UPSC CISF-AC-EXE Archives

21. Rule making power to carry out the purpose of the Central Industrial S

Rule making power to carry out the purpose of the Central Industrial Security Force Act, 1968 is given to the Central Government under which one of the following Sections of the Act ?

Section 22

Section 23

Section 21

Section 20

Answer is Right!

Answer is Wrong!

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

Section 22 of the Central Industrial Security Force Act, 1968 is the provision that vests the Central Government with the power to make rules for carrying out the purposes of the Act.

Section 22 is the specific section in the CISF Act, 1968 that grants rule-making authority to the Central Government.

Section 20 provides protection of action taken in good faith; Section 21 deals with the power to tender apology; Section 23 deals with the repeal and saving provision.

Join Our Telegram Channel

22. Which Section of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 makes provision reg

Which Section of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 makes provision regarding search of the arrested person and making an inventory of the articles found upon him ?

Join Our Telegram Channel

Section 49

Section 50

Section 50 A

Section 51

Answer is Right!

Answer is Wrong!

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

Section 51(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 mandates that whenever a person is arrested by a police officer or when an arrested person is handed over to a police officer by a private person, the police officer may search such person and prepare a list (inventory) of articles found upon him (except necessary wearing apparel) in the presence of two respectable witnesses.

Section 51 CrPC lays down the procedure for searching an arrested individual and documenting the seized items.

Section 49 prohibits unnecessary restraint on the arrested person; Section 50 requires informing the arrested person of the grounds of arrest and right to bail; Section 50A imposes an obligation to inform the arrested person’s nominee.

23. Power to search a place entered by a person sought to be arrested has

Power to search a place entered by a person sought to be arrested has been provided under

Join Our Telegram Channel

Section 47 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

Section 45 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

Section 46 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

Section 48 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

Answer is Right!

Answer is Wrong!

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

Section 47(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 provides that if a person to be arrested has entered into or is within any place, the person residing in or in charge of such place shall allow free ingress and afford reasonable facilities for a search to the person executing the warrant or the police officer having authority to arrest. This section grants the authority to search such a place.

Section 47 CrPC empowers law enforcement to enter and search a private premise to effect an arrest if the person sought is believed to be inside.

Section 45 provides protection from arrest to members of the armed forces in certain cases; Section 46 deals with the method of arrest (how an arrest is made); Section 48 deals with the power to pursue an offender into another jurisdiction.

24. Under which Section of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, may a Magist

Under which Section of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, may a Magistrate direct search in his presence ?

Join Our Telegram Channel

Section 102

Section 103

Section 104

Section 105

Answer is Right!

Answer is Wrong!

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

Section 103(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 explicitly states that any Magistrate may direct a search to be made in his presence of any place for the search of which he is competent to issue a search warrant.

Section 103(2) CrPC provides the legal basis for a Magistrate to oversee a search operation directly.

Section 102 gives police the power of seizure; Section 104 gives the power to impound documents; Section 105 relates to reciprocal arrangements for searches and arrests.

25. The power of the police officer to seize certain property has been giv

The power of the police officer to seize certain property has been given under

Section 102 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

Section 101 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

Section 103 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

Section 104 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

Answer is Right!

Answer is Wrong!

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

Section 102 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 empowers a police officer to seize any property that is alleged or suspected to have been stolen, or which is found under circumstances that create suspicion of the commission of any offence.

Section 102 CrPC is the principal statutory provision enabling police officers to seize suspicious property during an investigation.

Section 101 deals with the procedure on arrest by a private person; Section 103 deals with the procedure for search (witnesses, list, Magistrate’s presence); Section 104 deals with the power to impound documents.

Join Our Telegram Channel

26. According to the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018, who a

According to the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018, who among the following can be held liable?

Any person who induces a public servant to perform improperly a public duty by giving or promising to give any undue advantage
Any public servant who obtains or accepts or attempts to obtain from any person any undue advantage
A person who is compelled to give undue advantage and has reported the same to the concerned authority
A commercial organisation offering undue advantage to any public servant

Select the correct answer using the code given below :

1 and 2 only

3 and 4 only

1, 2 and 4 only

1, 2, 3 and 4

Answer is Right!

Answer is Wrong!

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

The Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018 introduced liability for bribe givers (Section 8), maintained liability for public servants accepting bribes (Section 7), and added liability for commercial organisations involved in bribing public servants (Section 9). However, Section 8 provides a defence for a person who is compelled to give undue advantage if they report the matter to the law enforcement agency within a specified period. Thus, while the act of being compelled and giving the bribe occurs, reporting it provides immunity from prosecution, meaning they are *not* held liable if they fulfil the condition. Therefore, statements 1, 2, and 4 describe parties who can be held liable under the Act.

