Offence affecting human body MCQ Quiz - Objective Question with Answer for Offence affecting human body - Download Free PDF

The correct answer is attempt to murder

Key Points

• Relevant Provision:
  • Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
• Key Elements of Attempt to Murder:
  • There must be a clear intention to cause death.
  • An act is done towards the commission of murder.
  • The act fails to cause death, but is capable of causing death.
• Application to the Case:
  • "A" shoots at "B" with the intention to kill — the mens rea (intention) is clear.
  • Although "B" survives, the act qualifies as an attempt, not murder, because death did not occur.
  • Hence, "A" is liable under Section 307 IPC for attempt to murder.
• Punishment: Imprisonment up to 10 years, or life imprisonment, and may also include fine.

Additional Information

• Murder: Not applicable as "B" is alive.
• Culpable homicide: Also involves causing death; here, death has not occurred.
• Hurt: Too mild — does not reflect the intention to kill, which is present here.

The correct answer is woman

Key Points

• Section 354C of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
• Definition of Voyeurism:
  • A man commits the offence of voyeurism when he:
  • Watches, or
  • Captures the image of a woman engaging in a private act, in circumstances where she would usually expect not to be observed,
  • And disseminates such image without her consent.
• Key Elements:
  • The act is done without the woman’s consent.
  • The woman has a reasonable expectation of privacy during the act (e.g., changing clothes, using a restroom).
  • It is gender-specific — only women are protected under this provision.
• Punishment:
  • First conviction: Imprisonment of 1 to 3 years + fine.
  • Second or subsequent conviction: Imprisonment of 3 to 7 years + fine.

Additional Information

• Boy: Not covered under Section 354C IPC.
• Eunuch: Not specifically protected under this section.
• All of these: Incorrect – the offence legally protects only women under the IPC.

The correct answer is nature of injuries

Key Points

• Section 324 IPC – Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means:
  • Applies when hurt (less severe injury) is caused.
  • Involves the use of dangerous weapons or means, such as fire, acid, iron rods, etc.
  • Punishment: Up to 3 years or fine, or both.
• Section 326 IPC – Voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means:
  • Applies when grievous hurt (serious injury under Section 320 IPC) is caused.
  • Also involves the use of dangerous weapons or means.
  • Punishment: Up to life imprisonment, or 10 years and fine.
• Key Difference – Use of Weapons or Means:
  • Though both sections involve dangerous weapons, Section 326 is graver because it causes grievous hurt, whereas Section 324 deals with simple hurt.
  • So the use of specific types of weapons or dangerous means and the nature of injury caused form the distinguishing criteria.

Additional Information

• Intention: In both, the accused voluntarily causes injury. Intention exists in both.
• Use of weapons or means: Both involve same category of dangerous weapons or means (fire, heated substances, stabbing, cutting, poison, explosives, animals, etc.).
• None of the above: Incorrect because "nature of injuries" is clearly the differentiating factor.

The correct answer is Section 354 A

Key Points 

• Section 354A IPC – Sexual Harassment:
  • Specifically defines “sexual harassment” of women.
  • Introduced by the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 following the Justice Verma Committee Report after the Nirbhaya case.
• Acts Considered as Sexual Harassment under Section 354A:
  • Physical contact and advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures.
  • A demand or request for sexual favours.
  • Showing pornography against the will of a woman.
  • Making sexually coloured remarks.
• Punishment:
  • Varies from rigorous imprisonment up to 3 years and/or fine, depending on the specific act.

Additional Information

• Section 354 IPC: Deals with assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty, not specifically sexual harassment.
• Section 354B IPC: Pertains to assault or use of criminal force to disrobe a woman.
• Section 509 IPC: Covers words, gestures or acts intended to insult the modesty of a woman, but is broader and less specific than 354A.

The correct answer is Homicide

Key Points

• Definition:
  • The term “homicide” is a generic term which means killing of one human being by another.
  • It can be either lawful (justifiable or excusable, like self-defense) or unlawful (like murder or culpable homicide).
• Types of Homicide:
  • Lawful Homicide: E.g., killing in self-defense, by a police officer in the line of duty, or by court order.
  • Unlawful Homicide: Includes murder (Section 302 IPC) and culpable homicide (Section 299 IPC).
  • Homicide is the broadest term among the options given.

