UPSC CISF-AC-EXE

11. Which of the following unit(s) is/are part(s) of a CPU ?

Which of the following unit(s) is/are part(s) of a CPU ?

Join Our Telegram Channel
ALU
Control Unit
Memory Unit
ALU, Control Unit and Memory Unit
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2018
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct option is B) Control Unit.
– The Central Processing Unit (CPU) is the primary component of a computer that performs most of the processing.
– The CPU is typically composed of the Arithmetic Logic Unit (ALU), the Control Unit (CU), and registers. Cache memory is also considered part of the CPU in modern architectures.
– The Control Unit is a vital part of the CPU responsible for fetching instructions from memory, decoding them, and managing the execution of these instructions by directing the operations of the ALU, memory, and input/output devices. It is often described as the “brain” or “manager” of the CPU.
– The ALU (Arithmetic Logic Unit) is another core part of the CPU that performs arithmetic operations (addition, subtraction, etc.) and logical operations (AND, OR, NOT, etc.).
– The Memory Unit (specifically referring to main memory or RAM) is generally considered a separate component of the computer system, external to the CPU, although closely interacting with it via the system bus.
– Option D lists ALU, Control Unit, and Memory Unit. Since the Memory Unit is typically not considered part of the CPU, option D is incorrect.
– Both A (ALU) and B (Control Unit) are correct parts of the CPU. Given that only one option can be selected and option D is incorrect, the question might be considered ambiguous as both A and B are valid. However, the Control Unit’s role in orchestrating all CPU operations, including those of the ALU, might lead to it being considered a more encompassing or primary unit in some simplified classifications.

Subscribe on YouTube

12. In which one of the following cases is it mandatory for the appropriat

In which one of the following cases is it mandatory for the appropriate Government to make reference of an industrial dispute for adjudication/settlement to the Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court/Arbitration ?

Join Our Telegram Channel
A dispute regarding compensatory allowance in respect of 50 workmen
A dispute relating to rules of discipline in the organization employing 100 workmen
An industrial dispute involving any question of national importance
An industrial dispute in a municipality
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2018
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct option is D) An industrial dispute in a municipality.
– Under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the appropriate Government has discretion to refer an industrial dispute for adjudication (Section 10(1)).
– However, the proviso to Section 10(1) mandates the government to make a reference (“shall”) if the dispute relates to a public utility service and a notice under Section 22 has been given.
– A municipality is often listed as a public utility service in Schedule I of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (e.g., services relating to sanitation, water supply).
– While the option doesn’t explicitly state that notice under Section 22 was given, among the given options, a dispute in a municipality is the only one that involves a public utility service, which is the condition that triggers mandatory reference *if* the other condition (notice) is met. The other options describe types or sizes of disputes that do not automatically mandate reference.
– Disputes regarding allowances, discipline rules, or involving a certain number of workmen (A and B) do not, by themselves, make reference mandatory.
– Disputes of national importance (C) can be referred to a National Tribunal, but the reference is discretionary (“may”), not mandatory (“shall”), based solely on national importance.
– Therefore, a dispute in a municipality (a public utility service) is the scenario where mandatory reference is potentially applicable, assuming the required procedural conditions (like notice) are fulfilled.

Subscribe on YouTube

13. The process by which a third party persuades and facilitates the dispu

The process by which a third party persuades and facilitates the disputants for mediating and promoting the settlement of an industrial dispute is called

Join Our Telegram Channel
Conciliation
Arbitration
Collective Bargaining
Compulsory Adjudication
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2018
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct option is A) Conciliation.
– Conciliation is a process in industrial relations where a neutral third party (conciliator) helps the disputing parties (employer and workmen) to communicate, understand each other’s viewpoints, and explore possible solutions to reach a voluntary settlement of their industrial dispute. The conciliator facilitates discussions and may suggest terms of settlement but does not impose a decision. This matches the description of a third party persuading and facilitating settlement.
– Arbitration involves a third party (arbitrator) hearing the arguments of both sides and giving a binding decision (award) to resolve the dispute, based on the agreement of the parties to refer the dispute to arbitration.
– Collective Bargaining is a process of negotiation between the management and trade union representatives to determine terms and conditions of employment. It does not involve a third-party facilitator in the negotiation itself.
– Compulsory Adjudication is a process where the government refers an industrial dispute to a Labour Court or Industrial Tribunal for a binding decision. This is a form of compulsory dispute resolution, not facilitation for voluntary settlement.

