UPSC CISF-AC-EXE

How much information received from an accused may be proved when the accused is in police custody?

[amp_mcq option1=”All relevant information” option2=”His confession to commit the crime” option3=”Information distinctly relates to the discovery of something” option4=”None, because he is in police custody” correct=”option3″]

The correct answer is C) Information distinctly relates to the discovery of something.

Sections 25 and 26 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 generally make confessions made to a police officer or while in police custody inadmissible. However, Section 27 provides an exception: “Provided that, when any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police officer, so much of such information, whether it amounts to a confession or not, as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered, may be proved.” This means only the part of the information given by the accused in custody that leads to the discovery of a relevant fact (like the weapon, stolen goods, or the body) is admissible in court.

This provision is based on the principle that the reliability of the information leading to a discovery serves as a guarantee of its truthfulness, distinguishing it from mere confessions which might be obtained under duress. The discovery must be a consequence of the information provided by the accused.

The question is whether ‘A’ stole the Laptop of ‘B’. Which one of the following is not relevant as per the Indian Evidence Act, 1872?

[amp_mcq option1=”‘A’ knows how to operate the Laptop.” option2=”‘A’ sold the same Laptop to his friend.” option3=”Only ‘A’ was authorized to use his Laptop by using his finger impressions.” option4=”‘A’ had the key of ‘B’s room.” correct=”option1″]

The correct answer is A) ‘A’ knows how to operate the Laptop.

Under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, facts are relevant if they are connected to the fact in issue in ways specified by Sections 6 to 55. The fact in issue is whether ‘A’ stole the Laptop of ‘B’.
– B) ‘A’ sold the same Laptop to his friend: Highly relevant as it shows possession and disposition of the stolen property (relevant under Section 8 – conduct, or Section 14 – state of mind).
– C) Only ‘A’ was authorized to use his Laptop by using his finger impressions: Highly relevant as it suggests exclusive access and opportunity (relevant under Section 7 – occasion, cause or effect). This fact might suggest that only ‘A’ could have stolen and then used the laptop easily.
– D) ‘A’ had the key of ‘B’s room: Highly relevant as it suggests opportunity and access to the location where the laptop was kept (relevant under Section 7).
– A) ‘A’ knows how to operate the Laptop: This fact, by itself, is not directly relevant to the *act of stealing*. Many people know how to operate a laptop. It does not prove opportunity, motive, preparation, or conduct related to the theft itself. It might be relevant if the charge involved illegal *use* of the laptop after theft, but the question is about *stealing*. Compared to the other options, knowing how to operate the device is the least, if at all, relevant fact concerning the theft itself.

Relevance is a key concept in the Evidence Act. Facts that are relevant are those that make the existence or non-existence of a fact in issue probable. While knowing how to operate a laptop might be a necessary skill to *use* it after theft, it doesn’t directly point to ‘A’ being the person who committed the theft itself.

In which one of the following cases is the offence of criminal breach of trust not committed?

[amp_mcq option1=”‘A’, the delivery boy of ‘B’ (B’ is an online retailer), does not deliver the package of a mobile phone and uses it himself.” option2=”A postman does not deliver the money order and misappropriates the money.” option3=”‘A’ finds a ring near the shop of a jeweler and gives it to his wife.” option4=”‘A’, an employee of the Employees’ State Insurance Corporation, does not deposit the contribution of an employee and misappropriates it.” correct=”option3″]

The correct answer is C) ‘A’ finds a ring near the shop of a jeweler and gives it to his wife.

Criminal breach of trust, as defined under Section 405 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, requires the essential element of “entrustment”. This means that the property must be handed over to the accused or they must have dominion over it, and they accept it under circumstances implying a trust. In option C, ‘A’ simply *finds* a ring. There is no entrustment of the ring to ‘A’ by its owner. Finding a lost item and misappropriating it may constitute other offences like dishonest misappropriation of movable property (Section 403 IPC) or potentially theft depending on the circumstances, but it does not fit the definition of criminal breach of trust due to the absence of entrustment.

In options A, B, and D, there is clear entrustment: the delivery boy is entrusted with the package, the postman is entrusted with the money order funds, and the employee is entrusted with the contribution money. Their subsequent misappropriation of these entrusted properties constitutes criminal breach of trust.

‘A’ kills the hen of ‘B’. The value of the hen is above two hundred fifty rupees. What is the offence committed by ‘A’?

[amp_mcq option1=”No offence under the IPC” option2=”Mischief under Section 429 of the IPC” option3=”Misappropriation of property” option4=”Trespass of the property of ‘B'” correct=”option2″]

The correct answer is B) Mischief under Section 429 of the IPC.

Section 425 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 defines “Mischief”. Section 428 punishes mischief by killing or maiming any animal of the value of ten rupees or upwards (fifty rupees or upwards in some states). Section 429, which carries a higher punishment, specifically deals with mischief by killing or maiming cattle, etc., or any animal of the value of fifty rupees or upwards. A hen is an “animal”. Since its value is stated as above two hundred fifty rupees (which is “fifty rupees or upwards”), the act of killing it falls under the ambit of Section 429 IPC.

Section 428 is typically used for killing or maiming animals of lesser value (like a dog or cat worth less than fifty rupees), while Section 429 applies to specified animals (like cattle) irrespective of value, or any other animal whose value is fifty rupees or more. The higher value of the hen places the offence under Section 429.

If, during dispersal of an unlawful assembly, an army officer, commanded to disperse it, exceeds his power which had resulted into the death of four women and three children, that army officer can be prosecuted with the sanction of

[amp_mcq option1=”his Commanding Officer” option2=”the District Magistrate” option3=”the Central Government” option4=”the concerned State Government” correct=”option3″]

The correct answer is C) the Central Government.

