Unit IV · Topic 10Theories and kinds of punishments, compensation to the victims of crime – Previous Year Questions

22 previous year questions on Theories and kinds of punishments, compensation to the victims of crime from UGC NET Law papers (2010–2026), including 1 statement-based questions. The correct option is marked in green.

Questions

22 questions

2010

Read the following paragraph and answer the Question Nos. 49 and 50. Protection of society and stamping out criminal proclivity must be the object of law, which must be achieved by imposing appropriate sentence. Therefore, law as a cornerstone of the edifice of "order" should meet the challenges confronting the society. In Operating the sentencing system law should adopt the corrective machinery or the deterrence based on factual matrix. By deft modulation sentencing process be stern where it should be and tempered with mercy where it warrants to be. The facts and given circumstance in each case, the nature of crime, the manner in which it was planned and committed, the motive for the commission of crime, the conduct of the accused, the nature of weapons used and all other attending circumstance are revelant facts which whould enter into the area of consideration.

What is the object of law?

  1. (a)Safeguarding individual interests
  2. (b)Permitting the individual to earn and become rich
  3. (c)Protection of society and stamping our criminal proclivity✓
  4. (d)None of the above
Answer & explanation

Ans. (c) : The object of law is the protection of society and stamping out criminal proclivity.

2010

While imposing sentence what are the relevant considerations?

  1. (a)The nature of crime only
  2. (b)The manner in which it was planned and committed only
  3. (c)The motive for the commission of crime only
  4. (d)All the above are relevant considerations✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : While imposing sentence the following should be considered: (1) What is the nature of the offence (2) The manner in which the offence was planned and committed and the motive for committing the offence.

2014

The real and abiding concern for the dignity of human life was decided in the case of:

  1. (a)Rajendra Prasad v. State of U.P.
  2. (b)Mohindra Singh v. Delhi Administration
  3. (c)Jayed Ahmed v. State of Maharashtra
  4. (d)Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : The real and complete decision regarding the dignity of human life was given in the case of Bachan Singh vs. State of Punjab (1980).

2014

Which of the mitigating factors do not justify the award of death penalty?

  1. (a)Where the murder has been previously planned
  2. (b)Such murder involves exceptional depravity
  3. (c)When such murder was against a public servant while on duty
  4. (d)When the offence was committed by the accused under the influence of extreme mental disturbance✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : Following do not justify the award of death penalty-

Where the murder has been previously planned.

Where such murder involves exceptional depravity.

Where such murder is against a government servant on duty. Therefore, when the offence has been committed by the accused under the influence of extreme mental disturbance, this fact does not justify the award of death penalty.

2015

'Imposing punishment implies that some one should be legally authorised to impose it upon the offender'. In which of the following cases a private person can impose such punishment?

  1. (a)Where the law recognises moral blame worthiness
  2. (b)Where there is justification for punishing any person provided the offender had broken a law✓
  3. (c)Where one can establish the connection between punishent and crime
  4. (d)Where the act falls within a retroactive penal legislation
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : The intent of imposition of punishment is that someone should be legally authorized to impose the offender. This also happens in such cases where there is justification of punishing a person provided the offender has committed an offence and in such cases a private person can impose punishment.

2016

In which of the crimes retributive theory strikes the moral blameworthiness of the offender to punish him?

  1. (a)Clamping prohibitory orders
  2. (b)Sexual harassment at workplace✓
  3. (c)Wilful attempt to defame
  4. (d)Common intention to commit riot
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : In the offence of sexual harassment at workplace, the retributive theory strikes the moral blameworthiness of the offender to punish him. The retributive theory of punishment is based on the feeling of retaliation or revenge. According to this principle, the criminal should be punished accordingly. According to Kant, this principle is based on the proverb of "tit for tat".

2016

Which of the conditions are essential for enhanced punishment to be offender with previous conviction?

  1. (a)The previous conviction must have been for not less than 3 years of imprisonment
  2. (b)The subsequent offence is not punishable with imprisonment for more than 3 years
  3. (c)The offence must be an offence relating to property or coin or government stamp✓
  4. (d)The previous conviction was not in India
Answer & explanation

Ans. (c) : According to section 75 of Indian Penal Code- 'A' who is liable for an enhanced punishment for an offence punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term of 3 years or more under Chapter 12 (relating to coins and stamps), Chapter 17 (regarding offences against property) of this Code by any court in India, shall be punishable with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 10 years.

2017

In which of the crimes retributive theory strikes the moral blameworthiness of the offender to punish him?

  1. (a)Clamping prohibitory orders
  2. (b)Sexual harassment at workplace✓
  3. (c)Wilful attempt to defame
  4. (d)Common intention to commit riot
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : In the offence of sexual harassment at workplace, the retributive theory strikes the moral blameworthiness of the offender to punish him. The retributive theory of punishment is based on the feeling of retaliation or revenge. According to this principle, the criminal should be punished accordingly. According to Kant, this principle is based on the proverb of "tit for tat".

