BSA MCQ Quiz in తెలుగు - Objective Question with Answer for BSA - ముఫ్త్ [PDF] డౌన్‌లోడ్ కరెన్

The correct answer is 'The court may permit a party to ask any question to its own witness which could be asked in cross-examination by the opposing party.'

Key Points

• Section 157 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023:
  • This section governs the circumstances under which a party can put questions to its own witness.
  • Generally, a party cannot cross-examine its own witness as witnesses are expected to support the party’s case.
  • However, when the court determines that the witness is hostile or not testifying truthfully, it may allow the party to cross-examine its own witness.
  • Cross-examination under this provision includes asking questions that could typically be asked by the opposing party during cross-examination.
  • The aim is to elicit truthful testimony or clarify contradictions in the witness's statements.

Additional Information

• Option 1: A party can only ask leading questions to its own witness if the witness is hostile:
  • While it is true that leading questions can be asked to a hostile witness, this option is incomplete and narrowly defines the scope.
  • Section 157 permits broader questioning, including cross-examination, not just leading questions.
• Option 2: A party cannot ask any question to its own witness during the trial:
  • This option is incorrect as parties regularly ask questions to their own witnesses during examination-in-chief to establish their case.
  • The restriction applies only to cross-examination unless specifically permitted by the court.
• Option 3: A party can put any question to its own witness at any time during the trial:
  • This option is inaccurate as parties are restricted from cross-examining their own witnesses unless the court permits it under special circumstances, such as when the witness is hostile.
  • Questions during examination-in-chief are limited to non-leading and relevant questions to support the case.

The correct answer is 'Evidence can be given to contradict such answers if the witness answers falsely, or if the question concerns their impartiality or criminal convictions.'

Key Points

• Section 156 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023:
  • This section governs the admissibility of evidence to contradict a witness's answer to questions that challenge their credibility or character.
  • It allows evidence to be introduced only under specific circumstances, ensuring fairness and preventing unnecessary character assassination.
  • Such evidence can be presented when the witness answers falsely, or if the questions pertain to their impartiality or prior criminal convictions.
• Purpose:
  • The provision ensures that the credibility of the witness is scrutinized only when there is sufficient cause, such as dishonesty or criminal history.
  • It prevents irrelevant or malicious questioning that could harm the dignity of the witness or derail the proceedings.

Additional Information

• Explanation of Incorrect Options:
  • Option 2 - Evidence can always be given to contradict such answers if the question is relevant:
    • This is incorrect because evidence cannot always be introduced just because the question is relevant. The law limits the introduction of evidence to specific circumstances to ensure fairness and relevance.
  • Option 3 - Evidence can be given to contradict such answers only if the witness has been convicted of a crime:
    • This is incorrect as Section 156 also allows evidence to contradict answers when the witness answers falsely or when the questions concern impartiality, not limited to criminal convictions.
  • Option 4 - Evidence can be given to contradict such answers only if the question is about the facts of the case:
    • This is incorrect because the section specifically deals with questions that shake the credit of a witness by injuring their character, not just questions about the facts of the case.
• Importance of Section 156:
  • It strikes a balance between protecting witnesses from unwarranted attacks on their character and allowing legitimate scrutiny of their credibility.
  • Ensures procedural fairness in judicial proceedings by setting clear boundaries for when evidence can be introduced.

The correct answer is 'The court will forbid any question intended to insult or annoy, or any question that, although proper in itself, is needlessly offensive in form.'

Key Points

• Section 155 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023:
  • This provision governs the manner in which questions may be put to witnesses during a trial.
  • The objective is to ensure that the process of questioning witnesses is fair, respectful, and does not lead to harassment, intimidation, or undue distress for the witness.
  • The court has the power to intervene and forbid questions that violate these principles.
• Prohibition of Offensive or Insulting Questions:
  • The court will forbid any question that is intended to insult, annoy, or embarrass the witness.
  • Even if a question is relevant to the case, it may still be forbidden if it is needlessly offensive in its wording or tone.
  • This ensures that witnesses are treated with dignity and respect during the trial process.

