Login Start Free Trial

Daily MCQ Paper — 7 April 2026

·
📝 Online Quiz Engine

Daily Practice Sheet — 50 Questions

Take this quiz online with timer, mark-for-review, instant scorecard, percentile, and per-question explanations. CLAT scoring scheme: +1 / -0.25.

Daily MCQ Paper — 7 April 2026

50 questions across all sections. Use the practice interface to attempt; review answers and explanations after submission.

  1. Q1. The doctrine of pith and substance is invoked to determine
    1. Whether a law is within the legislative competence of the enacting legislature
    2. Validity of a constitutional amendment
    3. Whether fundamental rights have been violated
    4. Whether a treaty has been validly executed
  2. Q2. Article 21 has been expanded to include right to clean environment in
    1. Subhash Kumar v State of Bihar
    2. M C Mehta v UoI (oleum gas)
    3. Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum
    4. All of the above
  3. Q3. Article 32 was famously called the heart and soul of the Constitution by
    1. B R Ambedkar
    2. Jawaharlal Nehru
    3. Sardar Patel
    4. K M Munshi
  4. Q4. The doctrine of eclipse applies to
    1. Pre-constitutional laws inconsistent with FRs
    2. Post-constitutional laws
    3. Constitutional amendments
    4. Treaties
  5. Q5. Which writ literally means we command and is issued to compel performance of public duty
    1. Habeas Corpus
    2. Mandamus
    3. Certiorari
    4. Prohibition
  6. Q6. Reservation in promotions for SC/ST under Article 16(4A) was upheld with conditions in
    1. Indra Sawhney
    2. M Nagaraj v Union of India
    3. State of Kerala v N M Thomas
    4. Janhit Abhiyan
  7. Q7. Right to privacy was declared a fundamental right under Articles 14, 19 and 21 in
    1. K S Puttaswamy v UoI 2017
    2. Selvi v State of Karnataka
    3. MP Sharma v Satish Chandra
    4. Kharak Singh v UP
  8. Q8. Living constitution doctrine is best illustrated in
    1. Joseph Shine v UoI decriminalising adultery
    2. Romesh Thappar
    3. State of Bombay v Narasu Appa Mali
    4. A K Gopalan v State of Madras
  9. Q9. Doctrine of severability ensures
    1. Only inconsistent part of statute is struck down if it can be severed
    2. Whole statute is struck down
    3. Statute is read down
    4. Court rewrites the statute
  10. Q10. Curative petition was conceptualised in
    1. Rupa Ashok Hurra v Ashok Hurra
    2. A R Antulay v R S Nayak
    3. Mohd Arif v Supreme Court
    4. S R Bommai v UoI
  11. Q11. Section 297 IPC/BNS Sec 297 penalises
    1. Defiling places of worship or sepulchre
    2. Selling obscene material
    3. Forgery
    4. Cheating
  12. Q12. The leading case on the test of deliberate and malicious intent under Sec 295A is
    1. Ramji Lal Modi v State of UP
    2. Mahendra Singh Dhoni v Yerraguntla Shyamsundar
    3. Both A and B
    4. State of Mysore v Henry Rodrigues
  13. Q13. Section 295A IPC (now BNS Sec 299) penalises
    1. Bona fide academic discussion of religion
    2. Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings
    3. Mere mention of any religion
    4. Religious conversion
  14. Q14. BNS Section 296 corresponds broadly to IPC Section
    1. 295
    2. 296
    3. 297
    4. 298
  15. Q15. Mens rea in offences under Sec 295A requires
    1. Mere knowledge
    2. Deliberate and malicious intention
    3. Negligence
    4. Strict liability
  16. Q16. BNS provisions corresponding to IPC Sec 503-507 (criminal intimidation) are
    1. Sec 351-355 BNS
    2. Sec 295-298 BNS
    3. Sec 100-102 BNS
    4. Sec 101-102 BNS
  17. Q17. In Manik Taneja v State of Karnataka 2015, the Supreme Court held that posting allegations on Facebook page of police
    1. Was clearly criminal intimidation
    2. Did not amount to criminal intimidation under Sec 503 IPC absent intent to alarm
    3. Was sedition
    4. Was defamation per se
  18. Q18. BNS Section 298 deals with
    1. Word with deliberate intent to wound religious feelings
    2. Theft
    3. Bigamy
    4. Forgery
  19. Q19. Punishment for criminal intimidation by anonymous communication is enhanced under
    1. Sec 506 IPC / Sec 351(3) BNS
    2. Sec 295A
    3. Sec 506 only
    4. Sec 503 only
  20. Q20. BNS replaces earlier IPC primarily in respect of
    1. All offences
    2. Terrorism, mob lynching and organised crime newly defined
    3. Only sexual offences
    4. Only economic offences
  21. Q21. BNSS Section 35(1)(b) (corresponding to CrPC Sec 41A) provides for
    1. Issue of notice in lieu of arrest in offences punishable up to 7 years
    2. Mandatory arrest in all cases
    3. Notice only for bailable offences
    4. Bail in all cases
  22. Q22. Arnesh Kumar guidelines on arrest were laid down in
    1. Arnesh Kumar v State of Bihar 2014
    2. D K Basu v State of WB
    3. Lalita Kumari v UP
    4. Joginder Kumar v UP
  23. Q23. BNSS Section 187 (CrPC 167) governs
    1. Maximum custody during investigation
    2. Bail
    3. Charge framing
    4. Discharge
  24. Q24. Satender Kumar Antil v CBI 2022 guidelines pertain to
    1. Bail jurisprudence and categorisation of offences
    2. FIR registration
    3. Witness protection
    4. Sentencing
  25. Q25. In CBI v Anupam Kulkarni 1992 the Supreme Court held that police custody beyond first
    1. 7 days from production
    2. 15 days from production
    3. 30 days from production
    4. 60 days from production
  26. Q26. In Vinubhai Haribhai Malaviya v State of Gujarat 2019 the Supreme Court held that magistrate may direct further investigation