Additional Information

• Murder: A type of unlawful homicide defined under Section 300 IPC with higher degree of intention and seriousness.
• Culpable Homicide: Defined under Section 299 IPC, it is also a type of unlawful homicide, but not all culpable homicide is murder.
• Assassination: A non-legal term, refers to killing of a prominent person (like a political leader), usually for ideological or political reasons.

The correct answer is Kidnapping, seduction, extortion, slavery and forced labour.

• Sections of Indian Penal Code - 359 to 374 are related to Kidnapping, seduction, extortion, slavery and forced labour.

Key Points

•  Kidnapping and Abduction: Sections 359 to 374 under IPC, 1860:
  • Kidnapping means taking away a person against his/her will by force, threat or deceit.
  • Kidnapping is classified into two categories in Section 359 of the Indian Penal Code and defined in Section 360 and 361 of the Indian Penal Code.
    • Kidnapping from India
    • Kidnapping from lawful guardianship.
• Section 360 explains kidnapping from India.
  • If any person takes a person beyond the limits of India against the consent of that person or against the consent of someone who is legally entitled to give consent on that person’s behalf, then the offence of kidnapping from India is committed
• Section 361 explains kidnapping from lawful guardianship
  • if a person takes away or entices a minor (i.e, a boy under the age of 16 years and a girl under the age of 18 years) or a person of unsound mind, away from his/her lawful guardian without the guardian’s consent, then that person commits the offence of kidnapping from lawful guardianship.
• Section 361 is to protect minor children from being seduced for improper purposes and to protect the rights and privileges of guardians having their custody.

Additional Information

• Section 307 in the Indian Penal Code Attempted murder.
• Section 377 deals with Unnatural offence.
• Section 375 of the IPC deals with Sexual offences including rape.You can relate section 375 of IPC ( with court room dramam movie Section 375 based on sexual offence)

The correct answer is option 2.Key Points

• Yes, in this scenario, the police officer would be guilty of wrongful confinement.
• Once a bail order has been issued by the court, the individual is entitled to be released from custody. Failure to release the individual constitutes wrongful confinement, as it involves unlawfully depriving them of their liberty.
• This action violates the individual's legal rights and can result in legal consequences for the police officer, including potential civil and criminal liabilities. 
• Section 340 of Indian Penal Code 1860 deals with wrongful confinement.
• Whoever wrongfully restrains any person in such a manner as to prevent that person from proceedings beyond certain circumscribing limits, is said “wrongfully to confine” that person. 

The correct option is Option 1.

Key Points

• Section 302 deals with the punishment for murder.
• Section 149 pertains to every member of an unlawful assembly guilty of an offence committed in the prosecution of the common object.
• Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with punishment for murder committed by any member of an unlawful assembly.
• The provision holds all the members of the unlawful assembly liable for the offence of murder if it is committed in the prosecution of the common object of that assembly.
• In the scenario presented, 10 persons were charged under section 302/149 IPC and six persons were acquitted.
  • This implies that only four persons remain accused.
  • Cannot be convicted for the offence under section 302/149 of IPC.
  • Explanation:
    • With only four persons remaining and six already acquitted, the charge under section 302/149 IPC may not be applicable because the essence of this section requires the involvement of at least five persons in the unlawful assembly.
    • If six persons have been acquitted, the remaining four cannot be held liable under section 302/149 IPC.
    • Given that six persons were acquitted, it means they were not found guilty of the offence.
    • Therefore, the remaining four individuals: Cannot be convicted for the offence under section 302/149 of IPC.

The correct answer is Option 3.

Key PointsProvisions under Indian Penal Code, 1860 regarding Acid Attack were added by the 2013 amendment to the Act under Sections 326A, 326B.