Additional Information

• Option 1 - Questions that are too difficult to answer:
  • The court does not forbid questions simply because they are difficult for the witness to answer.
  • The complexity of a question is not a valid reason for prohibition as long as it is relevant and appropriate.
• Option 3 - Irrelevant questions:
  • While relevance is an important criterion, Section 155 specifically focuses on the tone and intent of questions rather than their relevance.
  • Irrelevant questions may be disallowed under other provisions, but they are not the focus of this section.
• Option 4 - Repeated questions:
  • Although repeated questioning may be discouraged, Section 155 does not explicitly address the issue of repetitive questions.
  • The prohibition of repetitive questions typically falls under the court's general discretion to manage proceedings efficiently and fairly, rather than under this specific section.

The correct answer is 'The court may forbid any question or inquiry that is indecent or scandalous, even if it is relevant to the case, unless it pertains to facts in issue or necessary matters to determine those facts.'

Key Points

• Section 154 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023:
  • This section gives the court the authority to regulate the questioning process during trials.
  • The court may prohibit any questions or inquiries that are deemed indecent or scandalous, even if they are relevant to the case.
  • However, the exception to this rule is when the indecent or scandalous questions pertain to facts directly in issue or are necessary for determining those facts.
  • This provision ensures the decorum of the court is maintained while still allowing for questions crucial to the case.

Additional Information

• Option 1: The court may forbid questions only if they are asked with malicious intent:
  • This option is incorrect because the court's authority under Section 154 is not limited to questions asked with malicious intent.
  • The court can also forbid questions that are indecent, scandalous, or irrelevant, regardless of the intent behind them.
• Option 2: The court may forbid any question that the opposing party objects to, regardless of relevance:
  • This option is incorrect because the court does not forbid questions solely based on objections from the opposing party.
  • The relevance and propriety of the question are determined by the court, not by objections alone.
• Option 4: The court may forbid any question or inquiry if it is irrelevant to the case:
  • This option is partially correct but incomplete, as it does not cover the court's authority to prohibit indecent or scandalous questions even if they are relevant.
  • Section 154 specifically addresses indecent and scandalous questions as well, making this option insufficient in scope.

The correct answer is 'The court may report the circumstances to the High Court or relevant authority if the question was asked by an advocate'

Key Points

• Overview of Section 153, Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023:
  • Section 153 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (Indian Evidence Act), 2023, pertains to questions asked during cross-examination that lack reasonable grounds.
  • The section ensures that questioning during court proceedings adheres to principles of fairness and relevance, avoiding harassment or baseless insinuations.
  • It is particularly important to maintain the decorum of the court and protect witnesses from unnecessary humiliation or abuse during cross-examination.
• Action the court can take under Section 153:
  • If the court finds that a question was asked without reasonable grounds, it has the authority to take measures to address the situation.
  • One such measure is reporting the circumstances to the High Court or relevant authority, particularly when the question is asked by an advocate.
  • This serves as a mechanism to hold advocates accountable for their conduct in the courtroom and ensure adherence to professional ethics.

Additional Information

• Why other options are incorrect:
  • Option 1: The court will fine the advocate who asked the question:
    • This is incorrect because Section 153 does not provide for the imposition of fines directly by the court for such conduct. Instead, reporting the matter to the appropriate authority ensures due process.
  • Option 2: The court will immediately dismiss the case:
    • This is incorrect, as the dismissal of an entire case is not a remedy provided under Section 153 for an unreasonable question. The court may take measures to address the specific conduct without affecting the broader case.
  • Option 3: The court will allow the question to be asked again with modifications:
    • This is incorrect because Section 153 focuses on addressing improper conduct rather than modifying or rephrasing the question. The court does not permit the re-asking of an inappropriate question.
• Professional conduct of advocates:
  • Advocates are expected to adhere to professional standards and ethical guidelines during court proceedings.
  • Unreasonable or improper questions can lead to disciplinary action by the Bar Council or other relevant authorities upon referral by the court.
• Judicial discretion:
  • The court's discretion under Section 153 ensures that the judicial process remains respectful, impartial, and focused on truth-finding rather than unwarranted accusations or harassment.

