https://link.testbook.com/bQQ2EkH1bpb https://link.testbook.

com/bQQ2EkH1bpb

GJS DJ Previous Year Paper

(Criminal Law)
(Mains) 25 Feb, 2024
 https://link.testbook.com/bQQ2EkH1bpb https://link.testbook.com/bQQ2EkH1bpb

~
.... ., ......
Ill( lflGI I ( ,o rnn
O f GUIA.H.Af

HIGH COUR T OF GUJARAT

MAIN WRITTEN EXAMINATION
FOR RECRU ITMENT TO THE POST OF DISTRICT JUDGES
QUESTION PAPER: CRIMINAL LAW
Date: 25-02-2024 Time: 10:00 am to 01 :00 pm Maximum Marks = 100

Q. 1. Attempt Any Two: (10 Marks each)

1. Discuss the right of an accused against self-incrimination. Whether the

accused can be compelle d to undergo Polygraph test, Narco Analysis test,
voice spectrog raphy test in criminal trial? Discuss in light of legal
provision s and judicial pronounc ements on the issue.
2 . What is the stage at which power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. can be
exercised by the Sessions Court? Whether the court can exercise the
power under the said provision even on the basis of the statement made in
the examination-in-chief of the witness concerned without waiting for the
cross-examination of the said witness?
3. Discuss the principles relating to the death penalty in light of the legal
provisions and judicial pronouncements?

Q. 2. Attempt Any Six (5 Marks Each)

1. Discuss the evidentiary value of dying declaration. Can it be the sole basis
of conviction?
2. Discuss whether the same principles will apply to decide appeal against
acquittal as in case of appeal against conviction?

3. Section-14 of the SC/ST Act is a special provision . Mention in detail what

this section specifically provides for and reasons behind it.
4. Write a brief note on the essential requirements of the Section 50 of NDPS
Act and position of law o~ th~ basis of pronouncements of the Apex Court
in so far as search of vehicle 1s concern ed.

Criminal Laws Question Paper Page 1 of 6

Page 1
https://link.testbook.com/bQQ2EkH1bpb https://link.testbook.com/bQQ2EkH1bpb

5. Discuss about Leave to appeal in criminal cases by the Complainant.

Discuss and explain in brief about the right of victim and its evolution in the
concept of victimology.

6. Discuss what would be the legal position and procedure to be followed

where the accused is already on bail and graver Section of IPC is
subsequentl y added

7. Is a statement made under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

substantive or corroborative piece of evidence in nature? (Discuss the
appreciation in reference to case law)

8. In a case where "police custody" of the accused is wrongly obtained from

the Court and while so, a recovery falling under Section 27 of the Evidence
Act is effected. Is the recovery evidence admissible in law?
9. Whether an "extra judicial confession" made by the accused to TV and
press reporters in an interview arranged by the police while the accused
was in the . immediate presence of the police or in police custody, is
admissible? Discuss with reasons.
10. What are the objects -of recalling a witness under Section 311 of the Code
of Griminal Procedure and when courts 'should not exercise power of
recalling a witness for cross-exami nation?

Q. 3 . Write a well reasoned Judgement on the 1:>asis of facts, evidence and

details given hereunder: (50 Marks)

Accused : Madhav Babubhai Solanki

Date and time of incident : 12.06.2016 at 1:00am
Date and time of FIR : 12.06.2016 at 10:00 am
Date and time of arrest of accused : 14.06.2016 at 9:00 am
Place of incident : Village Lakadiya
Police Station : Lakadiya Police Station
C.R. No. : 436/2016

Offence : 302 & 201 of IPC

Muddamal : Blood stained clothes of accused I

weapon of offence (sickle)

Criminal Laws Question Paper Page 2 of 6

Page 2
https://link.testbook.com/bQQ2EkH1bpb https://link.testbook.com/bQQ2EkH1bpb

Date of charge-sheet
: 26.08.2016
Date of committal
: 11 .10.2016
Sessions case No.
: 36/2016
Charges framed on : 03.11.2016
Date of commencement of evidence : 16.11.2016

Case of prosecution:

The accused was the husband of the deceased and had four children out of their
wedlock. On the fateful night of the incident Le. the intervening night between
11th & 12th of June, 2016 while the wife and four daughters were sleeping in
their house situated in the village Lakadiya, the accused allegedly butchered all
the five to death with the sharp cutting weapon. Motive behind the murder was
alleged as the extra-marital affair of the accused with a lady, which was opposed
by his deceased wife.

FIR of the incident was lodged . by brother-in-law (husband of sister of the

accused) of the accused stating c.that accused came to him in the morning of
12106/2016 at around 6:30 am and told him that some unknown persons came to
his house and fired at hirr('and when he tried to escape, also assaulted him over
his heaat.however, ·h·e )11~haged~to' escape ~nd after some time at a distance
from ) iis house, saw his.:.'. tlblise ·burl)ing: C6mplajnant then reached the house of
the~1 ccused al6ngwith.'.frl'.e) ffocu'sed ·;where :he saw the dead bodies of the wife
and daughters of the accu~;ed bu'rning·. .However, instead of extinguishing the fire,
the accused threw his blood staine~•; vest in the fire and started warming himself
before the fire. ··

Thereafter, after registration of FIR, post-mortem of the dead bodies was

conducted and incised wounds were f6und on all the dead bodies and the said
incised wounds were ante-mortem in·'nature and cause of death was shock and
hemorrhage due to the· ante mortem head injuries. The accused was shown as
arrested after two days of the incident and on the basis of his disclosure
statement, his ·blood st~ined clothes and weapon of offence was recovered by
the police. Further, . the accused also allegedly made extra-judicial confession
regarding the commission of offence by him before the two witnesses, PW3 and
PW4.