2017

Which of the conditions are essential for enhanced punishment to be offender with previous conviction?

  1. (a)The previous conviction must have been for not less than 3 years of imprisonment
  2. (b)The subsequent offence is not punishable with imprisonment for more than 3 years
  3. (c)The offence must be an offence relating to property or coin or government stamp✓
  4. (d)The previous conviction was not in India
Answer & explanation

Ans. (c) : According to section 75 of Indian Penal Code- 'A' who is liable for an enhanced punishment for an offence punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term of 3 years or more under Chapter 12 (relating to coins and stamps), Chapter 17 (regarding offences against property) of this Code by any court in India, shall be punishable with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 10 years.

2018

Under Section 65 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, sentence of imprisonment for non-payment of fine shall be limited to:

  1. (a)One-half of the maximum term of imprisonment fixed for the offence
  2. (b)One-third of the maximum term of imprisonment fixed for the offence
  3. (c)One-fourth of the maximum term of imprisonment fixed for the offence✓
  4. (d)One-fifth of the maximum term of imprisonment fixed for the offence
Answer & explanation

Ans. (c) : One-fourth of the maximum term of imprisonment fixed for the offence

Explanation: According to Section 65 of the Indian Penal Code 1860, if the offender is sentenced to both imprisonment and fine, and default occurs in payment of the fine, the court may direct that the offender be imprisoned, which may extend up to one-fourth of the maximum term of imprisonment for that offence.

2019

In which of the following cases did the Supreme Court of India strike down Section 303 IPC as unconstitutional?

  1. (a)Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab✓
  2. (b)Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab
  3. (c)Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab
  4. (d)Mithu v. State of Punjab
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) : The Supreme Court declared Section 303 of the Indian Penal Code unconstitutional in the case of Mithu Singh v. State of Punjab.

2019

Which section of Indian Penal Code deals with solitary confinement?

  1. (a)Section 73 of IPC✓
  2. (b)Section 72 of IPC
  3. (c)Section 71 of IPC
  4. (d)Section 70 of IPC
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) : Section 73 of the Indian Penal Code is related to solitary confinement, according to which, whenever any person is convicted of an offence for which the Court has power under this Code to sentence him to rigorous imprisonment, the Court may by its sentence order that the offender shall be kept in solitary confinement for any portion or portions of the imprisonment to which he is sentenced, not exceeding three months in the whole.

2019Sequence / order

Arrange the following judgments of the Supreme Court on the issue of constitutionality of death penalty in chronological order?

Rajendra Prasad v. State of UP

Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab

Jagmohan Singh v. State of UP

Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab

Choose the correct option:

  1. (a)1, 2, 3, 4
  2. (b)3, 2, 1, 4
  3. (c)4, 3, 2, 1
  4. (d)3, 1, 4, 2✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : Chronological order of Supreme Court judgments -

Jagmohan Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (AIR 1973 SC)

Rajendra Prasad v. State of Uttar Pradesh (AIR 1979 SC)

Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980 SC)

Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab (1983 SC)

2020-2021

Which among the following is the most serious offence, and thus severely punishable?

  1. (a)Unlawful Assembly
  2. (b)Rioting✓
  3. (c)Affray
  4. (d)Assault
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : Rioting is defined under Section 146 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Section 147 provides for its punishment. According to it, whoever is guilty of rioting shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

Unlawful assembly is defined under Section 141 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Affray is defined in Section 159, and Section 160 provides for its punishment, which is imprisonment up to one month or fine up to one hundred rupees or both.

Assault is defined in Section 351. Section 352 provides for punishment for assault or criminal force otherwise than on grave provocation, which is imprisonment up to three months or fine up to five hundred rupees or both.

Dec 2020/June 2021 · Q59Sequence / order

Indicate the chronological order of the years of the following cases as decided by the Supreme Court

(1) State of T.N. V. Balkrishna

(2) Mangesh V. State of Maharashtra

(3) Ram Kumar V. State of M.P

(4) K.M. Nanavati V State of Maharashtra

(5) Mahesh chander V state of Delhi

Choose the correct answer from the options given below

  1. (a)(1), (2), (3), (4), (5)
  2. (b)(5), (3), (2), (4), (1)
  3. (c)(4), (1), (2), (3), (5)
  4. (d)(3), (4), (1), (2), (3)
Answer & explanation

Answer: no single key (NTA dropped this question or changed its answer key)

December 2022 · Q77Sequence / order

Arrange the following cases in chronological order (Old to New) where death sentence has been awarded by the Supreme Court of India

