Miscellaneous Archives

111. Which one of the following statements is correct ? The term “Force Cus

Which one of the following statements is correct ?
The term “Force Custody” means

[amp_mcq option1=”custody of confiscated goods by the CISF.” option2=”arrest of suspects by the CISF.” option3=”building and other infrastructure held by the CISF.” option4=”arrest or confinement of a member of the CISF.” correct=”option4″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

In the context of a uniformed force like the CISF, “Force Custody” typically refers to the arrest or confinement of a member of the force by the force authorities themselves for disciplinary or legal reasons.

Force custody is an internal disciplinary or punitive measure applied to members of the force, distinct from the custody of civilians or goods.

Provisions related to force custody are usually outlined in the act or rules governing the specific force (like the CISF Act, 1968). It allows the force to detain its own members under specific circumstances, subject to rules and limitations.

112. ‘A’ voluntarily throws into a river, a ring belonging to ‘Z’ with the

‘A’ voluntarily throws into a river, a ring belonging to ‘Z’ with the intention of thereby causing wrongful loss to ‘Z’. ‘A’ has committed

[amp_mcq option1=”theft.” option2=”mischief.” option3=”criminal breach of trust.” option4=”cheating.” correct=”option2″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

The scenario described, where ‘A’ voluntarily throws ‘Z’s ring into a river with the intention of causing wrongful loss to ‘Z’, fits the definition of ‘mischief’ under Section 425 of the Indian Penal Code. Mischief involves intentionally causing destruction to any property, or any such change in any property or in the situation thereof as destroys or diminishes its value or utility, or affects it injuriously, with the intent to cause wrongful loss or damage. Throwing the ring into the river destroys its utility and causes wrongful loss.

– Mischief requires intention to cause wrongful loss or damage.
– It involves causing destruction or diminution of value/utility of property.
– Throwing an item into a river to cause loss constitutes mischief.

Theft (A) requires taking property out of possession. Criminal breach of trust (C) involves misappropriating property entrusted to someone. Cheating (D) involves deception to cause delivery of property or harm. None of these applies to the destruction of property as described.

113. Under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, the term ‘Human Rights

Under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, the term ‘Human Rights’ has been defined as

[amp_mcq option1=”basic rights to food, shelter and clothing.” option2=”inalienable rights of a human being.” option3=”the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed by the Constitution of India.” option4=”the rights ensuring liberty, equality, fraternity and state sovereignty.” correct=”option3″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, defines ‘Human Rights’ in Section 2(1)(d) as “the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed by the Constitution or embodied in the International Covenants and enforceable by courts in India”. Option C precisely captures the core definition focusing on rights guaranteed by the Indian Constitution.

– The definition includes rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India.
– It also includes rights embodied in International Covenants enforceable by courts in India.
– The rights specifically mentioned are related to life, liberty, equality, and dignity.

The Act established the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and State Human Rights Commissions (SHRCs) to protect and promote human rights in India. The definition is broad enough to include internationally recognized human rights that are also enforceable domestically.

114. The National Human Rights Commission conducts inquiries into incidents

The National Human Rights Commission conducts inquiries into incidents where human rights have been violated. Such inquiry shall be initiated by the Commission

[amp_mcq option1=”only upon a petition presented to it by a victim.” option2=”only when it is directed to do so by a Court.” option3=”suo motu or on a petition by the victim or any person on the victim’s behalf or on a direction or order of any Court.” option4=”only when such complaint is forwarded by the concerned SHO.” correct=”option3″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct answer is C.

Section 12(a) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, which lists the functions of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), states that the Commission shall “inquire, suo motu or on a petition presented to it by a victim or any person on his behalf, into complaint of… violation of human rights…”. This covers the initiation of inquiry suo motu or upon petition. While the Act primarily lists suo motu action and petitions as modes of initiation, courts frequently direct the NHRC or State Human Rights Commissions to conduct inquiries into matters involving human rights violations. This is a recognized mode of initiation in practice.

