Important MCQs Based On Latest Supreme Court Judgments For Law Examinations
1. In a murder trial, the prosecution relies on the accused's absconding after the crime, along with last seen evidence and recovery of the murder weapon. The accused argues that absconding alone cannot prove guilt. Which of the following propositions is correct?A) Absconding is conclusive proof of guilt under Section 8 of the Evidence Act, and no further corroboration is required. B)...
1. In a murder trial, the prosecution relies on the accused's absconding after the crime, along with last seen evidence and recovery of the murder weapon. The accused argues that absconding alone cannot prove guilt. Which of the following propositions is correct?
A) Absconding is conclusive proof of guilt under Section 8 of the Evidence Act, and no further corroboration is required.
B) Absconding is irrelevant unless the accused confesses to the crime during interrogation.
C) Absconding is a relevant fact under Section 8 of the Evidence Act but must be corroborated by other evidence to establish guilt.
D) Absconding is admissible only if the accused fails to explain it during trial, regardless of other evidence.
Correct Answer: C
CHETAN VERSUS THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 657
Explanation: The Supreme Court recently observed that while mere absconding after the commission of a crime does not by itself establish guilt, it is a relevant fact under Section 8 of the Evidence Act, as it reflects the conduct of the accused and may indicate a guilty mind.
Mere Absconding Not Proof Of Guilt, But Relevant Conduct Under S.8 Evidence Act : Supreme Court
2. In Vinod Infra Developers Ltd. v. Mahaveer Lunia & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 630, the Supreme Court reiterated the legal position on agreements to sell. Which of the following statements is correct as per the judgment?
A) An unregistered agreement to sell, if coupled with possession, creates a valid title in favor of the purchaser.
B) An agreement to sell confers immediate ownership rights on the purchaser, even without a registered sale deed.
C) An agreement to sell does not transfer any title or ownership unless followed by a suit for specific performance and a registered sale deed.
D) A Power of Attorney executed along with an agreement to sell is sufficient to convey title without registration.
Correct Answer: C
Explanation: The Supreme Court recently reiterated that in the absence of a suit for specific performance of a contract, an agreement to sell cannot be relied upon for claiming ownership or title over the property.
3. If an accused threatens a shopkeeper with a knife to pay ₹10,000 monthly but the shopkeeper refuses and files a complaint before any payment is made, can the accused be convicted under Section 387 IPC?
A) No, because the shopkeeper did not suffer any loss.
B) Yes, since the threat itself constitutes the offence.
C) No, unless the accused physically assaults the victim.
D) Yes, but only if the threat was made in public.
Correct Answer: B
M/S. BALAJI TRADERS VERSUS THE STATE OF U.P. & ANR. 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 682
Explanation: The Supreme Court recently observed that the offence under Section 387 of the Indian Penal Code doesn't require actual delivery of property; instead, putting a person in fear of death/grievous hurt for the purpose of extortion is sufficient.
4. A complainant files a Section 498A IPC case (3-year limitation) on the last day of limitation. The Magistrate takes cognizance two years later due to backlog. Is the prosecution time-barred?
A) Yes, because cognizance was taken beyond the limitation period.
B) No, since the complaint was filed within limitation.
C) Yes, unless the court condones the delay under Section 473 CrPC.
D) No, but only if the accused consents to the delay.
Correct Answer: B
Ghanshyam Soni v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
Explanation: The Supreme Court reiterated that the relevant date for computing the limitation period under Section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is the date of filing of the complaint or the institution of prosecution, not the date when the Magistrate takes cognizance.
5. In Kamla Nehru Memorial Trust v. UPSIDC (2025), the Supreme Court laid down the essential elements of a valid legal notice. Which of the following statements is incorrect as per the judgment?
A) A legal notice must be explicitly labeled as "legal notice" to be valid.
B) The notice must clearly convey the facts of default and impending legal consequences.
C) Reference to prior communications between parties can satisfy the requirement of factual clarity.
D) The notice must unambiguously express the sender's intent to initiate legal action.
Correct Answer: A
Explanation: The Supreme Court outlined the essential components of a valid legal notice, ruling that a notice does not necessarily have to be explicitly labeled as "legal" to be considered valid. The court held that if a communication sent to the recipient (noticee) effectively conveys the details of the default, potential consequences, and the sender's intent, it will qualify as a legal notice. Therefore, Option A is Correct.
Essential Elements Of Valid Legal Notice : Supreme Court Explains
6. Which of the following statements is incorrect regarding the constitutional obligation to inform an arrestee of the grounds of arrest under Article 22(1)?
A) When an arrest is made pursuant to a warrant, reading the warrant aloud to the arrestee constitutes sufficient compliance with Article 22(1).
B) The burden of proving compliance with Article 22(1) lies on the police authorities if the arrestee claims non-communication of grounds.
C) Separate written grounds of arrest must be furnished even in cases of arrest under a valid warrant to satisfy Article 22(1).
D) Failure to inform the grounds of arrest "as soon as may be" vitiates the arrest and renders custody unlawful.
Correct Answer: C
KASIREDDY UPENDER REDDY Versus STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS., 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 628
Explanation: The Supreme Court held that when an arrest is made under a warrant, the warrant itself (read aloud) serves as the grounds of arrest, and no separate document is required. Options A, B, and D reflect correct principles laid down in the judgment. Option C contradicts the ruling and is thus incorrect.
