Medical Jurisprudence — MCQs

Medical Jurisprudence Indian Medical PG Practice Questions and MCQs

Question 271: In civil cases, conduct money is decided by:

A. Judge (Correct Answer)
B. Doctor
C. Witness
D. Lawyer

Explanation: ***Judge*** - In legal proceedings, the **Judge** holds the authority to determine and order the amount of **conduct money** to be paid. - **Conduct money** is an allowance paid to a witness for their reasonable travel expenses and loss of earnings incurred due to attending court. *Doctor* - A **doctor's** role is primarily focused on medical assessment and treatment, and they have no authority over legal financial matters like **conduct money**. - While a doctor might be a witness, they do not decide the compensation for their own or other witnesses' attendance. *Witness* - A **witness** is an individual who provides testimony or evidence in court and is typically the recipient of **conduct money**, not the decider. - They can submit claims for expenses, but the final decision on the amount rests with the court. *Lawyer* - A **lawyer** represents clients and can advise on legal matters, including the right to claim **conduct money**, but they do not make the final determination. - The lawyer's role is to advocate for their client's interests, which might include seeking an order for **conduct money** from the court.

Question 272: Plaintiff is a person who:

A. Gives judgment
B. Acts as defender
C. Same as public prosecutor
D. Files a case in civil court (Correct Answer)

Explanation: ***Files a case in civil court*** - A **plaintiff** is the party who initiates a lawsuit (a civil case) before a court. - They are the party seeking **legal remedy** or damages from another party (the defendant). *Gives judgment* - The act of "giving judgment" is reserved for the **judge** or the **court**, not a plaintiff. - A judge presides over legal proceedings and **makes legal determinations**. *Acts as defender* - The party against whom a lawsuit is brought is called the **defendant**, not the plaintiff. - A defender's role is to **contest the claims** made by the plaintiff. *Same as public prosecutor* - A **public prosecutor** represents the state or government in criminal proceedings, initiating charges against individuals for alleged crimes. - A **plaintiff** initiates civil actions between private parties, seeking compensation or other civil remedies, not criminal conviction.

Question 273: Transplantation of Human Organs Act was passed in:

A. 1996
B. 1994 (Correct Answer)
C. 2000
D. 2002

Explanation: ***1994*** - The **Transplantation of Human Organs Act (THOA)** was enacted by the Indian Parliament in **1994**. - This act provides legal guidelines for organ donation and transplantation in India, aiming to prevent illegal organ trafficking. *1996* - This year is incorrect; the Transplantation of Human Organs Act was passed earlier than **1996**. - No significant amendments or new acts related to organ transplantation occurred in **1996**. *2000* - This year is incorrect; the primary organ transplantation legislation was not established in **2000**. - The act was already in force by **2000**, having been passed several years prior. *2002* - This year is incorrect; the initial act for organ transplantation was not passed in **2002**. - While amendments and updates to THOA have occurred over time, the foundational act was not from **2002**.

Question 274: A doctor is involved in a medico-legal case concerning medical negligence that comes before a First Class Magistrate. What are the maximum sentencing powers of a First Class Magistrate in such cases involving medical professionals?

A. Unlimited fine and 7 years imprisonment
B. Fine upto 10,000 and 5 years imprisonment
C. Fine upto 3000 and 5 years imprisonment
D. Fine upto 10,000 and 3 years imprisonment (Correct Answer)

Explanation: ***Fine upto 10,000 and 3 years imprisonment*** - Under the **Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) 1973** as it stood in 2014, a **First Class Magistrate** had the power to impose a maximum fine of **Rs. 10,000** and imprisonment for up to **three years**. - This was the **correct answer for NEET-PG 2014** when this question was asked. - **Note:** The CrPC was subsequently amended, and as of 2018, First Class Magistrates can impose imprisonment up to **5 years** for certain offenses under Section 29. However, this question reflects the legal provisions applicable at the time of the examination. *Unlimited fine and 7 years imprisonment* - **Unlimited fines** and **seven years of imprisonment** exceed the powers of a First Class Magistrate under the CrPC. - Such extensive sentencing powers are reserved for **Sessions Courts** or higher judiciary for more serious offenses. *Fine upto 10,000 and 5 years imprisonment* - While this option reflects the **current law** (post-2018 amendment to Section 29 CrPC), it was **incorrect in 2014** when this question was set. - At the time of NEET-PG 2014, the maximum imprisonment term for a First Class Magistrate was **three years**, not five. *Fine upto 3000 and 5 years imprisonment* - The **fine of Rs. 3000** underestimates the maximum fine that could be imposed by a First Class Magistrate, which was **Rs. 10,000** even in 2014. - The **five-year imprisonment** term was also incorrect for the 2014 examination period.