Options A, B, and D are restrictive. Option A is incorrect because suo motu action is also permitted. Option B is incorrect because the Commission can initiate inquiry suo motu or on a petition, not just upon court direction. Option D is incorrect as complaints are not initiated solely based on forwarding by an SHO; the Commission receives complaints directly from victims, others, or acts on its own motion. Option C covers the range of ways initiation can occur: on its own motion, based on complaints/petitions, and also upon direction from a Court.

115. Under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atr

Under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, which one of the following is not permitted?

[amp_mcq option1=”Anticipatory Bail” option2=”Registration of FIR without preliminary enquiry” option3=”Arrest of an accused by the Investigating Officer without prior approval” option4=”Bail” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct answer is A.

Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, states that “Nothing in section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 shall apply in relation to any case involving the commission of, or attempt to commit, any offence under this Act.” Section 438 of the CrPC deals with Anticipatory Bail. Therefore, Anticipatory Bail is explicitly prohibited under the SC/ST Act.

Section 18A, inserted later, further clarifies that preliminary inquiry shall not be required for registration of an FIR against any person and that the investigating officer shall not require any approval for arrest. This means Registration of FIR without preliminary enquiry (B) and Arrest of an accused without prior approval (C) are permitted/required under the Act. Regular Bail (D), applied for after arrest (under Section 439 CrPC), is not absolutely prohibited, although the conditions for granting it are stringent.

116. For the purpose of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, a ‘chil

For the purpose of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, a ‘child’ means a person who has not completed the age of

[amp_mcq option1=”14 years” option2=”16 years” option3=”18 years” option4=”21 years” correct=”option3″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct answer is C.

As per Section 2(aa) of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, inserted by the Amendment Act of 2006, a ‘child’ is defined as “a person who has not completed the age of eighteen years”.

Before the 2006 amendment, ‘child’ was defined as a person who had not completed the age of sixteen years. The amendment raised the age to 18 years to align with international conventions and other domestic laws like the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act. Section 2(f) defines ‘minor’ as a person who has completed sixteen years but not eighteen years.

117. ‘A’, a carrier, is entrusted by ‘Z’ with property to be carried by lan

‘A’, a carrier, is entrusted by ‘Z’ with property to be carried by land or by water. ‘A’ dishonestly misappropriates the property. Which one of the following offences was committed by ‘A’ ?

[amp_mcq option1=”Criminal breach of trust” option2=”Dishonest misappropriation of property” option3=”Mischief” option4=”Theft” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

When a carrier is entrusted by a person with property to be carried, and the carrier dishonestly misappropriates that property, this act constitutes the offence of Criminal Breach of Trust under Section 405 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

– Section 405 IPC defines Criminal Breach of Trust. The key elements are: (1) entrustment of property or dominion over property, and (2) dishonest misappropriation or conversion of that property, or dishonest use or disposal of that property in violation of any legal direction or contract.
– In the given scenario, the carrier (‘A’) is entrusted with the property (‘Z’s property) for a specific purpose (carriage). When ‘A’ dishonestly misappropriates it, all elements of criminal breach of trust are met.
– Theft (Option D) involves taking property out of possession without consent, not necessarily after entrustment. Dishonest misappropriation of property (Section 403 IPC, Option B) is a less severe offence and applies when property is found and then dishonestly misappropriated, not typically when it is acquired through entrustment for a purpose. Mischief (Option C) involves causing destruction or damage to property.

– The relationship between the entruster and the person entrusted is crucial in Criminal Breach of Trust. The property is voluntarily handed over or control is given, unlike theft where property is taken from possession without consent.
– Section 407 IPC specifically deals with Criminal Breach of Trust by a carrier, wharfinger or warehouse-keeper, prescribing a higher punishment (up to seven years imprisonment and fine) compared to general criminal breach of trust (up to three years imprisonment and fine). The act itself is Criminal Breach of Trust; Section 407 is an aggravated form of it.

118. Which one of the following with regards to offence of theft is correct

Which one of the following with regards to offence of theft is correct ?