If Arrest Is Made On Warrant, No Separate Grounds Of Arrest Need To Be Given : Supreme Court
7. Under Section 239 of the CrPC, which of the following materials is legally permissible for a court to consider while deciding an application for discharge of the accused?
A) Defense-produced documents contradicting the prosecution's case.
B) Prosecution's charge sheet and evidence collected during investigation.
C) Oral arguments by the accused disputing the allegations.
D) Previous judicial findings in a similar case involving the same accused.
Correct Answer: B
STATE VERSUS ELURI SRINIVASA CHAKRAVARTHI AND OTHERS, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 633
Explanation: The Supreme Court held that discharge under Section 239 CrPC must be based solely on the prosecution's materials (e.g., charge sheet, witness statements, documents filed by the prosecution). Reliance on defense-produced materials (e.g., a CCI letter in the original case) or extraneous evidence at this stage is impermissible, as it amounts to a "mini-trial." The court's role is limited to assessing whether a prima facie case exists based on the prosecution's case, not evaluating the merits of the defense.
8. A State Legislature enacts a law imposing an "entertainment tax" on cable TV operators, while the Central Government simultaneously levies a "service tax" on the broadcasting services provided by the same operators. The cable operators challenge this as double taxation, arguing that broadcasting falls exclusively under the Union List (Entry 31, List I). Decide.
A) Strike down the State tax, as broadcasting is exclusively under the Union List, leaving no room for State legislation.
B) Uphold both taxes, ruling that the State's tax targets "entertainment" (Entry 62, List II) while the Centre's tax covers "broadcasting services" (Entry 97, List I), with no overlap in pith and substance.
C) Direct the State to refund taxes, as the Centre's service tax already covers the entire activity of broadcasting, making the State tax redundant.
D) Refer the matter to Parliament, as the conflict involves overlapping entries in the Union and State Lists.
Correct Answer: B
THE STATE OF KERALA AND ANR. Versus ASIANET SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS LTD. AND ORS. (and connect cases), 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 611
Explanation: The Supreme Court held that broadcasting constitutes a form of communication, while entertainment falls under the category of luxuries as outlined in Entry 62 of List II. Applying the doctrine of pith and substance, it reasoned that entertainment can be delivered through means of communication, making broadcasting merely incidental to it. As such, it does not directly encroach upon matters within the Union List. Consequently, both taxes function within their respective constitutional spheres, allowing the Centre and the State to concurrently impose service tax and entertainment tax on the activities undertaken by an assessee. Accordingly, Option B is Correct.
9. A public sector bank requires new employees to sign a standard-form contract with a clause imposing a ₹3 lakh penalty for resigning before completing 4 years of service. An employee challenges this clause as unconscionable and violative of Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
Assertion (A): The clause is valid because it imposes a reasonable financial penalty to deter early resignation and covers the bank's costs of re-recruitment, without restricting the employee's future employment opportunities.
Reason (R): Standard form employment contracts with financial penalties for early exit are not inherently void under Section 27 of the Contract Act, provided they serve a legitimate employer interest and are proportionate to the employee's salary and the employer's actual losses.
A. Both (A) and (R) are true, and (R) is the correct explanation of (A).
B. Both (A) and (R) are true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).
C. (A) is true, but (R) is false.
D. (A) is false, but (R) is true.
Correct Answer: A
Vijaya Bank & Anr. VERSUS Prashant B Narnaware, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 565
Explanation: The Court said that although the standard form of contract creates an unequal bargaining power to the employee, it cannot be invalidated solely on that ground unless it is shown that the contract's term is oppressive, unconscionable, or against public policy. Further, the Court held that exclusivity clauses cannot be termed as restrictive of trade practices under Section 27 of the Contract Act, as such clauses do not restrict future employment but only imposed a financial penalty for early exit.
Standard Form Employment Contracts : Supreme Court Lays Down Principles Of Interpretation
10. The Supreme Court reinstated the 3-year minimum practice requirement for judicial service candidates, overturning its 2002 decision that allowed fresh law graduates to apply. Which of the following statements best reflects the constitutional and jurisprudential basis for this reversal?
A) Article 233(2) of the Constitution explicitly mandates a minimum practice period for judicial service, leaving no discretion to the judiciary or executive.
B) Judicial independence under Article 50 requires practical courtroom exposure to ensure judges can adjudicate life, liberty, and property disputes without relying solely on theoretical knowledge.
C) The doctrine of stare decisis compelled the Court to revert to its 1993 All India Judges Association stance, as the 2002 deviation lacked empirical justification.
D) Fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(g) of practicing advocates would be violated if fresh graduates were allowed to compete for judicial posts without practical experience.
Correct Answer: B
All India Judges Association vs Union of India (Minimum Practice & LDCE issue), 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 601
Explanation: The Supreme Court emphasized that Judges adjudicate "life, liberty, property, and reputation" immediately, requiring practical courtroom experience, unattainable through academic training alone. This aligns with Article 50 (judicial independence). Thus, Option B is most appropriate amongst others.
Supreme Court Mandates Minimum Practice Of 3 Years As Advocate To Enter Judicial Service
(For feedback/suggestions, the writer can be approached at yash@livelaw-in.demo.remotlog.com)