A. Ediga Anamma V/s State of Andhra Pradesh

B. Bachan Singh V/s State of Punjab

C. Machhi Singh V/s State of Punjab

D. Vinay Sharma V/s Union of India

E. Shabnam Khan V/s Union of India

Choose the correct answer from the options given below

  1. (a)D, B, C, E, A
  2. (b)A, B, C, E, D✓
  3. (c)E, D, C, A, B
  4. (d)C, E, A, B, D
Answer & explanation

Answer: (b) A, B, C, E, D

December 2022 · Q83Sequence / order

Consider the following cases decided by the Supreme Court and arrange in correct sequence of the year of the judgment : (new to old)

A. Mukesh Singh v. NCT of Delhi

B. Yagoob Abdul Razzaq Menon v. State of Maharashtra

C. Navneet Kaur v. Union of India

D. Mohd Ajmal Amir Kasab v. State of Maharashtra

E. A.S. Mohd. Rafi v. State of Tamil Nadu

Choose the correct answer from the options given below

  1. (a)1, 2, 3, 4, 5
  2. (b)2, 3, 4, 5, 1
  3. (c)4, 3, 2, 1, 5
  4. (d)3, 2, 1, 4, 5
Answer & explanation

Answer: no single key (NTA dropped this question or changed its answer key)

June 2023 · Q7

Which of the following theories of punishment provides that 'crime is a disease' and the object should be to 'cure disease'?

  1. (a)Deterrent theory
  2. (b)Reformative theory✓
  3. (c)Expiatory theory
  4. (d)Retributive therory
Answer & explanation

Answer: (b) Reformative theory

December 2023 · Q115Statements

Consider the following statements relating to death penalty

(A) Death sentence follows deterrence theory

(B) The Parliament of India wants to remove death sentence

(C) Recent amendments in IPC and other proposals have added new offences with death sentence

(D) The parliament wants harsh punishment for heinous offences through capital punishment After rarest of the rare doctrine the number of capital punishment is reduced

Choose the correct answer from the options given below

(E)

  1. (a)(A), (C), (D), (E) Only✓
  2. (b)(A), (B), (C), (D), (E)
  3. (c)(A), (B), (C), (D) Only
  4. (d)(B), (D), (E) Only
Answer & explanation

Answer: (a) (A), (C), (D), (E) Only

December 2024 · Q99Sequence / order

Arrange the following punishments in chronological order of which offenders are liable under Section 53 of IPC, 1860

(A) Fine

(B) Forfeiture of property

(C) Imprisonment for Life

(D) Death

Choose the correct answer from the options given below

  1. (a)(D), (C), (B), (A)✓
  2. (b)(A), (B), (C), (D)
  3. (c)(D), (A), (B), (C)
  4. (d)(B), (A), (C), (D)
Answer & explanation

Answer: (a) (D), (C), (B), (A)

31 Dec 2025 (Shift 1) · Q80

Which of the following offence is most severally punishable among the following?

  1. (a)Unlawful assembly
  2. (b)Rioting✓
  3. (c)Affray
  4. (d)Assault
Answer & explanation

Answer: (b) Rioting

June 2026 · Q71Sequence / order

Arrange the following cases of the Supreme Court on Sentence of Death in their ascending order

A. Rajendra Prasad v. State of UP

B. Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab

C. Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab

D. Jagmohan Singh v. State of UP

E. Mohinder Singh v. State of Punjab

Choose the correct answer from the options given below

  1. (a)D, C, B, A, E
  2. (b)A, C, D, E, B
  3. (c)A, D, B, C, E
  4. (d)D, A, C, B, E✓
Answer & explanation

Answer: (d) D, A, C, B, E

Explanation: Arranging these landmark Supreme Court judgments on the Sentence of Death / Capital Punishment in ascending chronological order of their decision date:

• D. Jagmohan Singh v. State of U.P. (1973):

A 5-judge Constitution Bench upheld the constitutional validity of the death penalty under Article 19 and Article 21, holding that statutory discretion given to judges to award death sentence was not unguided.

• A. Rajendra Prasad v. State of U.P. (1979):

A 3-judge bench led by Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer held that capital punishment should be imposed only when the security of the State and society, public order, and the general interest of the public are threatened.

• C. Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980):

A 5-judge Constitution Bench overruled Rajendra Prasad and established the famous "Rarest of Rare Cases" doctrine, mandating a balancing of aggravating and mitigating factors before awarding a death sentence.

• B. Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab (1983):

A 3-judge bench outlined and codified five specific categories/guidelines to operationalize the "Rarest of Rare" doctrine laid down in Bachan Singh.

• E. Mohinder Singh v. State of Punjab (2013):

A 2-judge bench refined the application of the "Rarest of Rare" doctrine, reiterating that extreme brutality alone cannot be the sole basis for awarding the death penalty if mitigating factors exist.

← Back to all units All topics of Unit IV