Subscribe on YouTube

14. Which one of the following offences under the Indian Penal Code, 1860,

Which one of the following offences under the Indian Penal Code, 1860, is not compoundable by the parties in terms of Section 320(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ?

Join Our Telegram Channel
Voluntarily causing grievous hurt on grave and sudden provocation
Adultery
Cheating
Voluntarily causing grievous hurt and miscarriage
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2018
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct option is D) Voluntarily causing grievous hurt and miscarriage.
– Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, lists offences compoundable by parties. Section 320(1) lists offences compoundable *without* court permission, and Section 320(2) lists offences compoundable *with* court permission.
– Voluntarily causing grievous hurt (e.g., Section 325 IPC) is compoundable *with* the permission of the Court under Section 320(2).
– Causing miscarriage (e.g., Section 312 IPC) is compoundable *with* the permission of the Court under Section 320(2). More severe forms of causing miscarriage (Sections 313, 314, 315, 316 IPC) are not compoundable at all. Similarly, grievous hurt caused by dangerous weapons (Section 326 IPC) is not compoundable.
– An offence involving both voluntarily causing grievous hurt and miscarriage is a severe offence. While some less severe forms might be compoundable with court permission (falling under 320(2)), the combination or more severe forms would likely be entirely non-compoundable. An offence that is non-compoundable or compoundable only under Section 320(2) is *not* compoundable in terms of Section 320(1).
– Option C, Cheating (specifically Section 417 IPC), is listed under Section 320(1) as compoundable *without* the permission of the Court. Therefore, Option C *is* compoundable under Section 320(1).
– Options A and B are compoundable, but only under Section 320(2), not 320(1). Option D represents a combination of offences, where at least one component is in 320(2), and potentially other components (depending on severity) are non-compoundable altogether. Thus, D is definitely *not* compoundable under Section 320(1). Given that only one option can be correct and C is compoundable under 320(1), A, B, and D are candidates for being not compoundable under 320(1). D is the most likely intended answer as it can easily encompass non-compoundable sections altogether, making it unambiguously *not* compoundable under 320(1) or 320(2).
– S. 320(1) lists relatively less severe offences like simple hurt, defamation, criminal trespass, insult intended to provoke breach of peace, etc.
– S. 320(2) lists more severe offences like grievous hurt, adultery, criminal breach of trust by clerk/servant, etc., which require court permission for compounding.
– Offences not listed in S. 320 are not compoundable.

Subscribe on YouTube

15. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, does *not* expressly provide for

The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, does *not* expressly provide for which one of the following?

Join Our Telegram Channel
Identification of an arrested person
Detention of an arrested person beyond 24 hours with an order of the Magistrate
Health of an arrested person
Bail to a person arrested under Preventive Detention Law
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2018
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct option is D) Bail to a person arrested under Preventive Detention Law.
– The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, deals primarily with the procedure for investigation, inquiry, and trial of offences.
– Preventive detention is governed by specific laws like the National Security Act, COFEPOSA, etc., enacted under the powers provided by the Constitution (Article 22). These laws have their own procedures for detention, review, and limited rights of the detenu.
– The provisions for bail in the CrPC (Sections 436-439) apply to persons accused of having committed offences, allowing for their release during the pendency of investigation, inquiry, or trial, often upon furnishing security. These provisions do not apply to persons detained under preventive detention laws, which operate outside the normal criminal process based on suspicion of future acts.
– Section 54-A of CrPC expressly provides for the identification of an arrested person.
– Section 57 of CrPC limits detention by police to 24 hours in the absence of a special order from a Magistrate. Section 167 provides for detention beyond 24 hours with the Magistrate’s order (police custody or judicial custody). The CrPC expressly provides for detention beyond 24 hours *with* a Magistrate’s order.
– Section 54 of CrPC mandates the medical examination of an arrested person, thereby providing for the health of the arrested person by ensuring a medical record.

