1.
Consider the following statements:
1. In the case of Mithu v. State of Punjab, the constitutional validity of Section 303 of the Indian Penal Code was examined by the Supreme Court of India and held that this Section violates Article 14 and Article 21 of the Constitution,
2. Counsel for appellants/petitioners in the above case contended that Section 303 of the Indian Penal Code is arbitrary, because it authorizes deprivation of life by an unjust and unfair procedure.
3. Section 303 of the Indian Penal Code provides punishment for culpable homicide by causing death of person other that the person whose death was intended.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

2.
Section 159 of Indian Penal Code is attracted

3.
Which one of the expressive factors does not constitute sedition?

4.
Six persons were charged under Section 302, Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, two were acquitted the remaining four cannot be convicted under

5.
Which of the following statements is correct about the offence of dacoity under the Indian Penal Code, 1860?

6.
Which one of the following sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 provides that right of private defence of body extends to causing harm short of death?

7.
The accused attacked the victim with a spear and the others inflicted blows on legs and arms with lathes.

8.
A murder is always a culpable homicide but a culpable homicide is not always a murder. This statement is: