The Parliamentary Act Archives

91. Which one of the following statements is correct ?

Which one of the following statements is correct ?

[amp_mcq option1=”During the period of suspension, a member of the CISF continues to be subjected to the same responsibilities to which he would have been subject, if he were on duty.” option2=”A person temporarily ceases to be a member of the CISF during suspension.” option3=”The certificate of appointment is not required to be surrendered when a person ceases to be an ‘enrolled’ member of the CISF.” option4=”Clothing articles furnished to him need not be surrendered when one ceases to be an ‘enrolled’ member of the CISF.” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

During the period of suspension, a member of the CISF is relieved from active duty but remains under the administrative control and discipline of the force. They are still bound by the rules, regulations, and code of conduct of the CISF, even if they are not performing operational duties.

Suspension is a temporary removal from active duty, not a termination of membership. A suspended member is still subject to the disciplinary authority and rules of the force.

Option B is incorrect as suspension does not cease membership. Options C and D are incorrect; upon cessation of membership (e.g., by dismissal, resignation), official documents like the certificate of appointment and articles furnished by the force (uniforms, etc.) must be surrendered.

92. Any member of the CISF making an arrest under the provisions of the Ce

Any member of the CISF making an arrest under the provisions of the Central Industrial Security Force Act, 1968

[amp_mcq option1=”may detain the person up to a maximum of 10 days for the purpose of completing the preliminary investigation.” option2=”may obtain the person for a maximum of 48 hours for the purpose of interrogation.” option3=”must immediately hand over the person to the Security Officer of the industrial undertaking being protected by the CISF.” option4=”shall hand over the person to a police officer without unnecessary delay.” correct=”option4″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

Section 11 of the Central Industrial Security Force Act, 1968, states that any member of the Force making an arrest shall, without unnecessary delay, hand over the person so arrested to a police officer.

The primary role of the CISF is security, not comprehensive law enforcement investigation. Therefore, persons arrested by the CISF for criminal offences are to be transferred to the police for further investigation and legal process.

The police officer receiving the arrested person will then proceed according to the Code of Criminal Procedure, which includes producing the person before a Magistrate within 24 hours (excluding journey time) if further detention is required. Options A, B, and C describe procedures that are not standard legal procedures for handling arrested persons by security forces like CISF.

93. Which one of the following statements is correct ?

Which one of the following statements is correct ?

[amp_mcq option1=”No member of the CISF has any authority to carry out any search without a warrant.” option2=”Searches can be carried out after obtaining a search warrant from the Sector Inspector General.” option3=”There is no blanket prohibition on carrying out searches without a warrant.” option4=”Searches can be carried out without a warrant by any member of CISF in the presence of the local police.” correct=”option3″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

Security forces like the CISF are generally empowered under their governing act to carry out searches without a warrant under certain specific circumstances (e.g., hot pursuit, searching for stolen property within a protected area, searching suspects under reasonable suspicion), meaning there is no blanket prohibition on warrantless searches.

While searches typically require a warrant, security forces and police are usually provided powers for warrantless searches in specific, urgent situations or within defined areas under their protection, balancing security needs with individual rights.

The specific conditions and limitations for warrantless searches by the CISF would be detailed in the Central Industrial Security Force Act, 1968, and its associated rules. Option A is too absolute and unlikely for a security force. Options B and D describe specific procedures but do not negate the possibility of warrantless searches under statutory exceptions.

94. Under Section 354A of the IPC 1860, who can be a victim of the crime o

Under Section 354A of the IPC 1860, who can be a victim of the crime of sexual harassment ?

[amp_mcq option1=”Only a woman” option2=”Only a man” option3=”Both men as well as women” option4=”Only transgenders” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

Under Section 354A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the victim of the crime of sexual harassment, as defined by this section, is exclusively a woman. The section defines the acts of sexual harassment when committed by a man against a woman.

– Section 354A of the IPC was introduced specifically to define and criminalise sexual harassment against women.
– The language of the section explicitly refers to acts committed by a man which constitute sexual harassment towards a woman.
– While other provisions of law or different interpretations might address similar acts against other genders, Section 354A itself is gender-specific in defining the victim as a woman.

– The section lists various acts that constitute sexual harassment, including physical contact and advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures, demanding or requesting sexual favours, showing pornography against the will of a woman, and making sexually coloured remarks.
– Sections 354B, 354C, and 354D were also introduced/amended around the same time (post-Nirbhaya case amendments) to address related offences against women (assault or use of criminal force with intent to disrobe, voyeurism, and stalking, respectively).

95. Refusal to answer questions asked by a public servant in exercise of h

Refusal to answer questions asked by a public servant in exercise of his legal powers, by a person legally bound to state the truth on that particular subject is

[amp_mcq option1=”not a punishable offence.” option2=”punishable with maximum one month of imprisonment.” option3=”punishable with imprisonment for a term extending up to three months.” option4=”punishable with imprisonment up to six months.” correct=”option4″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

Refusal to answer questions asked by a public servant in exercise of his legal powers, by a person legally bound to state the truth on that particular subject is a punishable offence under Section 179 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The prescribed punishment is imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.

– Section 179 IPC deals with the offence of refusing to answer a public servant authorised to question.
– Two key conditions must be met: the person must be legally bound to state the truth on the subject, and the public servant must be asking the question in the exercise of their legal powers.
– The penalty is imprisonment up to six months or a fine up to ₹1,000, or both.

– This section aims to ensure cooperation with public servants who are legally authorised to gather information for official purposes.
– It is important to note that the person must be *legally bound* to answer the question; not all questions asked by public servants impose a legal obligation to answer truthfully.

