Advertisements
Advertisements
Question
Which authority in India notified the guidelines for the protection of persons assisting accident victims on Indian roads based on the Supreme Court's direction?
Options
Ministry of Surface Transport, Govt. of India
Ministry of Social Justice, Govt. of India
Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Govt. of India
National Human Rights Commission
Solution
Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Govt. of India
Explanation:
(1)
The Ministry of Surface Transport was a branch of the Government of India. It was the apex body for the formulation and administration of the rules, regulations, and laws relating to surface transport in India
(2)
The Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment is a Government of India ministry. It is responsible for welfare, social justice, and empowerment of disadvantaged and marginalised sections of society, including scheduled castes (SC), Other Backward Classes(OBC), the disabled, the elderly, and the victims of drug abuse. The Ministry of Tribal Affairs is responsible for the welfare of scheduled tribes (ST).
(3)
The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways: Sadka Parivahana Va Rajamarga Mantralya), is a ministry of the Government of India, is the apex body for formulation and administration of the rules, regulations, and laws relating to road transport, and transport research, in order to increase the mobility and efficiency of the road transport system in India
(4)
The NHRC is the National Human Rights Commission of India, responsible for the protection and promotion of human rights, defined by the Act as "rights relating to life, liberty, equality, and dignity of the individual guaranteed by the Constitution or embodied in the International Covenants". Hence option 'Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Govt. of India' is the most appropriate statement.
APPEARS IN
RELATED QUESTIONS
An appellate court, commonly called an appeals court, court of appeals, appeal court, court of second instance or second instance court, is any court of law that is empowered to hear an appeal of a trial court or other lower tribunal. In most jurisdictions, the court system is divided into at least three levels: the trial court, which initially hears cases and reviews evidence and testimony to determine the facts of the case; at least one intermediate appellate court; and a supreme court (or court of last resort), which primarily reviews the decisions of the intermediate courts. A jurisdiction's supreme court is that jurisdiction's highest appellate court. Appellate courts may follow varying rules from country to country. The authority of appellate courts to review decisions of lower courts varies widely from one jurisdiction to another. In some places, the appellate court has limited powers of review. Generally speaking, an appellate court's judgment provides the final directive of the appeals courts with regard to the matter appealed, setting out with specificity the court's decision on whether the action that has been appealed should be affirmed, reversed, remanded or modified. In the United States, both state and federal appellate courts are usually restricted to examining whether the lower court made the correct legal determinations, rather than hearing direct evidence and determining what the facts of the case were. Furthermore, US appellate courts are usually restricted to hearing appeals based on matters that were originally brought up before the trial court. Hence, such an appellate court will not consider an appellant's argument if it is based on a theory that is raised for the first time in the appeal. In most US states, and in US federal courts, parties before the court are allowed one appeal as a right. This means that a party who is unsatisfied with the outcome of a trial may bring an appeal to contest that outcome. However, appeals may be costly, and the appellate court must find an error on the part of the court below that justifies upsetting the verdict. Therefore, only a small proportion of trial court decisions result in appeals. Some appellate courts, particularly supreme courts, have the power of discretionary review, meaning that they can decide whether they will hear an appeal brought in a particular case.
Which of the following courts is authorized to initially determine the facts of the cases?
An appellate court, commonly called an appeals court, court of appeals, appeal court, court of second instance or second instance court, is any court of law that is empowered to hear an appeal of a trial court or other lower tribunal. In most jurisdictions, the court system is divided into at least three levels: the trial court, which initially hears cases and reviews evidence and testimony to determine the facts of the case; at least one intermediate appellate court; and a supreme court (or court of last resort), which primarily reviews the decisions of the intermediate courts. A jurisdiction's supreme court is that jurisdiction's highest appellate court. Appellate courts may follow varying rules from country to country. The authority of appellate courts to review decisions of lower courts varies widely from one jurisdiction to another. In some places, the appellate court has limited powers of review. Generally speaking, an appellate court's judgment provides the final directive of the appeals courts with regard to the matter appealed, setting out with specificity the court's decision on whether the action that has been appealed should be affirmed, reversed, remanded or modified. In the United States, both state and federal appellate courts are usually restricted to examining whether the lower court made the correct legal determinations, rather than hearing direct evidence and determining what the facts of the case were. Furthermore, US appellate courts are usually restricted to hearing appeals based on matters that were originally brought up before the trial court. Hence, such an appellate court will not consider an appellant's argument if it is based on a theory that is raised for the first time in the appeal. In most US states, and in US federal courts, parties before the court are allowed one appeal as a right. This means that a party who is unsatisfied with the outcome of a trial may bring an appeal to contest that outcome. However, appeals may be costly, and the appellate court must find an error on the part of the court below that justifies upsetting the verdict. Therefore, only a small proportion of trial court decisions result in appeals. Some appellate courts, particularly supreme courts, have the power of discretionary review, meaning that they can decide whether they will hear an appeal brought in a particular case.
What is the correct order in which the final verdict of a case is decided?
In a recent case a Supreme Court bench comprising of Justice Dipak Misra and justice Prafulla C Pant held that the amount of maintenance to be awarded under Section 125 of CrPC cannot be restricted for the iddat period (three months) only as of the inherent and fundamental principle behind Section 125. Also, it said that an order under Section 125 CrPC can be passed if a person, despite having sufficient means, neglects or refuses to maintain the wife.
Mark the best option:
Which judge tried Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination case?
Examine the Statement and Conclusions given below and choose a suitable answer from the options given:
Statements:
1. Justice delayed is justice denied. Justice hurried is justice buried.
2. More than 3 crore cases are pending in the Indian Courts.
Conclusions:
1. People are not getting justice in India.
2. Disposal of cases by ‘Fast track courts’ results in injustice.
3. Cases must be disposed of within a reasonable time.
Mark the best option:
Consider the following statements:
- Fast Track Courts are being set up on the recommendation of the 12th Finance Commission.
- Fast Track Courts take up Sessions cases pending for two years or more and the cases of undertrials in jails.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Mark the best option:
A person can move to the Supreme Court under Article __________ directly in case of his violation of fundamental rights.
The following question consists of two statements, one labelled as. 'Assertion' and the other as 'Reason'. Read both the statements carefully and answer using the codes given below.
Assertion (A): An accused person cannot be forced to give his thumb impression.
Reason (R): An accused person cannot be compelled to be a witness against himself.
The age of consent for sexual intercourse between a husband and wife has been made __________ from ____________ years by the Supreme Court of India.
In March 2018, the Supreme Court of India has held that there cannot be a stay of more than __________ on a trial of _________