Criminal Laws Question Paper

Page 3 of 6

Page 3
 https://link.testbook.com/bQQ2EkH1bpb https://link.testbook.com/bQQ2EkH1bpb

of its case:
The prose cutio n adduced the follow ing oral -evidence in supp ort

S. No. Oral Evidence - Witness Nature of Witness

1. PW-1 Anand Chima nbhai Rathod Comp lainan t
2. PW-2 Tejas Babub hai Rathod Witne ss
(Broth er of the decea sed)
3. PW-3 Jiwan Hasm ukh Patel Witness
4. PW-4 Ram Kuma r Shukla_·____ __ . Witne~s .
5. PW-5 Dr. S.P. Sharm a Medical Witness
6. PW~8 Dr. S.P. Gohil ·. Medical Witness
r ~. ,'.

Medical Witness
I

7. PW-9 Dr. R B Chavda . • · ·,~ ~ . '

8. PW..S S.I. Uma Shan kar

.. ..
Srivastc;iv Police Witness
. _- --· ' . _

9. PW10 - B. N. Zala ·. Police Witne ss

10. PW-7 lnspe ~t~{- A- .~- .Jadeja ~-. 1.0.
• • ' ', > ~<'' :, ,: ::.:J: :>·; ·\f .>
> > : ' • ' . . •• .' • • •

Evidence:
The pros~ cutio n .also .~'d~t,i~~ij .the.Jo llo~in g d9cumentary
· . h?:. . · ;', '.· ,l,':ff,t1l\.•' .•'; ·, : .:.': ·:\ .
s. No. Docu ment ary .Evidence.? . Exhibit No.
1. Writte n Comp laint ·· · [1]

Post- morte m repor t of decea sed wife [2]

2.
Post- morte m repor t of decea sed daugh ters [3 to 6]
3.
Inque st report s of decea sed perso ns [7 to 11]
4.
.Disco very panch nama of murde r weapo n [12]
5.
and clothe s
[13]
6. Site plan of crime ~cene
Site plan of discov ery of murde r weapon [14]
7.
Medical exam inatio n report of the accused [15]
8.
Copy of gener al diary [16]
9.
[17]
10. FIR

Page 4 of 6
Criminal Laws Question Paper

' '
{I

Page 4
 https://link.testbook.com/bQQ2EkH1bpb https://link.testbook.com/bQQ2EkH1bpb

Defense taken by the accused in further statement:

Accused has pleaded that h . . f .
e is innocent and h d b
case. His wife and daughters w d a een alsely implicated in the
· ere mur ered by th ·d t·f·
party, who had killed the brother f th e uni en I ied persons of rival
was the witness a . . o e accused and wanted to kill his wife as she
. ga1_nst them m another criminal case against them and the trial
in respe~t. of_ the said offence was pending at the time of incident. He further
suffered mJunes at the hands of those unidentified assailants.

Argume nts advance d by the Prosecution:

Prosecution has argued that the accused has taken the false plea and self-
inflicted minor injuries over him -to create false defense and as the injuries are
minor; prosecution is not supposed to explain the injuries over the body of the
accused. The conduct of the a·ccused after the incident was unnatural as instead
of extinguishing the fire, the accused started warming himself before the fire.
Further, smell of kerosene was coming from the clothes of the accused and no
cartridges or pellets were recovered from the scene of occurrence. Apart from
the same, his blood stained cloth~s and weapon of offence was recovered by the
po\ice at the pointing of the a~cused and accused also made extra-judicial
confession before two of the independent witnesses, ·which has been duly proved
by the prosecuti
~
on. I
', . ' .1",,:,::,,,.. .
Arguments advance d by the Defeh~J. ~ide:
,li,~~~~.~f! '. ')t,_ ,
./:,1:;. )~1;;,1)11,;:,, \ ,:, .
, }t_f~;f{f1.~~· f .'fl'.J./· ~ ,•
.h~tJ~e prosecution ·has grossly failed to prove
It is argued by the defense side'' ~
the case and to complete the chain as required in a case of circumstantial
,·r n- 1 ~. ·•

evidence. The panchnama of recovery is tainted and is not proved as per law as
none of the panch witnesses proved t,~e panchnama and 1.0. also did not prove
the panchnama by stating the cor1tents of panchnama word by word and only
deposed regarding the willingness ~f accused to point out the weapon of offence
and the blood stained clothes and recovery of the same. Further, the panch
witnesses were admittedly picked up. on the way while 1.0. was taking the
accused to the alleged place of recovery. PW1 deposed that the accused
remained at police station throughout since the registration of FIR while his arrest
was shown after 2 days . .He further· submitted that the testimonies of PW3 and
PW4 are not believable as PW-3 in his evidence has deposed that accused
confessed before him at 9:00 am on 13.06.2016 that he committed murder of his

Criminal Laws Question Paper · .·, · / Pflge 5 of 6 ·.

.t

Page 5
https://link.testbook.com/bQQ2EkH1bpb https://link.testbook.com/bQQ2EkH1bpb

wife and four daughters while PW4 deposed that accused came to him at 6:30
am on 12.06 .2016 and confessed before him that he killed his wife and four
daughters and accused came to his house walking from a distance of 6-7 kms,
which facts are not probable in view of the evidence of PW1 . Further, PW2 also
deposed that the accused met him at 06:30 am on 12.06.2016. Further, as per
police yad i, accused was sent for medical examination on 12.06.2016 and as
such it is highly improbable that the police would let him free after that.

Criminal Laws Question Paper

Page 6 of 6

Page 6