[amp_mcq option1=”Theft is always an offence against ownership.” option2=”Dishonest intention is the gist of offence of theft.” option3=”Theft may or may not include moving of property in order to take the property away.” option4=”Theft may be of movable as well as immovable properties.” correct=”option2″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

Under the Indian Penal Code, 1860, theft is defined in Section 378. The gist of the offence of theft is the dishonest intention to take movable property out of the possession of any person without that person’s consent.

– Section 378 IPC defines theft. The key elements are: (1) dishonest intention, (2) to take movable property, (3) out of the possession of any person, (4) without that person’s consent, and (5) there must be a moving of the property in order to effect such taking.
– Option A is incorrect because theft is an offence against *possession*, not necessarily ownership. One can steal from a person who is lawfully in possession but not the owner.
– Option C is incorrect because the definition explicitly requires the *moving* of the property (Section 378 Explanation 5). The taking must be accompanied by motion.
– Option D is incorrect because theft applies only to *movable* property (Section 378). Immovable property cannot be stolen under the IPC definition of theft.
– Option B is correct as dishonest intention is the fundamental mental element (mens rea) required for the offence of theft.

– The term “dishonestly” is defined in Section 24 IPC as doing anything with the intention of causing wrongful gain to one person or wrongful loss to another person.
– “Movable property” is defined in Section 22 IPC to include corporeal property of every description, except land and things attached to the earth, or permanently fastened to anything which is attached to the earth.

119. ‘A’ sues ‘B’ for a libel imputing disgraceful conduct to ‘A’. ‘B’ affi

‘A’ sues ‘B’ for a libel imputing disgraceful conduct to ‘A’. ‘B’ affirms that the matter alleged to be libelous is true. Which one of the following is not a relevant fact ?

[amp_mcq option1=”Position of parties at the time when the libel was published” option2=”The relations of the parties at the time when the libel was published” option3=”Particulars of some dispute between A and B about a matter unconnected with the libel” option4=”Facts of some dispute between A and B which affected relations between them” correct=”option3″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

In a libel suit where the defense is that the matter alleged to be libelous is true, facts showing the position and relations of the parties at the time the libel was published, and facts of any dispute between them that affected their relations are generally relevant to establish context, motive, or the state of feelings, which might be relevant to the publication or its impact. However, particulars of a dispute between A and B about a matter *unconnected* with the libel are typically not relevant facts in determining the truth of the alleged libel or assessing damages, unless that unconnected dispute somehow provides a motive for the libel itself (which is not suggested here).

– Relevancy of facts in a court case is governed by the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
– Facts forming part of the same transaction, facts showing motive, preparation, conduct, or relationship of parties are often relevant under Sections 6-16 of the Act.
– In a defamation case, facts related to the relationship, background, and circumstances surrounding the publication of the statement are relevant to understand the context and evaluate the claim and defense.
– A dispute on an entirely unrelated matter, without a link to the alleged libel, is generally considered irrelevant as it does not help prove or disprove the truth of the libel or the circumstances of its publication.

– The defense of truth (justification) in a defamation case requires the defendant to prove that the statement published was substantially true.
– Facts that provide context for the relationship between the parties (options A, B, D) can be relevant for various aspects of the case, including potential motive, the impact of the statement, or assessing damages, depending on the specifics.

120. The In-line Hold Baggage System is prescribed to have a minimum throug

The In-line Hold Baggage System is prescribed to have a minimum throughput of

[amp_mcq option1=”450 bags” option2=”800 bags” option3=”1200 bags” option4=”1500 bags” correct=”option3″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct answer is C. The prescribed minimum throughput for an In-line Hold Baggage System (HBS) in major airports, as per BCAS guidelines, is typically 1200 bags per hour.

The In-line HBS is an automated system for screening checked baggage for explosives and other prohibited items. A high throughput is necessary to handle the volume of baggage processed at busy airports without causing delays.

The required throughput can vary slightly based on the category and volume of traffic at a specific airport, but 1200 bags/hour is a common minimum standard for ensuring efficient and effective baggage screening operations at medium to large airports.