Question 275: In the court of law, the act of a witness giving false evidence after taking an oath is punishable under:

A. 191 IPC
B. 192 IPC
C. 193 IPC (Correct Answer)
D. 197 IPC

Explanation: ***193 IPC*** - **Section 193 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)** specifically deals with the punishment for giving **false evidence** in a judicial proceeding. - This section outlines that any person who intentionally gives false evidence in any stage of a judicial proceeding, or fabricates false evidence for the purpose of being used in any stage of a judicial proceeding, shall be punished. *192 IPC* - **Section 192 IPC** defines what constitutes **"fabricating false evidence."** - While fabricating false evidence is a prerequisite for some offenses related to false evidence, Section 192 itself defines the act, but does not prescribe the punishment for giving false evidence after taking an oath in court. *191 IPC* - **Section 191 IPC** defines what constitutes **"giving false evidence."** - It explains that consciously making a statement which is false, and which a person either knows or believes to be false, or does not believe to be true, while legally bound by oath or by any express provision of law to state the truth, is considered giving false evidence, but does not prescribe the punishment. *197 IPC* - **Section 197 IPC** deals with **issuing or signing a false certificate**, not the act of a witness giving false evidence under oath in court. - This section punishes someone who issues or signs any certificate required by law, knowing or believing it to be false, in any material point.

Question 276: Which legal doctrine allows inference of negligence from the circumstances of an incident when the event would not normally occur without negligence?

A. Civil negligence
B. Professional negligence
C. Criminal negligence
D. Res ipsa loquitur (Correct Answer)

Explanation: ***Res ipsa loquitur*** - This Latin phrase means "**the thing speaks for itself**," allowing a court to infer **negligence** when an accident occurs under circumstances where it wouldn't normally happen without someone's carelessness. - It shifts the burden of proof to the defendant to show they were not negligent, often applied in cases where the defendant had exclusive control over the instrument that caused the injury. *Civil negligence* - This is a general term referring to a failure to exercise the **standard of care** that a reasonably prudent person would have exercised in a similar situation, leading to harm. - It encompasses a broader category of negligent acts in civil law, but does not specifically describe the doctrine of inferring negligence from the event itself without direct evidence of a specific act of negligence. *Professional negligence* - This refers to a breach of the **standard of care** owed by a professional (e.g., doctor, lawyer, accountant) to their client, resulting in harm. - It requires proving that the professional failed to act with the degree of skill and learning commonly applied by members of their profession. *Criminal negligence* - This involves **gross deviation** from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe, often with reckless disregard for human life or safety, leading to criminal prosecution. - While it involves negligence, its focus is on the criminal intent or extreme culpability and the resulting criminal penalties, distinct from inferring fault in a civil context.

Question 277: What does Section 89 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) address regarding criminal responsibility?

A. Criminal responsibility of persons of unsound mind
B. Acts done under intoxication
C. Protection of guardians acting in good faith for children/insane persons (Correct Answer)
D. Criminal responsibility of children under 7 years

Explanation: ***Protection of guardians acting in good faith for children/insane persons*** - Section 89 of the IPC deals with acts done by a **guardian or person in charge** for the benefit of a child under twelve years of age or an **unsound mind person**, done in good faith and with their express or implied consent, where the act would otherwise be an offense. - This section provides a defense against criminal liability when harm is caused to a minor or a person of unsound mind, provided the act was done in **good faith** for their benefit and with proper consent. *Criminal responsibility of persons of unsound mind* - This is covered by **Section 84 of the IPC**, which exempts a person from criminal responsibility if, at the time of doing an act, they are by reason of unsoundness of mind, incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that it is wrong or contrary to law. - Section 89 does not directly address the criminal responsibility of persons of unsound mind themselves but rather the actions taken by others on their behalf. *Acts done under intoxication* - This is addressed by **Sections 85 and 86 of the IPC**. Section 85 deals with acts committed by a person who is incapable of knowing the nature of the act due to intoxication against their will. - Section 86 deals with voluntarily caused intoxication, where an offense requiring a specific intent or knowledge is committed. *Criminal responsibility of children under 7 years* - This is covered by **Section 82 of the IPC**, which states that nothing is an offense which is done by a child under seven years of age (known as **doli incapax**). - This provision establishes an absolute presumption that a child under seven cannot possess the necessary criminal intent.