Section 132 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 provides protection against prosecution for acts done in good faith to disperse an unlawful assembly. Section 132(3) specifically states that “No prosecution shall be instituted in any Criminal Court against any person for any act done in good faith in pursuance of this section… (c) if such person is a member of the armed forces of the Union, without the sanction of the Central Government.” In this scenario, the army officer is a member of the armed forces acting (though exceeding power) in the course of dispersing an unlawful assembly.

This provision grants special protection to members of the armed forces when acting to maintain public order, requiring the highest level of executive sanction (Central Government) before they can be prosecuted for such actions, provided the act was done in pursuance of Section 132, even if power was exceeded. The intention is to protect them from vexatious litigation while ensuring accountability through a high-level review process.

Any book or newspaper or document can be forfeited and seized by an order of the State Government under Section 95 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, if the same contains any matter, the publication of which is punishable under Sections

[amp_mcq option1=”124A, 122, 292 and 354A of the IPC” option2=”124A, 153A, 153B, 292, 293 and 295A of the IPC” option3=”124A, 153B, 509, 376 and 377 of the IPC” option4=”124A, 153A, 153B, 354 and 509 of the IPC” correct=”option2″]

The correct answer is B) 124A, 153A, 153B, 292, 293 and 295A of the IPC.

Section 95 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 empowers the State Government to declare certain publications forfeited if they contain any matter whose publication is punishable under specific sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. These sections are Section 124A (Sedition), Section 153A (Promoting enmity between different groups), Section 153B (Imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration), Section 292 (Sale, etc., of obscene books, etc.), Section 293 (Sale of obscene objects to young person), and Section 295A (Deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs).

This power allows the government to take action against publications deemed inflammatory or harmful without immediate judicial intervention, though the affected party has a right to apply to the High Court to set aside the order of forfeiture under Section 96 CrPC. The listed IPC sections cover offences related to public order, national integration, obscenity, and religious feelings.

When was the CISF inducted at airports ?

[amp_mcq option1=”1999″ option2=”2001″ option3=”2002″ option4=”2000″ correct=”option4″]

The correct answer is D) 2000.

Following the hijacking of Indian Airlines Flight 814 in December 1999, the Indian government decided to induct the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) for security duties at major airports across the country to enhance airport security. The process of deploying CISF personnel at sensitive airports began in the year 2000.

Prior to the induction of CISF, airport security in India was primarily handled by the state police. The decision to hand over security duties to a professional federal force like CISF was a significant step towards modernizing airport security management in the wake of increased threats. The deployment was phased, starting with the more sensitive and busy airports.

Which one of the following is the first duty of a police officer at a scene of crime ?

[amp_mcq option1=”To preserve the scene of crime” option2=”Photograph the scene of crime” option3=”Start collecting physical evidence” option4=”Make a sketch of the scene of crime” correct=”option1″]

The absolute first duty of a police officer upon arriving at a scene of crime is to preserve the scene. This involves securing the area to prevent unauthorized access, contamination, or alteration by bystanders, witnesses, or even other emergency personnel. Preservation ensures the integrity of potential evidence before it is documented, collected, and analyzed.

Preserving the scene of crime is paramount as it protects the physical evidence from being disturbed or destroyed, which is essential for a proper investigation.

Once the scene is secured, subsequent steps in crime scene management include documenting the scene (photographing, sketching, video recording), searching for evidence, collecting and preserving evidence, and conducting a final survey. Each step must be conducted meticulously to maintain the chain of custody and ensure evidence is admissible in court.

Which of the following are the main components of an IED ?

[amp_mcq option1=”Weapons, explosives, dangerous articles, dangerous substances” option2=”Ignition, incendiary material mechanism” option3=”Explosives, switch mechanism and battery / power source” option4=”Explosives, detonator, switch mechanism and battery / power source” correct=”option4″]

An Improvised Explosive Device (IED) typically consists of four main components:
1. **Explosives:** The main charge that causes the damage (e.g., dynamite, C4, homemade explosives).
2. **Detonator (or Initiator):** A small charge or device used to initiate the main explosive charge. This is often the most sensitive part.
3. **Switch Mechanism:** The device that triggers the detonator. This can be a simple switch, a timer, a remote control, a pressure plate, etc.
4. **Battery / Power Source:** Provides the energy needed to activate the switch and detonator.
Option D lists these four essential components of a typical IED.

The four core components of an IED are the explosive material, the detonator, the trigger mechanism, and the power source.

IEDs are characterized by their improvised nature, meaning they are constructed from non-standard military components. While the four main components are common, the materials and construction methods can vary widely, making them challenging to detect and counter. Other components might be added, such as fragmentation material (nails, ball bearings), but these are additions to the core explosive train.

First Aid Fire Extinguishers are known as

[amp_mcq option1=”Fire tenders” option2=”Foam tenders” option3=”Portable fire extinguishers” option4=”DCP tenders” correct=”option3″]

“First Aid” in the context of fire fighting refers to the initial response to a small fire before it grows out of control or before professional firefighters arrive. Portable fire extinguishers are designed to be used by individuals present at the scene for this initial, immediate attack on a small fire. They are distinct from larger fire fighting apparatus like fire tenders or specialized vehicles (foam tenders, DCP tenders) that are operated by trained fire services.

Portable fire extinguishers are the primary tools used for “First Aid” fire fighting, enabling individuals to tackle small fires quickly.

Different types of portable fire extinguishers exist for different classes of fires (e.g., water, foam, dry chemical powder (DCP), CO2, wet chemical). Using the correct type of extinguisher for the specific fire is crucial for effective and safe fire fighting. Training on the proper use of portable extinguishers is often part of basic fire safety education.