The correct answer is 'The question may be asked only if there is reasonable ground to believe that the imputation conveyed by the question is well-founded.'

Key Points

• Section 152 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023:
  • This section governs the rules regarding questioning witnesses in a manner that may affect their character.
  • The provision aims to ensure fairness and prevent misuse of questioning techniques that could damage a witness’s reputation unjustifiably.
• Permissibility of character-related questions:
  • Under Section 152, questions affecting a witness’s character can be asked only if there is reasonable ground to believe that the imputation conveyed by the question is well-founded.
  • This ensures that the questioning does not become a tool for harassment or unfair treatment of the witness.
  • The intent behind such questions must be genuine, and there must be a factual basis or evidence to justify the imputation.

Additional Information

• Option 1: 'The question may be asked without any reason as long as it is relevant to the case':
  • This is incorrect because relevance alone does not justify asking questions that may harm a witness’s character. There must be reasonable grounds for believing the imputation is well-founded.
  • Allowing questions solely based on relevance could lead to misuse and unnecessary damage to the witness’s reputation.
• Option 2: 'Any question about a witness’s character is allowed if it is related to the subject matter of the case':
  • This is incorrect because even if a question is related to the case, it cannot be asked unless there are reasonable grounds to believe the imputation is well-founded.
  • Merely being related to the case does not provide sufficient justification for potentially harmful character-related questions.
• Option 4: 'The question may be asked if the witness is unwilling to answer other questions':
  • This is incorrect because the witness’s unwillingness to answer other questions does not justify asking character-related questions.
  • Such questions must be based on reasonable grounds and cannot be used as a punitive measure against a witness’s reluctance to answer other queries.

The correct answer is 'The court may decide whether the witness should answer based on the question's potential to affect the witness's credibility and other relevant factors.'

Key Points

• Section 151 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023:
  • Section 151 empowers the court to exercise discretion when determining whether a witness should answer a question that may seem irrelevant on the surface but could impact the proceedings.
  • The court assesses the question's relevance, especially its potential to affect the credibility of the witness or the case's outcome.
  • This ensures a balance between uncovering the truth and protecting witnesses from unnecessary or intrusive questioning.
• Relevance and Credibility:
  • If a question, although seemingly irrelevant to the primary issue, can help assess the witness's reliability, the court may compel an answer.
  • The goal is to maintain the integrity of the judicial process by allowing examination of factors that could influence the court's perception of the witness.

Additional Information

• Incorrect Options:
  • Option 2: The statement that the court will always compel a witness to answer any question, regardless of its relevance, is incorrect. Courts weigh the relevance and potential impact of the question before making a decision.
  • Option 3: The assertion that the witness cannot refuse to answer any question, regardless of the subject matter, is also incorrect. Witnesses have protections against answering questions that are clearly irrelevant or violate their rights.
  • Option 4: The idea that the court must allow the witness to refuse to answer any irrelevant question without consideration of its effect on credibility is inaccurate. Courts can direct witnesses to answer questions if they affect the case, even if they appear irrelevant initially.
• Importance of Judicial Discretion:
  • Judicial discretion under Section 151 ensures a fair trial by balancing the need for truth with the protection of witnesses from undue harassment.
  • This provision prevents misuse of questioning while enabling the court to examine all aspects of the case thoroughly.

The correct answer is 'A witness can be compelled to answer only questions that are relevant to the suit or proceeding, as per Section 137'

Key Points

• Section 150 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023:
  • This provision outlines the conditions under which a witness can be compelled to answer questions during legal proceedings.
  • It ensures that witnesses are not subjected to irrelevant or intrusive questioning while maintaining the integrity of the judicial process.
  • A witness is obligated to answer only those questions that are relevant to the suit or proceeding, as specified under Section 137 of the same legislation.
• Section 137 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023:
  • Section 137 defines what constitutes relevant evidence and testimony during legal proceedings.
  • The aim is to ensure that only pertinent questions, which contribute to the resolution of the case, are posed to the witness.
  • This safeguards the witness from being unnecessarily harassed or compelled to disclose personal or unrelated information.