Question 278: Under which section of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was adultery historically defined?

A. Section 497 (Correct Answer)
B. Section 314
C. Section 375
D. Section 504

Explanation: ***Section 497*** - **Section 497** of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) **historically** defined and criminalized **adultery** in India. - This section was eventually **struck down** by the Supreme Court of India in **2018**, decriminalizing adultery. *Section 314* - **Section 314** of the IPC deals with **death caused by an act done with intent to cause miscarriage**. - It focuses on grievous harm or death resulting from interventions to terminate a pregnancy, not adultery. *Section 375* - **Section 375** of the IPC defines **rape**. - This section addresses sexual assault without consent, which is distinct from adultery. *Section 504* - **Section 504** of the IPC pertains to **intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace**. - This section deals with disturbances to public order and does not relate to matrimonial offenses like adultery.

Question 279: Minimum age for giving consent for organ donation in India is?

A. 16 years
B. 18 years (Correct Answer)
C. 21 years
D. No age limit

Explanation: ***18 years*** - In India, an individual must be at least **18 years of age** to legally give consent for organ donation. - This age aligns with the legal age of **majority**, where individuals are considered competent to make independent decisions regarding their bodies and medical procedures. *16 years* - While 16 years is the age of consent for other medical procedures in some contexts, it is **not the minimum age for organ donation** in India. - Consent for organ donation is a significant legal and ethical matter requiring full adult capacity. *21 years* - The minimum age for organ donation in India is **not 21 years**. - This age is typically associated with other legal rights or responsibilities, but not specifically with organ donation consent. *No age limit* - This option is incorrect as there are **strict age limits** for giving consent for organ donation. - A lack of age limit would imply that minors or individuals without legal capacity could consent, which is not permitted.

Question 280: Under which section of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) is grievous hurt defined?

A. 319
B. 320 (Correct Answer)
C. 324
D. 326

Explanation: **Correct: Section 320** - **Section 320** of the Indian Penal Code specifically enumerates and defines what constitutes **"grievous hurt"**, listing eight distinct types of injuries - This section outlines severe forms of harm, such as **emasculation**, permanent privation of sight or hearing, fracture or dislocation of a bone, and any hurt endangering life or causing severe bodily pain for 20 days - Section 320 is the definitive reference for determining whether an injury qualifies as grievous hurt *Incorrect: Section 319* - **Section 319** of the IPC defines **"hurt"** in general terms, referring to bodily pain, disease, or infirmity - It describes a less severe form of injury compared to grievous hurt, which involves more significant and lasting damage *Incorrect: Section 324* - **Section 324** deals with the offense of voluntarily causing **hurt by dangerous weapons or means** - While it addresses the manner in which hurt is caused, it does not define what constitutes "grievous hurt" *Incorrect: Section 326* - **Section 326** addresses voluntarily causing **grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means** - This section specifies the punishment for such an act but does not define "grievous hurt" itself; it relies on the definition provided in Section 320

Practice by Chapter

Legal Systems and Medical Practice

Practice Questions

Civil and Criminal Liability

Practice Questions

Medical Certificates and Reports

Practice Questions

MCI Code of Ethics

Practice Questions

Medical Registration Acts

Practice Questions

Human Organ Transplantation Acts

Practice Questions

Mental Health Legislation

Practice Questions

Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act

Practice Questions

PCPNDT Act

Practice Questions

Human Rights in Medical Practice

Practice Questions

Legal Aspects of Medical Records

Practice Questions

Medicolegal Case Management

Practice Questions

Want unlimited practice?

Get full access to all questions, explanations, and performance tracking.

Start For Free