ClearMains
During the hearing, the court asked the State whether any FIR has been lodged against Abhishek Banerjee before May 4 and additional solicitor general S.V. Raju confirmed the court that there were no cases before that
Quick Revision
Prelims-testable facts
Trap alerts
Mains Practice Question
Critically examine the implications of custodial interrogation on suspects with prior legal standing, particularly in cases where they are already protected by law.
250 words
Practice this in the exam hall →Prelims Practice MCQs
When were custodial interrogations of Abhishek Banerjee not required?
Abhishek Banerjee was not required to undergo custodial interrogation in cases registered against him after May 4, as per the Calcutta High Court ruling.
Consider the following statements regarding Abhishek Banerjee's Custodial Interrogation: 1. Abhishek Banerjee was not required to undergo custodial interrogation in any case. 2. No FIRs were lodged against Abhishek Banerjee before May 4, according to the Calcutta High Court. 3. The Calcutta High Court made this ruling during a hearing on April 1. How many of the above statements are correct?
Statement-1 is true because of provision 1. Statement-2 is false because it incorrectly attributes the information to the Calcutta High Court instead of additional solicitor general S.V. Raju. Statement-3 is false because there is no evidence in the fact list that supports a hearing on April 1.
Consider the following two statements: Statement-I: Abhishek Banerjee was not required to undergo custodial interrogation in cases registered against him after May 4. Statement-II: The Calcutta High Court made this ruling because it found that the FIRs lodged against Abhishek Banerjee were all invalid. Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?
Statement-1 is true because of provision 1. Statement-2 is false because the fact list does not provide any information about the validity of the FIRs or why the Calcutta High Court made this ruling.