Question

The review of the given excerpt highlights the prevailing problem of

• A. Imposing non-statutory conditions by the courts while granting bail applications.
• B. Lack of gender sensitization of the bar and the bench, particularly with regard to judicial empathy for the prosecutrix
• C. Both (A) and (B).
• D. Judges are not aware about the bail provisions.
• A. Both (I) and (II) are true.
• B. Both (I) and (II) are untrue.
• C. (I) is true and (II) is untrue
• D. (II) is true and (I) is untrue.
• A. Conditions prescribed under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 f or granting bail.
• B. Conditions in conformity with the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court for granting bail
• C. Conditions which suit the case after examining the credibility and culpability of the accused with the subjective satisfaction of the judge granting bail.
• D. Both (B) and (C).
• A. Right to equality.
• B. Right to life and personal liberty.
• C. Judicial independence.
• D. Both (A) and (B).
• A. Women are emotional and often overreact or dramatize events, hence it is necessary to corroborate their testimony
• B. Lack of evidence of physical harm in sexual offence cases leads to an inference of consent by the woman
• C. Men are the head of the household and should take all the decisions relating to family.
• D. Women are capable of taking decisions on their own.
• A. Both (I) and (II) are true.
• B. Both (I) and (II) are true.
• C. (I) is true and (II) is untrue.
• D. (II) is true and (I) is untrue.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is A

The correct option is (A) : Imposing non-statutory conditions by the courts while granting bail applications.

Answer 2

The passage recounts the Supreme Court's concern about courts attaching conditions to bail orders that go beyond what the law permits, and its call for judges to avoid gender-stereotyped reasoning. The question asks which of these is the problem the excerpt is centred on.

1. Option A: The excerpt opens with, and returns repeatedly to, the practice of courts imposing conditions such as community service, tree plantation, or charitable contributions that have no basis in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in Supreme Court guidelines. This is the concrete legal problem the passage is built around.
2. Option B: Gender sensitization is raised in the passage as part of the wider discussion of judicial stereotyping, but it appears as a related concern flowing from the same set of bail orders rather than as the excerpt's central focus.
3. Option C: Folding B into the answer as a co-equal problem overstates its role in the excerpt, since the passage's opening and driving concern is squarely about the legality of the conditions attached to bail.
4. Option D: The excerpt does not suggest that judges are unaware of what the law permits, in fact it says the permissible conditions "are clearly laid down" in the Code and in Supreme Court decisions. The problem is that courts go beyond those known limits, not that they are ignorant of them.

The excerpt's central, driving concern is the practice of attaching non-statutory conditions to bail orders.

Therefore, the correct answer is Imposing non-statutory conditions by the courts while granting bail applications.

Answer 3

The correct option is (C) : (I) is true and (II) is untrue

Answer 4

Both statements need to be checked against how the Supreme Court has actually described the judicial role in curbing gender stereotyping, rather than assumed to be true together.

1. Statement I: Judges are frequently described, including by the Supreme Court, as role models whose language and reasoning are absorbed by lawyers, litigants, and the wider public well beyond the four corners of a single case. Framed at this level of generality, describing judges as teachers to the legal community and the public is an accurate description of the influence the higher judiciary is understood to carry.
2. Statement II: The direction actually given is broader than what this statement captures. Courts are called upon to keep their reasoning, language, and orders free of stereotyped assumptions about gender across the board, not only within the narrow window of "proceedings" or the text of a "judicial order". Confined to that narrower scope, the statement understates the actual standard set for judicial conduct, which is why it does not hold up as framed.

Statement I correctly captures the teaching role judges occupy, while Statement II, as narrowly worded, falls short of the fuller standard actually laid down.

Therefore, the correct answer is (I) is true and (II) is untrue.

Answer 5

The correct option is (D) : Both (B) and (C).

Answer 6

The question asks which type of bail condition falls outside what a court is permitted to impose, so each option needs to be checked against where its authority to impose conditions comes from.