Subscribe on YouTube

16. The term ‘workman’ under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923, include

The term ‘workman’ under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923, includes who among the following persons?

Join Our Telegram Channel
A person whose employment is of a casual nature
A person employed as a personal cook by the Managing Director of a company
A person employed for repairing an article in any premises wherein 15 persons are employed
The Captain of an aircraft
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2018
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct option is C) A person employed for repairing an article in any premises wherein 15 persons are employed.
– The Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 (now Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923) covers persons employed in scheduled employments listed in Schedule II of the Act.
– Employment in factories, workshops, or other premises where manufacturing or other operations are carried on and where a certain number of persons are employed (thresholds varied over time but premises with 15 employees suggest a formal workplace) are typically included in Schedule II. Repairing an article in such a premises is likely employment for the purpose of the employer’s trade or business and falls within the scope of scheduled employments.
– A person whose employment is of a casual nature and who is employed otherwise than for the purposes of the employer’s trade or business is excluded from the definition of ‘workman’/’employee’. Option A is ambiguous but suggests potential exclusion.
– Persons employed in domestic service (like a personal cook for a Managing Director) are generally excluded from the definition. Option B is excluded.
– The Captain of an aircraft, while employed in a scheduled employment (operation of aircraft), might be excluded if they were in a managerial, administrative, or supervisory capacity drawing wages above a certain limit (as per the Act before 2000 amendment which removed the wage ceiling). Option D is potentially excluded depending on specifics.
– Option C describes employment in a setting typically covered by the Act, performing work related to the premises’ activity, making the person a ‘workman’.

Subscribe on YouTube

17. ‘A’ with the intention of murdering ‘Z’, instigates ‘B’, a child under

‘A’ with the intention of murdering ‘Z’, instigates ‘B’, a child under seven years of age, to do an act which causes ‘Z’s death. ‘B’ in consequence of the abetment, does the act in the absence of ‘A’ and thereby causes ‘Z’s death. Here ‘A’ is liable under which one of the following Sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ?

Subscribe on YouTube
Section 109
Section 115
Section 120
Section 302
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2018
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct option is A) Section 109.
– Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, provides for the punishment of abetment when the act abetted is committed in consequence of the abetment and where no express provision is made for the punishment of such abetment.
– In this case, ‘A’ instigated ‘B’ to murder ‘Z’. ‘B’, in consequence of this abetment, committed the act causing ‘Z’s death. The act abetted is murder, which is punishable under Section 302.
– Explanation 3 to Section 108 of the IPC clarifies that it is not necessary for the person abetted to be capable by law of committing an offence. Since ‘B’ is a child under seven, ‘B’ is legally incapable of committing murder (as a child under seven is presumed ‘doli incapax’ – incapable of having criminal intent, by Section 82 IPC). However, ‘A’ is still liable for abetting the act that resulted in Z’s death.
– Since murder is committed in consequence of ‘A’s abetment, ‘A’ is punishable under Section 109 with the punishment provided for murder (Section 302). Thus, ‘A’ is liable under Section 109.
– Section 115 deals with abetment of an offence punishable with death or life imprisonment if the offence is *not* committed. This is not applicable here as Z’s death occurred.
– Section 120 relates to criminal conspiracy, which is a different form of inchoate offence from abetment by instigation.
– Section 302 provides the punishment for murder itself. While ‘A’ receives this punishment, the liability as an abettor for the committed act arises under Section 109.

Join Our Telegram Channel

18. Which one of the following offences under the Indian Penal Code, 1860,

Which one of the following offences under the Indian Penal Code, 1860, is cognizable and non-bailable?