• Section 326A - Voluntarily causing grievous hurt by use of acid, etc.
  • Whoever causes permanent or partial damage or deformity to, or burns or maims or disfigures or disables, any part or parts of the body of a person or causes grievous hurt by throwing acid on or by administering acid to that person, or by using any other means with the intention of causing or with the knowledge that he is likely to cause such injury or hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and with fine.
    • Provided that such fine shall be just and reasonable to meet the medical expenses of the treatment of the victim.
    • Provided further that any fine imposed under this section shall be paid to the victim.
• Section 326B - Voluntarily throwing or attempting to throw acid 
  • Whoever throws or attempts to throw acid on any person or attempts to administer acid to any person, or attempts to use any other means, with the intention of causing permanent or partial damage or deformity or burns or maiming or disfigurement or disability or grievous hurt to that person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than five years but which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
  • Explanation 1 — For the purposes of section 326A and this section, "acid" includes any substance which has acidic or corrosive character or burning nature, that is capable of causing bodily injury leading to scars or disfigurement or temporary or permanent disability.
  • Explanation 2 — For the purposes of section 326A and this section, permanent or partial damage or deformity shall not be required to be irreversible.

Additional InformationIn Laxmi v. Union of India (2013), the Supreme Court outlined that establishments selling acid would need a licence to do so and have to be registered under the Poisons Act 1919. The judgement of the case further emphasized on following points:

• Sections 326A and 326B, which particularly addressed the offence of the acid assault, were added to Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
• The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was amended to incorporate Section 357B, which ensures that the victim will get reimbursement in addition to the penalties required under Sections 326A and 376D of the IPC. Whereas Section 357A was added to explain the victim compensation programmer.
• COMPENSATION - The victim of acid attack is entitled to compensation of at least three lakh rupees, according to the Government’s Victim Compensation Scheme, which also established a consistent method for paying the compensation.
• It was emphasized that no facility, not even a private hospital, could refuse the victim medical care.
• When hospitals are short on equipment, the victim should first get primary care before being transferred to the appropriate hospital.
• The restrictions on acid sales and purchases were imposed.

The correct answer is option 3.

Key Points

•  The scenario described raises legal questions under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), particularly concerning the liability of Raju for the accidental death caused by the axe flying off while he was cutting wood.
• To determine Raju's liability, one would look at concepts of "negligence" and "accidents" as outlined in the IPC.
• The concept of "Death by Negligence" is encapsulated under Section 304A of the IPC, which states that causing the death of any person by doing any rash or negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide shall be punished. For Raju to be liable under this section, it must be established that his actions were "rash" or "negligent."
• Rashness and negligence relate to the failure to take the care that a reasonable person would in similar circumstances. If Raju was aware that children were playing in the area and still chose to cut wood there without taking adequate precautions to prevent potential harm, his actions could be considered negligent, especially if a reasonable person would have foreseen the risk of the axe flying off and causing injury.
• However, it's important also to consider the provisions related to acts done by accident. An "act done by accident" under Section 80 of the IPC exempts a person from criminal liability for an act that was not intended to cause harm and occurred without negligence or ill will. 
• The determination of Raju's liability would thus depend on the circumstances surrounding the incident, such as whether Raju took reasonable precautions to ensure that cutting wood in the vicinity of playing children was safe. If in the same situation, there was no child but some grown man the situation would come under Section 80 and defence of Accident would be given.
  Given that this scenario seems closely related to an illustration within legal discussions on negligently caused accidents and liability, it is critical for a thorough investigation to consider all factors, including Raju's awareness of the risk, the precautions taken (if any), and the foreseeability of the accident, before a determination of liability is made.

The correct option is Option 1.

Key Points

• Rape is forced sexual intercourse, including vaginal anal or oral penetration, penetration may be by a body part or an object.
• Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, rape is committed by a man when he has sexual intercourse with a woman under any of the following circumstances:
  • Against her will.
  • Without her consent.
  • With her consent obtained by using fear of death or hurt against her or someone she cares about.
  • With her consent, knowing that he is not her husband, she believes he is another man to whom she is married or believes herself to be lawfully married.
  • With her consent, when she is unable to understand the nature and consequences of giving consent due to unsoundness of mind, intoxication, or the administration of stupefying or unwholesome substances.
  • With or without her consent, when she is under 18 years of age.
  • When she is unable to communicate consent.
• Criminal Law (Amendment) Act 2013:
  • Under the Act, the minimum sentence of rape was altered from seven years to ten years.
  • Furthermore, in cases which resulted in the death of the victim being left in a vegetative state, the minimum sentence has been duly increased to twenty years.

