Under Article 32 a writ petition can be made to the Supreme Court by a person who himself has suffered only. Under which of the following, a relative or friend of a person aggrieved can file a writ petition:

Related MCQs

• Under which one of the following cases the traditional rule of filing petition only by the person aggrieved except in the case of habeas corpus is relaxed:
• Give correct response. A and his wife W went to have dinner with a friend. He carried his gun with him, and before going to dinner he discharged the gun and kept it in a private place in his friend’s house. A, then went to church after dinner and in the night returned home with his gun. He carried the gun in the room. He in taking it up touched the trigger and the gun went off and killed the wife. It was found that when A was away to church another man had privately taken the gun out to shoot and had returned it loaded to the place where it was put in the friend’s house. In this case :
• The Supreme Court has power under Article 32 to issue directions or orders or writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari:
• Petitions to the Supreme Court under Article 32 are subject to the rule of Res judicata except:
• Every person has the right to defend the property of himself or of any other person against the attempts and :
• A, person instigates to B & his friend to beat C with lathis but one of the assailant took suddenly spearhead & stabbed the person
• In a case the accused who was a widower led a homely life with his 12-year-old son, nephew and unmarried daughter. The accused suffered from no insanity. One day the accused accompanied by his son went with an axe in his hand to woods to gather siadi leaves. Sometimes after his nephew who had been working in the field discovered the accused sleeping under a tree with the blood stained axe beside him. There was no trace of the son of the accused. Later his son was found hacked to death. It transpired in evidence that the accused for the time being was seized of a state of mind in which he visualised that a tiger was going to pounce on him and as such mistaking his son as the tiger he cut him into pieces.
• A, the captain of a steam vessel, suddenly and without any fault or negligence on his part, finds himself in such a position that before he can stop his vessel, he must inevitably run down a boat B, with twenty to thirty passengers on board, unless he changes the course of his vessel, and that by changing his course, he must incur risk of running down a boat C with only two passengers on board, which he may possibly clear. Here if A alters his course without any intention to run down the boat C and in good faith for the purpose of avoiding the danger to the passengers in boat B. But in the course of this action A runs down boat C.
• The father of the accused was attacked by the deceased and suffered a simple injury on his head, the accused in order to protect his father administered a fatal below on the chest of deceased with Ballam
• A sets fire to a house to scare away the occupants. But the whole house was gutted and two occupants died. When charged with murder of two persons. A defended saying that he has no intention to cause death. This was accepted by the Court. The Court’s ruling can be said to be: