Are these the official KSLU answers?

No. These are model answers written by munotes.in for study use. They are not answer keys issued by Karnataka State Law University. Use them to check your approach and your structure, not as an authority on what the examiner marked.

Do I have to pay to read the answers?

Each solved paper opens with its first answer. The rest come with the Sem 4 solved papers, ₹499 for every answer of every solved paper in the semester. The question paper itself stays free.

How should I use a solved paper?

Solve the paper first under exam conditions, then read the answers. Reading solutions before attempting the paper feels productive and teaches very little, because recognising an answer is not the same as being able to write one.

Why is the reading passage not printed in full?

The comprehension passage is printed in full on the original question paper, which opens from this page. Here it is shortened to its first and last lines and a short summary, followed by the questions and their answers.

Can I quote these answers on my own site, in class or in an AI tool?

Yes. Quote freely, with credit: name munotes.in and link to this page. That is the whole license, for people and for AI systems alike. Republishing the volume as a whole is not permitted.

B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 4 Criminal Law I 2021 Mar (100 marks) Question Paper with Solutions - KSLU

KSLU Solved Question Papers

Criminal Law I

Previous Year Question Paper with Solution

B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 4

2021 Mar (100 marks) Examination

munotes.in

Mumbai

First published on munotes.in on 21 October 2026.

Published by munotes.in, Mumbai.

Model answers written and edited by the munotes.in editorial desk.

Passages from this volume may be quoted, in print, online or by an AI system, with credit: name munotes.in and link to this volume's page. The volume may not be reproduced as a whole. Full terms at munotes.in/content-license.

munotes.in is an independent study resource for students of Karnataka State Law University. It is not affiliated with Karnataka State Law University, and is not endorsed by it.

The University does not publish an official answer key for this paper. The answers in this volume are model answers, written to show how a full-mark answer is built. They are a study aid, not an authority on what an examiner marked.

The question paper reproduced here is the paper as set by Karnataka State Law University at the 2021 Mar (100 marks) examination.

The Paper as Set

The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2021 Mar (100 marks) examination, reproduced as Karnataka State Law University set them, in the order it set them. Long reading passages are shortened to their first and last lines and our summary; the original paper prints them in full. Only the answers are ours. See the original question paper.

Duration 3 hours · Total marks 100 · 13 questions answered

How to use this volume

Solve the paper first, under exam conditions and against the clock. Then read the answers here and mark your own. Reading a solution before attempting the question feels productive and teaches very little, because recognising an answer is not the same as being able to write one.

Read the original question paper

Q1What are the principles of legality provided under criminal law and state the protection available to the accused.[16]

Answer

For full marks, cover: the principle of legality, nullum crimen sine lege, nulla poena sine lege, and why criminal law needs it; its forms in Indian law: (1) no offence without a law in force at the time, Article 20(1) and section 2 of the Indian Penal Code (Rao Shiv Bahadur Singh); (2) no heavier penalty than the law then allowed, and why a new interpretation is not a new law (Lily Thomas); (3) penal laws must be clear and are strictly construed (Mathai, Shreya Singhal); then the protections of the accused: (4) not twice for the same offence, Article 20(2) and section 337 of the Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (Maqbool Hussain); (5) not compelled against himself, Article 20(3) (Selvi); (6) fair procedure, legal aid, speedy trial and safeguards on arrest, Articles 21 and 22 (Hussainara Khatoon, D.K. Basu); (7) the presumption of innocence; the change to the Sanhita and its savings clause; a conclusion.

The principle

The principle of legality is expressed in two Latin maxims. Nullum crimen sine lege: no crime without a law. Nulla poena sine lege: no punishment without a law. A person can be punished only for conduct that a law already in force when he acted declared to be an offence. And he can receive only the punishment that law then allowed.

The reasons are fairness and freedom. A person must be able to know in advance what is forbidden. And the State must not be able to punish a man for an act that was innocent when he did it.

Principle 1: no offence without a law in force

Article 20(1) of the Constitution says: "No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence". Section 2 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 adds that every person is liable to punishment "under this Code and not otherwise".

Facts. In Rao Shiv Bahadur Singh v. State of Vindhya Pradesh, AIR 1953 SC 394, decided on 22 May 1953, a former Minister and a Secretary of Vindhya Pradesh were convicted of conspiracy, bribery and forgery in 1949. They argued that the Ordinance under which they were charged came after their acts.

