Criminal Law (CLAT Legal-Aptitude): Questions 25 - 27 of 88
Get 1 year subscription: Access detailed explanations (illustrated with images and videos) to 1066 questions. Access all new questions we will add tracking exam-pattern and syllabus changes. View Sample Explanation or View Features.
Rs. 450.00 or
Question number: 25
» Criminal Law
Appeared in Year: 2013
Principle: Existence of all the alleged facts is relevant whether they occurred at the same time and place or at different times and places.
Facts: A, a permanent resident in a foreign country who never visited India, is accused of waging war against the Government of India by taking part in an armed insurrection in which property is destroyed, troops are attacked and prisons are broken open.
Only the alleged fact that A is accused of waging war against the Government of India is relevant
The existence of all the above mentioned alleged facts is relevant
Only the alleged fact of taking part by A in armed resurrection is relevant
The fact that A was a permanent resident in a foreign country who never visited India is not relevant
Question number: 26
» Criminal Law
Appeared in Year: 2009
The temporary release of a prisoner is called
A. Whoever intending to take any moveable property out of the possession of any person without that person’s consent, moves that property out of his or her possession, is said to commit theft.
B. A person who, without lawful excuse, damages any property belonging to another intending to damage any such property shall be guilty of causing criminal damage.
C. Damage means any impairment of the value of a property.
FACTS: Veena, an old lady of 78 years, used to live with her granddaughter Indira. Vienna was ill and therefore bedridden for several months. In those months, she could not tolerate any noise and it ’became quite difficult to clean her room. After she died, Indira hired a cleaner, Lucky, to clean the room and throw away any rubbish that may be there.
There was a pile of old newspapers which Veena had stacked in a corner of her room. Lucky asked Indira if he should clear away the pile of old newspapers, to which she said yes, Lucky took the pile to a municipality rubbish dump. While Lucky was sorting and throwing away the newspapers, he was very surprised to find a beautiful painting in between two sheets of paper. He thought that Indira probably wouldn’t want this old painting back, especially because it was torn in several places and the color was fading. He took the painting home, mounted it on a wooden frame and hung it on the wall of his bedroom. Unknown to him, the painting was an old masterpiece, and worth twenty thousand rupees. Before mounting the painting, Lucky pasted it on a plain sheet of paper so that it does not tear any more. By doing so, he made its professional restoration very difficult and thereby reduced its value by half.
Lucky’s neighbor Kamala discovered that the painting belonged to Indira. With the motive of returning the painting to Indira, Kamala climbed through an open window into Lucky’s room when he was away one afternoon and removed the painting from his house.
Question number: 27 (1 of 5 Based on Passage) Show Passage
» Criminal Law
Appeared in Year: 2011
Is Lucky guilty of criminal damage?
No, Lucky is not guilty of criminal damage as he has not destroyed the painting.
Yes, Lucky is guilty of criminal damage as he intentionally stuck the paper on to the painting
No, Lucky is not guilty of criminal damage as he did not intentionally impair the value of the painting.
No, Lucky is not guilty of criminal damage as he does not have the painting in his possession anymore.