1. Option A: Conditions prescribed under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 have a direct statutory basis. A court imposing these is acting squarely within its granted powers, so this option describes something the court can impose, not something it cannot.
2. Option B: A condition that conforms to guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court is, by definition, a condition the higher judiciary has already sanctioned as appropriate. Something that is in conformity with binding guidelines cannot at the same time be something the court is barred from imposing, so this too falls on the permissible side.
3. Option C: This describes a condition arrived at purely from the judge's own subjective satisfaction about the accused's credibility and culpability, untethered from the Code or from any Supreme Court guideline. Conditions of this kind, resting on the judge's personal sense of what suits the case rather than on any legal standard, are exactly what courts have been cautioned against imposing, since they lack the nexus with the offence and the legal grounding that a valid bail condition requires.
4. Option D: Combining B with C is inconsistent, because B by its own wording describes conditions that conform to established Supreme Court guidance, which places it on the permissible side rather than the impermissible one.

Only conditions based on unstructured, subjective satisfaction, without grounding in statute or binding guidelines, fall outside what a court may impose.

Therefore, the correct answer is Conditions which suit the case after examining the credibility and culpability of the accused with the subjective satisfaction of the judge granting bail.

Answer 7

The correct option is (D) : Both (A) and (B).

Answer 8

The excerpt states plainly which constitutional guarantees are undermined when a bail condition has no connection to the offence or to the purpose of bail, so each option can be checked directly against that statement.

1. Option A: A condition unrelated to the offence, imposed simply because the accused happened to be granted bail, treats that accused differently from others similarly placed without any rational basis connected to the case. This directly implicates the right to equality.
2. Option B: Requiring an accused, who at that stage is presumed innocent, to perform community service, plant trees, or make donations as a precondition for liberty amounts to a restriction on personal liberty that is not backed by a procedure established by law, since no statute or guideline authorises it. This engages the right to life and personal liberty.
3. Option C: Judicial independence concerns the freedom of judges to decide cases without external interference, which is a separate constitutional concern altogether and has no direct bearing on an accused person's rights being curtailed by an arbitrary condition.
4. Option D: Since both the right to equality and the right to life and personal liberty are engaged by the same irrelevant condition, for the same underlying reason, both apply together.

The condition offends two constitutional guarantees at once, equality and personal liberty, rather than either alone.

Therefore, the correct answer is Both (A) and (B).

Answer 9

The correct option is (D) : Women are capable of taking decisions on their own.

Answer 10

The question asks which statement is free of gender stereotyping, so each option needs to be tested for whether it rests on a fixed assumption about how women or men are expected to behave.

1. Option A: This assumes women as a class are prone to emotional exaggeration and therefore need their testimony corroborated more than anyone else's would. That is a textbook gender stereotype, treating a generalisation about women's temperament as a basis to discount their evidence.
2. Option B: Inferring consent purely from an absence of visible physical injury relies on an assumption about how a woman would necessarily react to or resist a sexual offence, ignoring that reactions vary. This too is a stereotyped inference rather than a fact-based one.
3. Option C: Declaring that men are the head of the household and entitled to make all family decisions assigns a fixed role to men and, by implication, a subordinate one to women, which is a classic patriarchal stereotype.
4. Option D: Stating that women are capable of taking decisions on their own affirms individual agency rather than imposing any predetermined role or trait on women as a group. It does not generalise or assume anything about how women must behave, which is exactly why it is not a stereotype.

A, B, and C each generalise about how women or men supposedly behave, while D simply affirms individual capacity without any such generalisation.

Therefore, the correct answer is Women are capable of taking decisions on their own.

Answer 11

The correct option is (B) : Both (I) and (II) are true

Answer 12

Both statements describe judicial stereotyping, so the way to test them is against what judicial stereotyping actually consists of.

1. Statement I: Judicial stereotyping is understood as judges reaching a view about a case on the strength of preconceived beliefs about a class of people, rather than on relevant facts and genuine enquiry into the case before them. Describing it instead as a view grounded in real social facts and cultural enquiry gets the definition backwards, since the whole problem with stereotyping is precisely that it substitutes assumption for actual fact-finding. This statement does not hold up.
2. Statement II: Judicial stereotyping is widely recognised as a significant obstacle to justice, and it bears most heavily on women who come before the courts as victims or survivors of violence, since preconceived notions about how a "genuine" victim should behave or appear often work against them. This statement accurately reflects that understanding.

Statement I inverts the actual definition of judicial stereotyping, while Statement II correctly identifies its effect on women victims.

Therefore, the correct answer is (II) is true and (I) is untrue.