The 2018 amendment made bribe givers and commercial organisations liable, alongside public servants. A key defence for compelled givers is prompt reporting.

Section 7 deals with the offence committed by a public servant (taking a bribe). Section 8 deals with the offence of giving a bribe or inducing a public servant. Section 9 deals with offences by commercial organisations. The proviso to Section 8(1) offers protection to victims of bribery who are compelled to pay and report the incident.

Join Our Telegram Channel

27. Under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 “Gratification” means

Under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 “Gratification” means

Join Our Telegram Channel

pecuniary gratification only.

non-pecuniary gratification only.

gratification estimable in money only.

not restricted to pecuniary gratification or to a gratification estimable in money.

Answer is Right!

Answer is Wrong!

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

While the original 1988 Act defined “gratification” to include pecuniary gratification or gratification estimable in money, the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018 significantly broadened the scope by replacing “gratification” with “undue advantage” in operative sections and defining “undue advantage” under Section 2(d) as “any gratification whatever, other than legal remuneration”. This indicates a legislative intent to cover a wide range of benefits, not limited strictly to monetary forms or those easily estimable in money. Therefore, “gratification” (in the broader sense now covered by “undue advantage”) is not restricted to pecuniary forms or those only estimable in money.

The 2018 amendment’s definition of “undue advantage” as “any gratification whatever” signifies a broad interpretation extending beyond strictly monetary or estimable-in-money benefits.

The amendment aimed to align the Indian anti-corruption law with international standards set by the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), which requires parties to criminalise a broad range of benefits given or received corruptly.

28. Which one of the following Committees/Commissions has given the recomm

Which one of the following Committees/Commissions has given the recommendation on removing corruption in public offices ?

Join Our Telegram Channel

Santhanam Committee

Rajamannar Committee

Sarkaria Commission

Venkatachaliah Commission

Answer is Right!

Answer is Wrong!

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

The Santhanam Committee (1962-1964) was appointed to examine the problem of corruption in public services and recommend measures to eradicate it. Its recommendations led to the establishment of the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC).

The Santhanam Committee is specifically known for its comprehensive recommendations on combating corruption in public administration.

The Rajamannar Committee (1969) and the Sarkaria Commission (1983) primarily dealt with Centre-State relations. The Venkatachaliah Commission (2000-2002), also known as the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution, reviewed the working of the Indian Constitution.

29. “A” in good faith believing property belonging to “Z” to be “A”s own p

“A” in good faith believing property belonging to “Z” to be “A”s own property, takes the property out of “B”s possession. “A” has

Join Our Telegram Channel

committed the offence of Theft because he has removed the property from 'B's possession.

not committed the offence of Theft because there was no dishonest intention.

committed the offence of Criminal Breach of Trust.

committed the offence of Misappropriation of Property.

Answer is Right!

Answer is Wrong!

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct answer is B) not committed the offence of Theft because there was no dishonest intention.

A key ingredient of theft under Section 378 of the IPC is the intention to take the property *dishonestly*. The scenario explicitly states that “A” takes the property “in good faith believing property belonging to ‘Z’ to be ‘A’s own property”. Good faith negates the element of dishonest intention.

Although “A” takes the property out of “B”s possession, the lack of dishonest intention means the act does not amount to theft. Criminal Breach of Trust (C) and Dishonest Misappropriation of Property (D) also require dishonest intention and/or entrustment, which are not present or relevant in the way described in the question.

30. “A” is a warehouse keeper. “Z” is going on a journey and entrusts his

“A” is a warehouse keeper. “Z” is going on a journey and entrusts his furniture to “A” under a contract that it shall be returned on a payment of a stipulated sum for warehouse room. “A” dishonestly sells the goods. “A” has committed the offence of

Dishonest Misappropriation of Property.

Criminal Breach of Trust.

Theft.

Dishonest Holding of Property.

Answer is Right!

Answer is Wrong!

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2021

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct answer is B) Criminal Breach of Trust.

“A”, being a warehouse keeper, was entrusted with Z’s furniture under a contract (entrustment/dominion). By dishonestly selling the goods, “A” misappropriated the property, which is a violation of the trust and the contract. This scenario perfectly fits the definition of Criminal Breach of Trust under Section 405 of the IPC.

It is not Theft (C) because “A” had lawful possession of the property. It is not Dishonest Misappropriation of Property (A) under Section 403, as that section typically applies to property not in one’s initial lawful possession through entrustment. Dishonest Holding of Property (D) is not a specific offence defined as such in the IPC.

Join Our Telegram Channel