96. Which of the following has the power to pass orders prohibiting any pe

Which of the following has the power to pass orders prohibiting any person from repeating or continuing a public nuisance ?

[amp_mcq option1=”A District Magistrate” option2=”Any Executive Magistrate empowered by the State Government or the District Magistrate in this behalf” option3=”A Sub-Divisional Magistrate” option4=”All of the above” correct=”option4″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

Under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, a District Magistrate, a Sub-Divisional Magistrate, or any other Executive Magistrate specially empowered by the State Government in this behalf, has the power to issue orders prohibiting any person from repeating or continuing a public nuisance or apprehended danger. Therefore, all of the listed authorities possess this power.

– Section 144 CrPC grants powers to Executive Magistrates to issue urgent orders in cases of nuisance or apprehended danger.
– This power is specifically vested in the District Magistrate and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate.
– The State Government also has the authority to empower other Executive Magistrates to exercise this power.

– Orders under Section 144 are typically prohibitory in nature and are aimed at preventing public nuisance or disturbances of public tranquility.
– Such orders are generally in force for a period not exceeding two months, but can be extended by the State Government under certain conditions.

97. Which one of the following is not correct ? Under the Code of Crimin

Which one of the following is *not* correct ? Under the Code of Criminal Procedure, no person who has been arrested by a police officer shall be discharged except

[amp_mcq option1=”on his own bond.” option2=”under the special orders of a magistrate.” option3=”on bail.” option4=”upon the completion of trial.” correct=”option4″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

Under the Code of Criminal Procedure, no person who has been arrested by a police officer shall be discharged except on his own bond, or on bail, or under the special orders of a Magistrate. Discharge upon the completion of trial is *not* a condition for discharge by a police officer as per the specified sections dealing with police arrest procedures.

– Section 59 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 specifies the circumstances under which a person arrested without warrant shall be discharged by a police officer. These are: on execution of his bond, on bail, or under the special order of a Magistrate.
– Discharge upon completion of trial is a judicial process that occurs after the trial proceedings are over, resulting in acquittal or conviction. This is not a decision or action taken by the arresting police officer regarding the initial custody.

– Sections like 57 (person arrested not to be detained for more than twenty-four hours) and 59 deal with the initial custody and release by the police.
– The option “upon the completion of trial” describes a judicial outcome (acquittal), not a method of discharge by the police after arrest and before being produced in court or remanded.

98. Every warrant of arrest issued by a court under the Code of Criminal P

Every warrant of arrest issued by a court under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 shall remain in force

[amp_mcq option1=”until it is executed.” option2=”until it is cancelled by any court.” option3=”for a period of one month.” option4=”for a maximum period of 3 months from the date of its issue.” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020

Download PDF Attempt Online

Every warrant of arrest issued by a court under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 shall remain in force until it is executed or until it is cancelled by the court which issued it.

– Section 70(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 explicitly states the duration of a warrant of arrest.
– Unlike summons which have a return date, a warrant of arrest does not automatically expire after a certain period unless specifically stated by the court or law in a particular context.
– The warrant remains legally valid and executable until the person is arrested or the court revokes the warrant.

– The options suggesting fixed time periods like one month or three months are incorrect according to Section 70(2).
– A court may cancel a warrant for various reasons, such as the appearance of the accused, a change in circumstances, or on its own motion.

99. Central Industrial Security Force was created

Central Industrial Security Force was created

[amp_mcq option1=”under an Act of the Parliament” option2=”as per a Resolution of the Cabinet” option3=”as per an Executive order issued by the Ministry of Defence” option4=”as per an Executive order issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2019

Download PDF Attempt Online

The correct option is A.

The Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) was established under an Act of the Parliament of India. The Central Industrial Security Force Act, 1968, provided for the constitution and regulation of an armed force of the Union for the better protection and security of industrial undertakings owned by the Central Government. Over time, its mandate has expanded to include other types of establishments and critical infrastructure.

CISF is one of the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) of India, under the Ministry of Home Affairs. Its primary role was initially focused on public sector undertakings but has expanded significantly to cover airports, seaports, power plants, government buildings, cultural heritage sites, Delhi Metro, etc.

100. Which one of the following legal powers has been conferred on CISF dep

Which one of the following legal powers has been conferred on CISF deployed at an undertaking which has been declared as a ‘prohibited place’?

[amp_mcq option1=”Power of arrest without any order from Magistrate and without a warrant” option2=”Power of arrest only with an order from Magistrate” option3=”Power of arrest along with power to grant bail in suitable cases” option4=”Power of arrest and power to investigate” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2019

Download PDF Attempt Online

The CISF Act, 1968, along with specific notifications declaring certain undertakings/areas as ‘prohibited places’ (often under acts like the Official Secrets Act), grants CISF personnel deployed there specific legal powers. For certain offenses committed within these prohibited areas, CISF personnel may be empowered to arrest without an order from a Magistrate and without a warrant. This enhanced power is crucial for maintaining security in sensitive or vital installations.

– CISF personnel have powers of search, seizure, and arrest, which vary depending on whether they are deployed under the CISF Act alone or also in connection with other laws applicable to the guarded premises (like Official Secrets Act for prohibited places).
– Deployment in a declared ‘prohibited place’ often involves specific gazette notifications conferring enhanced powers necessary for the security of the installation.
– The power of arrest without warrant is a key enhanced power granted in such sensitive areas to deal with immediate threats or offenses.

The extent of CISF’s legal powers is determined by the CISF Act, 1968, and any specific notifications or arrangements pertaining to the protected establishment, including its status as a ‘prohibited place’. This often includes treating CISF personnel as ‘police officers’ for specific purposes within the protected area.