Additional Information

• Explanation of Incorrect Options:
  • Option 1: "A witness can be compelled to answer only questions about their own personal history" - This is incorrect because the law does not limit questioning to just personal history. Questions must relate to the case and be relevant, as per Section 137.
  • Option 2: "A witness can be compelled to answer any question related to the case, regardless of relevance" - This is incorrect because witnesses cannot be compelled to answer questions that are irrelevant or intrusive. The relevance of the question is a key determinant under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.
  • Option 3: "A witness can never be compelled to answer any question" - This is incorrect as witnesses can be compelled to answer relevant questions within the legal framework. Refusing to answer relevant questions can have legal consequences.
• Importance of Relevance in Legal Proceedings:
  • The principle of relevance ensures that the judicial process remains focused and efficient, avoiding unnecessary diversions.
  • It protects the rights and dignity of witnesses while ensuring that justice is served through the collection of pertinent evidence.

The correct answer is 'A witness may be asked questions to test veracity, identity, or credibility—even if such questions may incriminate or expose him to penalties'

Key Points

• Scope and limitation of questions under Section 149 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023:
  • Section 149 allows wide latitude during cross-examination to assess the credibility, identity, and veracity of a witness.
  • The purpose is to test the reliability of the testimony provided and uncover any inconsistencies or biases.
  • Questions may be posed even if they tend to incriminate the witness or expose them to penalties, as long as they serve the purpose of evaluating credibility or truthfulness.
  • This provision reflects the principle that cross-examination is a vital tool for ensuring justice by enabling the defense or opposing party to critically examine the testimony presented against them.

Additional Information

• Option 1: A witness cannot be asked questions that may expose him to criminal liability or penalty:
  • This option is incorrect because Section 149 explicitly allows questions that may incriminate or expose the witness to penalties if they are related to testing their credibility, veracity, or identity.
  • The protection against self-incrimination is limited and does not restrict cross-examination aimed at assessing the truthfulness of the testimony.
• Option 2: A witness may only be questioned about facts directly related to the case during cross-examination:
  • This option is incorrect as the scope of cross-examination under Section 149 is broader and includes questions related to credibility, identity, or any other matter that can shed light on the truthfulness of the witness.
  • Questions do not need to be strictly limited to the direct facts of the case.
• Option 3: In cases involving sexual offences, the past sexual conduct of the victim may be examined to determine consent:
  • This option is incorrect because Section 149, along with other provisions, generally prohibits the use of a victim’s past sexual conduct to discredit or infer consent. This aligns with laws protecting victims of sexual offences from undue trauma during cross-examination.
  • The focus is on ensuring fair treatment and preventing victim-blaming tactics that undermine justice.

The correct answer is 'The witness’s attention must be drawn to the specific parts of the writing intended for contradiction.'

Key Points

• Section 148 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023:
  • This section governs the procedure for contradicting a witness during cross-examination using their previous written statements.
  • The primary condition is that the witness must be explicitly directed to the parts of the document that the opposing counsel seeks to use for contradiction.
  • Drawing the witness’s attention to specific sections ensures fairness and clarity, allowing the witness to respond adequately without being misled or confused.
  • This rule prevents misuse of written statements and ensures the credibility of cross-examination processes.

Additional Information

• Option 1: A witness cannot be cross-examined on previous statements without their prior consent:
  • This is incorrect because a witness’s consent is not required for cross-examination under Section 148. Cross-examination is a legal right of the opposing counsel and does not depend on the witness's willingness.
  • The focus is on procedural fairness rather than obtaining permission from the witness.
• Option 3: The entire document must be read out in court before the contradiction is made:
  • This is incorrect because reading out the entire document in court is unnecessary and impractical. Only the relevant parts of the statement need to be highlighted for contradiction.
  • The emphasis is on specific sections rather than the entire document to save time and maintain the relevance of the cross-examination.
• Option 4: The written statement must be proved before the cross-examination begins:
  • This is incorrect because proving the document is not a prerequisite for cross-examination. The document can be used for contradiction during cross-examination, and its authenticity can be established later if required.
  • The focus is on the procedural aspect of contradiction rather than proving the document beforehand.