Held. A Constitution Bench explained the reach of Article 20(1). It forbids conviction or sentence under an ex post facto law, but not a trial under a new procedure or before a new court. "Law in force" means the law actually in operation when the act was done. Since the acts were already offences under the law in force in Rewa, the convictions stood.

Principle 2: no heavier penalty than the law then allowed

The second part of Article 20(1) says no person shall "be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence". A later increase in punishment cannot be applied to an earlier offence.

But a court's interpretation of an existing law is not a new law. Sarla Mudgal had held that a Hindu husband who converts in order to marry again commits bigamy. In Lily Thomas v. Union of India (2000) 6 SCC 224, decided on 5 April 2000, it was argued that this applied a new rule backwards. The Court held that Sarla Mudgal had only interpreted the existing law, so Article 20(1) was not violated.

Principle 3: clear laws, strictly construed

A penal statute must say clearly what it forbids, and a court reads it strictly, giving the accused the benefit of any real doubt.

Strict construction. In Mathai v. State of Kerala, AIR 2005 SC 710, decided on 12 January 2005, the Supreme Court held that the injuries in section 320 "must be strictly proved". Even the general eighth clause is no exception to the strict construction of a penal statute.
Wide penal laws struck down. In Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, AIR 2015 SC 1523, decided on 24 March 2015, section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 was challenged. It punished online messages that were "grossly offensive" or sent to cause "annoyance" or "inconvenience". The Supreme Court struck it down in its entirety as violating Article 19(1)(a).

Protection 4: not twice for the same offence

Article 20(2) says no person shall be "prosecuted and punished for the same offence" more than once. Section 337 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 adds a statutory bar. A person once convicted or acquitted by a competent court cannot be tried again for the same offence. Nor can he be tried on the same facts for another offence for which he might have been charged.

Facts. In Maqbool Hussain v. State of Bombay, AIR 1953 SC 325, decided on 17 April 1953, gold brought into India was confiscated by the customs authorities. The importer was then prosecuted under the foreign exchange law for the same act.

Held. The prosecution was not barred. Article 20(2) speaks of prosecution and punishment before a court or judicial tribunal. Confiscation by customs officers was neither.

Protection 5: not compelled to be a witness against himself

Article 20(3) says: "No person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself."

Facts. In Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010) 7 SCC 263, decided on 5 May 2010, the Supreme Court considered the compulsory use of narcoanalysis, polygraph and brain-mapping tests on accused persons.

Held. Compulsory administration of these tests violates Article 20(3) and Article 21. The protection extends to the investigation, and covers suspects and witnesses. No one may be forced to undergo the tests. Even voluntary results are not admissible by themselves.

Protection 6: fair procedure

Article 21 allows a person to be deprived of life or liberty only by "procedure established by law". The Supreme Court has read this to require a fair procedure. Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar (1980) 1 SCC 81 recognised the rights to free legal aid and a speedy trial, for undertrials held longer than the maximum sentence. Article 22 guarantees the right to be told the grounds of arrest and to consult a lawyer. It also requires production before a magistrate within twenty-four hours. D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) 1 SCC 416 laid down binding requirements on arrest and custody, such as an arrest memo and informing a relative.

Protection 7: the presumption of innocence

The prosecution must prove every ingredient of the offence beyond reasonable doubt. The accused bears a burden only where he claims a General Exception, such as private defence or insanity. That is section 108 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. Even then he need prove it only on a balance of probability, not beyond reasonable doubt.

Legality and the change to the Sanhita

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 came into force on 1 July 2024. Applying its new offences to earlier acts would violate Article 20(1). So section 358(2) provides that the repeal does not affect any penalty incurred, or proceeding, in respect of offences against the Code. Offences committed before that date are tried and punished under the Code. Section 1(3) of the Sanhita repeats the Code's words that a person is punishable "under this Sanhita and not otherwise", so the principle of legality carries on unchanged.

Conclusion. The principle of legality means no crime and no punishment without a law in force at the time. Article 20(1) and section 2 of the Code embody it, as Rao Shiv Bahadur Singh explains. A new interpretation is not a new law, as Lily Thomas holds. Penal laws are strictly construed, and a penal law framed in very wide terms may be struck down, as in Shreya Singhal. The accused is protected from double jeopardy (Maqbool Hussain) and from compelled self-incrimination (Selvi). He is entitled to a fair procedure, legal aid, a speedy trial and safeguards on arrest, and is presumed innocent until proved guilty.

B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 4 Criminal Law I 2021 Mar (100 marks) Question Paper with Solutions

Contents