Subscribe on YouTube
Sedition
Joining an unlawful assembly armed with a gun
Rioting with a deadly weapon
Bribery
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2018
Download PDFAttempt Online
The question asks which of the listed offences under the Indian Penal Code, 1860, is cognizable and non-bailable. The classification of offences (cognizable/non-cognizable, bailable/non-bailable) is provided in the First Schedule of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
A) Sedition (Section 124A IPC) is classified as Cognizable, Non-bailable, and triable by the Court of Session.
B) Joining an unlawful assembly armed with a deadly weapon (Section 144 IPC) is classified as Cognizable, but Bailable, and triable by a Magistrate of the first class. A gun is a deadly weapon, so option B describes an offence under Section 144.
C) Rioting, armed with a deadly weapon (Section 148 IPC) is classified as Cognizable, Non-bailable, and triable by a Magistrate of the first class.
D) Bribery: If referring to Election Bribery (Section 171E IPC), it is classified as Non-cognizable and Bailable. If referring to bribery involving public servants under the Prevention of Corruption Act, such offences are generally Cognizable and Non-bailable. However, the question specifies offences “under the Indian Penal Code, 1860”, making Section 171E the relevant reference, which is Non-cognizable and Bailable.
Based on the CrPC First Schedule classification of IPC offences, both Sedition (Section 124A) and Rioting, armed with a deadly weapon (Section 148) are Cognizable and Non-bailable. Given that only one option can be correct, and both A and C fit the criteria, there might be an ambiguity in the question as presented. However, comparing the typical examples of such offences in legal studies, Section 148 is a standard illustration of a Cognizable, Non-bailable offence related to public order, triable by a Magistrate. Section 124A, while also C&NB, is triable by the Court of Session and relates to offences against the State. Without further context or clarification, both A and C are legally classified as Cognizable and Non-bailable. If forced to choose one, C is often cited as a clear example of a C&NB offence triable by a Magistrate.

Join Our Telegram Channel

19. ‘A’ was at work with a hatchet with full precautions. While working, t

‘A’ was at work with a hatchet with full precautions. While working, the head of the hatchet flies off and kills a man who was standing nearby. ‘A’ has committed no crime under which one of the following Sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ?

Subscribe on YouTube
Section 80
Section 81
Section 86
Section 89
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2018
Download PDFAttempt Online
The scenario describes an act done by ‘A’ with full precautions, resulting in an accidental death when the hatchet head flies off. This falls under the general exception of ‘Accident’ in the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Section 80 of the IPC states that “Nothing is an offence which is done by accident or misfortune, and without any criminal intention or knowledge in the doing of a lawful act in a lawful manner, by lawful means, and with proper care and caution.” ‘A’ was engaged in a lawful act (working with a tool) in a lawful manner (“with full precautions” – implying proper care and caution). The death was caused by an accident or misfortune (hatchet head flying off) without criminal intention or knowledge. Therefore, under Section 80, ‘A’ has committed no crime.
Section 81 applies when an act is done to prevent other harm. Section 86 relates to offences committed while intoxicated. Section 89 relates to acts done for the benefit of a child or insane person with guardian’s consent. None of these apply to the given scenario.

Join Our Telegram Channel

20. Under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, a witness summoned by a Court of

Under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, a witness summoned by a Court of Law to produce a document which is in his possession has to do which one of the following?

Subscribe on YouTube
Shall bring it to the Court notwithstanding any objection
May refuse to bring it in the interest of national security
May refuse to bring it on the ground of confidentiality
Shall produce before the Court only if there is no objection
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2018
Download PDFAttempt Online
Section 162 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 governs the production of documents summoned by a Court.
Section 162 states: “A witness summoned to produce a document shall, if it is in his possession or power, bring it to Court, notwithstanding any objection which there may be to its production or to its admissibility. The validity of any such objection shall be decided by the Court.” This means the witness is obligated to bring the document regardless of any objection; the objection is for the Court to consider regarding its admissibility or inspection, not a ground for the witness to refuse production.
Options B and C are incorrect as a witness cannot refuse to bring the document based on national security or confidentiality; these are grounds for objection to admissibility or inspection which the Court will rule upon after the document is produced. Option D is contrary to the mandatory requirement of Section 162.

Join Our Telegram Channel
Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5
Test 1Test 2Test 3Test 4Test 5Test 6Test 7Test 8Test 9Test 10Test 11Test 12Test 13Test 14Test 15Test 16Test 17Test 18Test 19Test 20Test 21Test 22Test 23Test 24