Read each question, consider the options, then reveal the correct answer and explanation.
100 MCQs10 per page2 of 10
MCQ 11Drugs Act, 1976
Under Section 9A, inserted by Ordinance 128 of 2002, to whom may a person aggrieved by a licensing authority's decision appeal, as distinct from the Federal Appellate Board under Section 9?
The Central Licensing Board
Directly to the Supreme Court of Pakistan
The Provincial Appellate Authority, constituted by the Provincial Government
The Federal Ombudsman
Correct answerC — The Provincial Appellate Authority, constituted by the Provincial Government
Explanation
Section 9A creates a parallel provincial-level appeal route: '(1) Any person aggrieved by any decision of the licensing authority may prefer appeal to the Provincial Appellate Authority. (2) The Provincial Government shall constitute a Provincial Appellate Authority for the disposal of appeal preferred under sub-section (1) as may be prescribed' — distinguishing appeals against provincial licensing-authority decisions from the federal Appellate Board's broader jurisdiction over Central Licensing Board, Registration Board, and other decisions.
MCQ 12Copyright Ordinance, 1962
Under Section 5, when is a work NOT deemed to be published or performed 'in public'?
Except for infringement purposes, if published/performed/delivered without the licence or consent of the copyright owner
Whenever it is performed free of charge
Whenever it is performed to an audience of fewer than fifty people
Whenever it is performed outside Pakistan
Correct answerA — Except for infringement purposes, if published/performed/delivered without the licence or consent of the copyright owner
Explanation
Section 5 provides a crucial carve-out: 'Except for the purposes of infringement of copyright, a work shall not be deemed to be published or performed in public... if published, performed in public or delivered in public, without the licence or consent of the owner of the copyright' — meaning an unauthorized public performance still counts as 'public' for infringement purposes (so the owner can sue), but does NOT count as valid 'publication' for other purposes (e.g., starting the copyright term clock, or satisfying registration requirements).
MCQ 13Copyright Ordinance, 1962
Under Section 13's proviso (a), who is the first owner of copyright in a literary, dramatic, or artistic work made by an author employed by a newspaper/magazine proprietor under a contract of service, for publication purposes?
The proprietor, but only insofar as the copyright relates to publication in the newspaper/magazine or reproduction for that purpose; the author remains first owner in all other respects
Copyright is jointly and equally owned by the author and proprietor in all respects
The author retains full first ownership in every respect
The proprietor owns the copyright absolutely and exclusively in all respects
Correct answerA — The proprietor, but only insofar as the copyright relates to publication in the newspaper/magazine or reproduction for that purpose; the author remains first owner in all other respects
Explanation
Section 13, proviso (a) creates a split-ownership rule specific to journalistic employment: absent contrary agreement, the newspaper/magazine proprietor is first owner only 'in so far as the copyright relates to the publication of the work in any newspaper, magazine or similar periodical, or to the reproduction of the work for the purpose of its being so published, but in all other respects the author shall be the first owner' — a nuanced balance recognizing both the employer's publishing interest and the author's broader creative ownership.
MCQ 14Banks (nationalization) Act, 1974
A private individual buys shares in a nationalized bank on the open market after the Federal Government sells down its stake to 60% of the bank's capital under Section 5A. Does the Act continue to apply to that bank?
Only Sections 1-10 cease to apply; Sections 11 onward remain in force
Yes, the Act continues to apply in full regardless of the percentage of shares sold
No — under Section 5(6)(b) (and by parity of reasoning, Section 5A's analogous threshold), once not less than fifty-one percent of shares are sold, the Act's provisions cease to apply to that bank
The Act's applicability depends solely on the buyer's nationality
Correct answerC — No — under Section 5(6)(b) (and by parity of reasoning, Section 5A's analogous threshold), once not less than fifty-one percent of shares are sold, the Act's provisions cease to apply to that bank
Explanation
Since the Federal Government's stake has been reduced to 40% (i.e., 60% has been sold, exceeding the 51% threshold), Section 5(6)(b)'s rule that 'where not less than fifty-one per cent of the shares are so sold, the provisions of this Act shall cease to apply to such bank' would be triggered, meaning the bank would exit the Act's regulatory framework entirely — a practical illustration of how the privatization provisions were designed to fully 'graduate' banks out of the nationalization statute once majority private ownership is achieved.
MCQ 15Bankers' Books Evidence Act, 1891
Considering the Act's full amendment history, which of the following best characterizes its overall legislative lineage?
A statute enacted in 1974 alongside the Federal Investigation Agency Act
A late-19th-century British-Indian statute (1891) progressively amended by a 1893 Act, a 1900 Act, the 1914 Repealing and Amending Act, and post-independence Adaptation Orders and Ordinances through the 1960s
A statute that has never been amended since its original enactment
A wholly modern statute enacted after Pakistan's independence with no colonial antecedents
Correct answerB — A late-19th-century British-Indian statute (1891) progressively amended by a 1893 Act, a 1900 Act, the 1914 Repealing and Amending Act, and post-independence Adaptation Orders and Ordinances through the 1960s
Explanation
The Act's footnotes trace a long amendment lineage: originally Act XVIII of 1891, amended by the Bankers' Books Evidence Act, 1893 (adding clause (c) to Section 2(2)) and the Bankers' Books Evidence Act, 1900 (amending the 'company' definition), trimmed by the Repealing and Amending Act, 1914, and subsequently adapted to independent Pakistan through Adaptation Orders (1937, 1949, 1961) and the Central Laws (Statute Reform) Ordinance, 1960 — a layered legislative history spanning nearly seven decades before settling into its present form.
