyance of others satisfies the section.
  49. 49. (C) IPC Section 294 (Obscene acts and songs) maps to BNS Section 296 (Obscene acts and songs) in the BNS.
  50. 50. (C) Section 297(2) punishes whoever publishes any proposal 'to pay any sum, or to deliver any goods...on any event or contingency relative or applicable to the drawing of any ticket' in such an unauthorized lottery with a fine which may extend to five thousand rupees.

प्रश्न कायदा मजकुरातून तयार केले जातात आणि स्वतंत्ररीत्या पडताळले जातात. प्रिंट, फोटोकॉपी आणि वाटप करण्यास मोफत, कोचिंग सेंटरसहित — कृपया क्रेडिट ठेवावे. पूर्ण मजकूर, स्पष्टीकरणे आणि 10,000+ प्रश्न samvidhan.co.in वर.