Odisha Judicial 2022 Question Paper with Answers

A–II, B–I, C–IV, D–III

A–IV, B–II, C–I, D–III

A–II, B–IV, C–I, D–III

A–II, B–IV, C–III, D–I

Article 141 bars the Supreme Court from overruling its own decisions.

A bench of greater strength may overrule a decision of a smaller bench.

The Supreme Court may depart from precedent only after Parliament changes the governing law.

A bench of equal strength may disregard a binding precedent whenever it considers the precedent mistaken.

The President could issue a public notification under clause (3) without a recommendation from that Assembly.

The dissolution permanently extinguished the President’s power under clause (3).

The President could act only after the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly recommended it under the proviso.

The President could act only after an amendment to Article 370 under Article 368.

Article 21 protects life and includes a general right to die.

Article 19 protects life and excludes a general right to die.

Articles 19 and 20 protect life and exclude a general right to die.

Article 21 protects life and excludes a general right to die.

A Directive Principle of State Policy

A guarantee stated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

A fundamental right

A constitutional protection outside Part III

Whether students could be expelled for standing respectfully during the national anthem without singing it

Whether a statute drew a reasonable classification between two groups of taxpayers

Whether a reservation scheme properly identified backward classes

Whether an accused person could be compelled to provide testimonial evidence

Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain

Madhav Rao Scindia v. Union of India

Bengal Immunity Co. Ltd. v. State of Bihar

R.C. Cooper v. Union of India

State through SPE and CBI, A.P. v. M. Krishna Mohan

Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Raj Kumari

Goutam Kundu v. State of West Bengal

Kesavananda Bharati → Excel Wear → In re Berubari Union

Kesavananda Bharati → In re Berubari Union → Excel Wear

Excel Wear → Kesavananda Bharati → In re Berubari Union

In re Berubari Union → Kesavananda Bharati → Excel Wear

Union of India v. Alok Kumar

C. Magesh v. State of Karnataka

Anil Kumar v. B.S. Neelkanta

Vijeta Gajra v. State (NCT of Delhi)

Section 123

Section 124

Section 125

Section 126

Aparna Ajinkya Firodia v. Ajinkya Arun Firodia

C. Magesh v. State of Karnataka

Ningamma v. Chikkaiah

Goutam Kundu v. State of West Bengal

Section 7

Section 8

Section 9

Section 10

Statements I and II only

Statements I and III only

Statements II and III only

Statements I, II and III

A party subsequently admitted being present at the scene.

The statement was a spontaneous reaction closely connected to the event in dispute.

The statement was later copied into an official report about the incident.

The statement was consistent with an account given by another witness.

Primary evidence of the original letter’s contents

Oral evidence of the original letter’s contents

Secondary evidence of the original letter’s contents

A document that can serve as evidence only if checked against the original letter itself

Explanation 1

Explanation 2

Illustration (a)

Illustration (b)

A court may presume the act was regularly performed, subject to contrary evidence.

A court must treat the act as valid even if contrary evidence proves an irregularity.

A court must initially presume the act was irregular.

A court may presume that every assertion in the act’s written record is true.

The body and movable property only

Movable and immovable property only

The body and immovable property only

The body, movable property and immovable property

Section 2(8)

Section 2(31)

Section 2(34)

Section 2(7)