MCQ 16Banks (nationalization) Act, 1974
Under Section 12(4), what annual reporting obligation does the State Bank have regarding loan write-offs and financial relief involving departures from established banking practice?
The State Bank shall prepare and submit to the Federal Government a special report on cases involving wrongful loss or wrongful gain from departures from established banking practices or authorized procedures
The report is submitted only to the bank's own Board, not the Federal Government
Each individual bank, not the State Bank, must report directly to Parliament
The State Bank has no such reporting obligation
Correct answerA — The State Bank shall prepare and submit to the Federal Government a special report on cases involving wrongful loss or wrongful gain from departures from established banking practices or authorized procedures
Explanation
Section 12(4) requires the State Bank to 'prepare, and submit to the Federal Government, a special report every year on cases of write off of loans, mark-up and other dues, or financial relief through rescheduling and restructuring of loans and subsidized loans provided by the nationalized commercial banks, in which established banking practices or authorized procedures have been departed from with a view to causing wrongful loss... or conferring wrongful gain... or such departure has caused wrongful loss... or conferred wrongful gain.'
MCQ 17Federal Investigation Agency Act, 1974
How do Section 3(1)'s reference to 'offences specified in the Schedule' and Section 6's Schedule-amendment power work together over time?
Section 6 restricts Section 3(1) to only Pakistan Penal Code offences
Section 3(1) defines the Agency's jurisdiction by reference to the Schedule, while Section 6 allows that jurisdictional list to be kept current through executive notification as new offences or statutes warrant FIA involvement
They are unrelated; Section 3 fixes jurisdiction permanently and Section 6 has never actually been used
Section 3(1) can only be amended by repealing the entire Act
Correct answerB — Section 3(1) defines the Agency's jurisdiction by reference to the Schedule, while Section 6 allows that jurisdictional list to be kept current through executive notification as new offences or statutes warrant FIA involvement
Explanation
Together, these provisions create a dynamic jurisdictional framework: Section 3(1) ties the Agency's core investigative mandate to 'the offences specified in the Schedule,' while Section 6 allows the Federal Government to add, modify, or omit Schedule entries by Gazette notification — explaining why, over nearly five decades, dozens of S.R.O.s and MOI notifications have progressively reshaped the Schedule to add offences under newer statutes like the Prevention of Electronic Crime Act, 2016 and the Anti-Money Laundering Act, 2010.
MCQ 18Drugs Act, 1976
Under Section 11A, inserted to address conflict of interest, what restriction applies to members of the various drug-regulatory boards and committees?
Only the Chairman is restricted from serving on multiple boards
Board members may serve on unlimited numbers of boards simultaneously with no restriction
No person who is a member of the Appellate Board, Central Licensing Board, a Provincial Quality [Control] Board, the Registration Board, or an Expert Committee shall simultaneously be a member of another such board or committee
The restriction applies only to Provincial, not Federal, board members
Correct answerC — No person who is a member of the Appellate Board, Central Licensing Board, a Provincial Quality [Control] Board, the Registration Board, or an Expert Committee shall simultaneously be a member of another such board or committee
Explanation
Section 11A provides: 'No person who is a member of the Appellate Board, Central Licensing Board, a Provincial Quality Board, the Registration Board or a member of Expert Committee shall be a member of the any other board or committee of which he is a member to avoid any conflict of interest' — a cross-membership prohibition designed to prevent the same individual from sitting on multiple bodies that might review or appeal each other's decisions, preserving independence and objectivity in the regulatory appeals process.
MCQ 19Drugs Act, 1976
Under Section 11(5)(a), what is one of the powers and functions of the Provincial Quality Control Board?
To inspect premises where drugs are manufactured or sold and recommend cancellation or suspension of licences for contravention
To set national import tariffs on pharmaceuticals
To try criminal drug offences directly as a court
To appoint the Director-General of the FIA
Correct answerA — To inspect premises where drugs are manufactured or sold and recommend cancellation or suspension of licences for contravention
Explanation
Section 11(5)(a) empowers the Board 'to inspect any premises where any drug is being, or is to be, manufactured or sold and to recommend to the appropriate authority the cancellation or suspension of the licence to manufacture or sell drugs granted to any person who is found to be contravening... any of the provisions of this Act, or the rules' — an inspection and recommendation function, with actual cancellation/suspension power resting elsewhere (e.g., Section 41's licensing authority/Central Licensing Board power).
MCQ 20Bankers' Books Evidence Act, 1891
A party in litigation seeks to prove a disputed bank transaction using a photocopy of a ledger page, without any accompanying certificate from the bank's principal accountant or manager. Is this admissible as a 'certified copy' under the Act?
Yes, any photocopy of a bank ledger automatically qualifies as a certified copy
No — without the certificate meeting the requirements of Section 2(8), it does not qualify as a statutory 'certified copy' and cannot claim the Act's evidentiary benefit
Yes, provided the photocopy is notarized by any notary public
Yes, provided the customer whose account it is consents in writing
Correct answerB — No — without the certificate meeting the requirements of Section 2(8), it does not qualify as a statutory 'certified copy' and cannot claim the Act's evidentiary benefit
Explanation
Section 2(8) is definitional and prescriptive: a document only qualifies as a 'certified copy' for purposes of the Act's simplified proof mechanism (Section 4) if it carries the required certificate — confirming truth, ordinary-book status, ordinary-course-of-business creation, and continued custody — dated and subscribed by the principal accountant or manager. A bare photocopy without this certificate does not attract the Act's evidentiary shortcut, though it might still be tendered under ordinary rules of evidence.