Additional Information

• Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ( POCSO): 
  • ​The Act was enacted to protect the children from sexual assault, sexual harassment, and pornography.
  • The POCSO Act raised the age of consent to 18 years (which was 16 till 2012) and criminalizes all sexual activities for those under 18 even if consent was factually present between two minors.
  • This Act was also amended in 2019 to make provisions for enhancement of punishment for various offences to ensure safety, security & dignity of a child.

The correct option is All of the above.

Key Points

• Section 299:
• This section deals with Culpable homicide. 
• It states that whoever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death, commits the offence of culpable homicide.
• Culpable homicide is not murder: 
  • If it is in the exercise of the right to private defence.
  • If is done by the public servant acting in good faith.
  • If it is committed without premeditation in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel.
  • It is not murder when the person whose death is caused, being above the age of eighteen years, suffers death or takes the risk of death with his own consent.

The Correct answer is Culpable homicide 

Key PointsSection 299 of the IPC addresses the concept of culpable homicide as the act of causing another person's death. According to this section, an individual commits culpable homicide if the act resulting in death is carried out with the intention of causing death, or with the awareness that death is a probable outcome. Furthermore, the provision includes scenarios where the act is done with the intent to inflict bodily injury that is likely to lead to death, or with the understanding that the inflicted bodily harm has a high likelihood of resulting in death.

Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code delineates murder as a more severe instance of culpable homicide. While culpable homicide does not always equate to murder, for a case of culpable homicide to be classified as murder, it must meet one of the four specified conditions under Section 300:

• Murder occurs when the act causing death is performed with the explicit intent to cause death.
• It is considered murder if the act is carried out with the intention of inflicting bodily harm that the perpetrator knows is likely to result in the death of the person who suffers the harm.
• The act is deemed murder if done with the intention to cause bodily harm, and the harm intended is of such a nature that it would, in the ordinary course of events, likely lead to death.
• Murder is also defined as committing an act that the doer has knowledge of being so dangerously life-threatening that it will in all probability cause death or such severe bodily harm that is likely to result in death, without any justification for taking such a risk.
• These criteria escalate culpable homicide to the graver classification of murder, except in specifically excluded circumstances as outlined within the legal provisions.

 Additional InformationIn Re: Palani Goundan vs Unknown on 7 April 1919 The Hon’ble High Court overruled the judgement of the sessions court and held that the accused will not be held liable for murder or culpable homicide. He will instead be held liable only for the grievous hurt caused when using the ploughshare to hit the victim and for tampering with evidence.

The correct answer is option 3Key Points

• Section 353 comes under Chapter 16 (Offence against human body) of Indian Penal Code 1860 deals with assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty.
• Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any person being a public servant in the execution of his duty as such public servant, or with intent to prevent or deter that person from discharging his duty as such public servant, or in consequence of anything done or attempted to be done by such person to the lawful discharge of his duty as such public servant, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
• The offence under section 353 is a non-bailable and cognizable offence provided under 1st schedule of Cr.P.C. 1973.

The correct answer is 'Fine up to Rs.500.'

Key Points

• Provision under IPC for vitiating the atmosphere:
  • The Indian Penal Code (IPC) prescribes a penalty for individuals who voluntarily vitiate the atmosphere in a place.
  • Vitiating the atmosphere generally refers to actions that make the environment harmful, unpleasant, or unsafe for individuals in that location.
  • Under the IPC, such actions are punishable with a fine of up to Rs.500.
  • This penalty ensures accountability for actions that compromise public health, safety, or peace in a given space.

Additional Information

• Explanation of Incorrect Options:
  • Fine up to Rs.1000: The IPC specifies a fine of up to Rs.500 for this offense, not Rs.1000. The higher amount mentioned in this option does not align with the prescribed penalty.
  • Imprisonment term up to 6 months: The IPC does not prescribe imprisonment for this specific offense. It is a minor offense that carries a monetary penalty rather than a jail term.
  • Imprisonment term up to 3 months: Similar to the previous option, imprisonment is not mentioned as a punishment for voluntarily vitiating the atmosphere under the IPC.
• Purpose of the fine:
  • The fine serves as a deterrent against actions that harm the atmosphere of a place, ensuring public spaces remain safe and conducive for everyone.
  • It also emphasizes the importance of individual responsibility in maintaining public health and order.