New Criminal Laws MCQs for Bihar APO 2026 Exam

The Bihar APO Preliminary Examination tests candidates on their understanding of criminal law, procedural law, and evidence law. With the implementation of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), candidates are expected to be familiar with the updated legal provisions and their practical application.

Practising topic-wise MCQs is one of the most effective ways to revise important Bare Act provisions, understand frequently tested concepts, and improve accuracy in the examination. The following sections cover important questions from the new criminal laws that are highly relevant for Bihar APO 2026 preparation.

New Criminal Laws MCQs for Bihar APO 2026

Practising MCQs is one of the most effective ways to prepare for the new criminal laws for the Bihar APO 2026 examination. The following questions cover important concepts from the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) that are frequently tested in competitive law exams.

Q1. Whenever an act, which is criminal only because of its being done with criminal knowledge or intention, is defined in ____?

A. Section 3(4), BNS, 2023
B. Section 3(6), BNS, 2023
C. Section 3(8), BNS, 2023
D. None of the above

Answer: B — Section 3(6), BNS 2023
Section 3(6) says: "Whenever an act, which is criminal only by reason of its being done with a criminal knowledge or intention, is done by several persons, each of such persons who joins in the act with such knowledge or intention is liable for the act... as if the act were done by him alone." (This corresponds to old IPC Section 35.)

Q2. Four accused with common intention to kill M shot R in the bona fide belief that R was M.
A. All accused are guilty of causing death. 

B. This Section does not apply in this case. 

C. All accused are guilty of causing death without invoking Section 3(5) of BNS, 2023.

D. None of them is liable for the offence of murder.

Answer: C
Since each of the four accused personally fired at R (a direct, principal act by each of them), all are directly guilty of causing death — there's no need to invoke Section 3(5) (common intention/vicarious liability, the BNS equivalent of old IPC S.34), because that section is only needed when someone is being held liable for an act actually done by another person. A mistake as to the victim's identity (R for M) doesn't excuse them — the intent to kill transfers.

Q3. If the offence is punishable with a fine or community service, the imprisonment which the Court imposes in default of payment of the fine or in default of community service shall be simple, and the term for which the Court directs the offender to be imprisoned... shall not exceed:

A. Two months when the fine ≤ ₹5,000
B. Four months when the fine ≤ ₹10,000
C. One year in any other case
D. All of the above

Answer: D — All of the above
This is the exact wording of Section 8(5), BNS 2023 (equivalent to old IPC S.67), which lays out this three-tier default-imprisonment scale. All three statements A, B, and C are individually correct parts of the same provision.

Q4. A gives Z fifty strokes with a stick. Here A may have committed the offence of voluntarily causing hurt to Z by the whole beating, and also by each of the blows which make up the whole beating. If A were liable to punishment for every blow, he might be imprisoned for fifty years, one for each blow. But he is liable only to one punishment for the whole beating. It is contained in:

A. Section 5 of BNS
B. Section 7 of BNS
C. Section 9 of BNS
D. Section 11 of BNS

Answer: C — Section 9 of BNS
This is the exact illustration given under Section 9, BNS 2023 ("Limit of punishment of offence made up of several offences" — equivalent to old IPC S.71), which prevents an offender from being punished separately for each component act of a single continuous offence.

Q5. To prove a child cannot get the benefit of doli incapax, the defence must prove. Choose the correct option:

A. The child is mature enough.
B. Child has intention to commit a crime
C. Child is a habitual offender
D. None of the above

Answer: A — The child is mature enough
Under Section 21, BNS 2023 (old IPC S.83), a child between 7–12 years is presumed incapable of committing a crime (doli incapax), unless it is shown that the child had attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and consequences of their conduct. Proving that maturity is exactly what defeats the doli incapax protection — regardless of intention or habitual behavior.

Q6. Assertion (A): An accused charged with an offence punishable with imprisonment up to 10 years becomes entitled to release under Section 479 BNSS after completion of one-half of the maximum punishment period.

Reason (R): Section 479 applies to all offences except those punishable with death or life imprisonment.

A. Both A and R are true and R correctly explains A.
B. Both A and R are true but R does not correctly explain A.
C. A is true but R is false.
D. A is false but R is true.

Answer: A
A is true — Section 479(1) BNSS's general rule (for someone who isn't stated to be a first-time offender) is released on bail once one-half of the maximum sentence has been undergone. R is true and is exactly why this offence qualifies for the benefit at all — Section 479 expressly carves out offences punishable with death or life imprisonment; since this offence (max 10 years) isn't one of those, the accused can invoke the section in the first place. So R correctly supports/explains A.

Q7. An accused is charged with an offence punishable up to 9 years imprisonment. He has remained in custody for 3 years and is a first-time offender. Which statement is correct?"

A. He has no right to release because one-half period is not completed.
B. He is entitled to release because a one-third period is completed.
C. Release depends entirely on the Court's discretion.
D. Release can only be ordered by the High Court.

Answer: B
As a first-time offender, the proviso to Section 479(1) applies: he becomes entitled to release once he has undergone one-third of the maximum sentence. One-third of 9 years = 3 years, which he has already served — so he is entitled to release on bond.

Q8. Assertion (A): The Court may continue detention beyond one-half of the maximum punishment period under Section 479.

Reason (R): Release under Section 479 is absolute and admits no exception.

A. Both true.
B. A true, R false.
C. A false, R true.
D. Both false.

Answer: B
A is true — the second provision to Section 479(1) lets the Court, after hearing the Public Prosecutor and recording reasons in writing, order continued detention beyond the one-half (or one-third) period. R is false precisely because of that same proviso — release under Section 479 is not absolute; it's subject to judicial discretion and to the bar in sub-section (2) where multiple cases/offences are pending against the accused.

How to Prepare New Criminal Laws for Bihar APO 2026

Since the new criminal laws have replaced the IPC, CrPC, and Indian Evidence Act, candidates should focus on understanding the updated provisions and their practical application.

For effective preparation:

• Read the Bare Acts of BNS, BNSS, and BSA thoroughly.

• Practice topic-wise MCQs regularly to improve conceptual clarity.

• Revise important sections, definitions, illustrations, and legal principles.

• Study recent amendments and landmark judgments wherever relevant.

• Attempt full-length mock tests to improve speed and accuracy.