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 7 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 7 Criminal Law II 2026 Jan Question Paper with Solutions - KSLU

KSLU Solved Question Papers

Criminal Law II

Previous Year Question Paper with Solution

B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 7

2026 Jan 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 2026 Jan examination.

The Paper as Set

The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2026 Jan 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 80 · 20 questions answered

Instructions printed on the paper

N.B. (1) Answer all five (5) Units. (2) One essay type question and short note/problem is compulsory from each Unit. (3) Figures to the right indicate marks. (4) Answer should be written either in English or Kannada completely.

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

Q1

Unit I

(a)Explain the Constitutional dimensions of BNSS, 2023.[10]

Answer

For full marks, cover: why criminal procedure is a constitutional subject; Article 21 and fair, just and reasonable procedure; Article 22 and the arrested person; Article 20 on double jeopardy and self-incrimination; Articles 14, 39A and 50; Article 19 and preventive orders; a table linking each Article to its Sanhita section; the provisions open to challenge; a conclusion.

Why procedure is a constitutional subject

Criminal procedure decides when the State may arrest, search, detain, question and punish a person. Each of these acts touches liberty. The Constitution therefore sets limits that every procedural law must respect.

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Act 46 of 2023) came into force on 1 July 2024. Section 531(1) repealed the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Sanhita kept the old structure but wrote many court-made safeguards into the text. Its constitutional dimension is the way it gives effect to Articles 14, 19, 20, 21, 22, 39A and 50.

Article 21: a procedure that is fair, just and reasonable

Article 21 says no person shall be deprived of life or personal liberty "except according to procedure established by law". The courts read "procedure" to mean a fair procedure, not any procedure.

Facts. In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597, decided on 25 January 1978, the petitioner's passport was impounded "in public interest". The Government refused to give her the reasons.

Held. The procedure under Article 21 must be "right and just and fair" and not "arbitrary, fanciful or oppressive". Otherwise it is no procedure at all.

Why it bears. Every provision of the Sanhita must pass this test. A section that allows detention without fair safeguards can be struck down.

Facts. In Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar, AIR 1979 SC 1360, decided on 12 February 1979, a habeas corpus petition showed men, women and children held in Bihar jails for years awaiting trial. Many were charged with offences that carried only a few months.

Held. Speedy trial, meaning a reasonably expeditious trial, is part of the right to life and liberty under Article 21. The Court ordered release on personal bond.

Why it bears. The Sanhita answers this with fixed timelines. In a case triable only by it, a Sessions Court must frame the charge within sixty days of the first hearing on charge (section 251(1)(b)). Judgment must follow arguments within thirty days, extendable to forty-five (section 258).

Article 22: rights of the arrested person

Article 22(1) gives an arrested person the right to know the grounds of arrest and to consult a lawyer of his choice. Article 22(2) requires production before the nearest Magistrate within twenty-four hours, excluding journey time.

The Sanhita repeats these rights in its own sections.

Grounds of arrest. Section 47 (old section 50) requires the officer to tell the person "full particulars of the offence". In a bailable offence he must also be told of his right to bail.
Twenty-four hours. Section 58 (old section 57) forbids police detention beyond twenty-four hours without a Magistrate's order under section 187.

Lawyer during interrogation. Section 38 (old section 41D) allows the person to meet an advocate of his choice during interrogation, "though not throughout".
Informing a relative. Section 48 (old section 50A) requires the arrest and place of custody to be told to a relative or friend.

Facts. In D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, (1997) 1 SCC 416, decided on 18 December 1996, letters about deaths in police lock-ups were treated as a writ petition.

Held. The Court laid down eleven requirements for every arrest. These included an identity badge on the officer, an attested memo of arrest and information to a relative.

Why it bears. Section 36 of the Sanhita now carries the badge and the memo. The court's directions have become statute.

In Joginder Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (1994) 4 SCC 260, a young advocate was held without production before a Magistrate. The Court held that the power to arrest is different from the justification for using it. Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273, turned that rule into a checklist for offences punishable up to seven years. Section 35(1)(b) of the Sanhita now requires the officer to record his reasons for arresting, and also for not arresting.

Article 20: double jeopardy and self-incrimination

Article 20(2) says no person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once. Section 337 of the Sanhita (old section 300) bars a second trial for the same offence after a conviction or acquittal.

Article 20(3) says no accused shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. Section 180(2) of the Sanhita (old section 161(2)) lets a person refuse questions whose answers "would have a tendency to expose him to a criminal charge".

Facts. In Nandini Satpathy v. P.L. Dani, (1978) 2 SCC 424, a former Chief Minister refused to answer written police questions in a corruption case. She was prosecuted for the refusal.

Held. The protection of Article 20(3) begins at the police station, not only in court. It covers answers with a reasonable tendency to expose the person to a charge.

Why it bears. The right to silence is part of the Sanhita's questioning power itself.

Articles 14, 39A and 50

Article 14. Equal treatment requires that like cases follow like procedure. The Sanhita classifies every offence in its First Schedule, so the same rule of arrest and bail applies to all accused of that offence.
Article 39A. It directs free legal aid. Section 341 (old section 304) requires the court to assign an advocate at State expense to an accused who cannot afford one.
Article 50. It directs the separation of the judiciary from the executive. Section 6 keeps two separate classes: Judicial Magistrates, who try cases, and Executive Magistrates, who keep the peace.

Article 19 and preventive orders

Section 163 of the Sanhita (old section 144) allows an order in urgent cases of nuisance or apprehended danger. Such an order can restrict speech, assembly and movement under Article 19.

In Madhu Limaye v. Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Monghyr, AIR 1971 SC 2486, the power was upheld because it is used only in a sudden emergency with grave consequences. In Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India, (2020) 3 SCC 637, the Court added that such orders must state reasons, be published and be proportionate.

The Articles and the Sanhita at a glance

Article	What it protects	Sanhita section (old Code)
20(2)	No second trial for the same offence	337 (300)
20(3)	No compelled self-incrimination	180(2) (161(2))
21	Fair procedure and speedy trial	251, 258 timelines; 187 custody limits
22(1)	Grounds of arrest and a lawyer	47 (50), 38 (41D)
22(2)	Production within 24 hours	58 (57)
39A	Free legal aid	341 (304)
50	Judiciary apart from executive	6 (6)

Where the Sanhita is open to challenge

Handcuffs. Section 43(3) allows handcuffs for listed persons, such as habitual offenders and those accused of murder or rape. In Prem Shankar Shukla v. Delhi Administration, AIR 1980 SC 1535, an under-trial prisoner complained of routine handcuffing on the way to court. The Court held handcuffing prima facie inhuman and allowed it only with recorded reasons. A list by offence may sit uneasily with that rule.
Police custody. Section 187(2) allows fifteen days of custody "in parts" during the first forty or sixty days. Critics fear longer exposure to police pressure.
Trial in absentia. Section 356 allows a proclaimed offender to be tried in his absence. It needs safeguards such as two warrants and a newspaper notice, but it limits the right to be present.

Conclusion. Most of the Sanhita's safeguards are Articles 20, 21 and 22 written into sections. Many of them codify cases such as D.K. Basu and Arnesh Kumar. Its validity will still be judged by the Maneka Gandhi test of fair, just and reasonable procedure. Provisions on handcuffs, staggered police custody and trial in absentia are where that test is most likely to be applied.

B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 7 Criminal Law II 2026 Jan Question Paper with Solutions

Contents