    1. Even after taking cognisance of charge sheet
    2. Only before charge sheet
    3. Never after charge sheet
    4. Only with State consent
  27. Q27. BNSS Section 173(8) (further investigation) corresponds to
    1. Sec 167 CrPC
    2. Sec 173(8) CrPC
    3. Sec 161 CrPC
    4. Sec 164 CrPC
  28. Q28. In Pakala Narayana Swami v Emperor 1939 the Privy Council clarified that the cause of death
    1. Need not be in actual contemplation of declarant
    2. Must be in declarant contemplation but circumstances of transaction admissible even if death distant
    3. Must always be imminent
    4. Cannot be proved by oral statement
  29. Q29. Laxman v State of Maharashtra 2002 dealt with
    1. Use of dying declaration recorded by Magistrate vs by police/doctor
    2. Extra judicial confession
    3. Test identification parade
    4. Approver evidence
  30. Q30. Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act / Sec 26 BSA covers
    1. Statements of persons who cannot be called as witnesses
    2. All hearsay statements
    3. Only police statements
    4. Only documentary evidence
  31. Q31. Khushal Rao v State of Bombay 1958 laid down that dying declaration
    1. Cannot found conviction
    2. Can be sole basis for conviction if found wholly reliable
    3. Always requires corroboration
    4. Is hearsay and inadmissible
  32. Q32. Multiple dying declarations require the court to
    1. Reject all of them
    2. Examine consistency; convict on the strength of credible declaration
    3. Always pick the latest
    4. Always require corroboration
  33. Q33. Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 deals with
    1. Cheque dishonour for insufficiency of funds
    2. Bills of exchange
    3. Promissory notes
    4. Bank guarantees
  34. Q34. The complaint under Sec 138 must be filed within
    1. 15 days of dishonour
    2. One month of expiry of 15-day notice period after demand notice
    3. Six months of dishonour
    4. Three years of dishonour
  35. Q35. In Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod v State of Maharashtra 2014 the Supreme Court held that territorial jurisdiction for Sec 138 lies
    1. Where cheque was drawn
    2. Where drawee bank is situated where cheque is dishonoured
    3. Where complainant resides
    4. At any place where cheque was presented
  36. Q36. The Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Act 2015 effectively
    1. Restored jurisdiction at place where payee bank is situated
    2. Repealed Sec 138
    3. Doubled the punishment
    4. Made offence non-cognisable only
  37. Q37. In Meters and Instruments Pvt Ltd v Kanchan Mehta 2018 the Supreme Court emphasised
    1. Compounding of Sec 138 offences
    2. Mandatory imprisonment
    3. Withdrawal of prosecution power of court
    4. Strict construction without compounding
  38. Q38. The principle of res ipsa loquitur means
    1. The thing speaks for itself
    2. Let the seller beware
    3. Let the buyer beware
    4. Things spoken cannot be retracted
  39. Q39. Vicarious liability of master for tort of servant exists
    1. Only when master directs the act
    2. When act is done in the course of employment
    3. Only when servant is paid
    4. Never
  40. Q40. Volenti non fit injuria means
    1. Right of self defence
    2. To one who consents no injury is done
    3. Plaintiff must prove negligence
    4. No remedy without injury
  41. Q41. In Bhim Singh v State of J & K AIR 1986 SC the SC awarded exemplary damages for
    1. Defamation
    2. Wrongful confinement of an MLA
    3. Trespass
    4. Negligence
  42. Q42. Hindu Marriage Act 1955 applies to
    1. Only Hindus by religion
    2. Hindus, Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs
    3. All Indians
    4. Christians and Muslims also
  43. Q43. Under Section 13B HMA 1955 (mutual consent divorce) the cooling off period of six months can be waived
    1. Never
    2. In exceptional cases by competent court
    3. Only by High Court
    4. Only with State permission
  44. Q44. Triple talaq instant divorce was declared unconstitutional in
    1. Shayara Bano v UoI 2017
    2. Mohd Ahmed Khan v Shah Bano
    3. Sarla Mudgal v UoI
    4. Daniel Latifi v UoI
  45. Q45. Under Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act 2005 daughters
    1. Have coparcenary rights from birth
    2. Get rights only after fathers death
    3. Have no coparcenary rights
    4. Need brothers consent
  46. Q46. The Transfer of Property Act 1882 covers
    1. Transfer inter vivos of immovable property
    2. Transfer by will
    3. Succession
    4. Both A and B
  47. Q47. Section 10 of the Specific Relief Act post 2018 amendment provides that specific performance
    1. Is discretionary
    2. Shall be enforced subject to provisions of Sec 11(2), 14 and 16
    3. Is barred
    4. Is only equitable remedy
  48. Q48. Under Section 14 of amended SRA, specific performance cannot be granted in respect of contracts
    1. Where compensation is adequate
    2. Of personal service
    3. Determinable in nature
    4. All of the above (with refined list under amendment)
  49. Q49. Inter alia is a Latin phrase used in legal drafting meaning
    1. Among other things
    2. Within four corners
    3. Between the parties
    4. Alternatively
  50. Q50. The current Chief Justice of India (as of early 2026) is
    1. D Y Chandrachud
    2. Sanjiv Khanna
    3. U U Lalit
    4. N V Ramana