SCHOOL OF LAW, NARSEE MONJEE

INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES,

BANGALORE

PROJECT FOR LAW OF CRIMES (IPC)

Submitted by: Ekjot Kaur

81021219014
BBA LLB (Hons.)
Semester III

Submitted to: Prf. Sukanya Singha

(Law of Crimes)
 CONCEPT OF “GOOD FAITH” UNDER IPC

Good Faith is defined as “honesty or sincerity of intention” in the Oxford

Dictionary. In other words, it can be described as an act which is done by an
individual with sincere intentions with due care as well as caution.
The concept of Good Faith is vast, under Indian Penal Code. It has been defined
under various sections. The concept has been given a lot of importance since it
is used to determine the intention of an accused/individual when a crime was
committed with regard to Legal usage. It also amplifies the certitude, whether or
not the act which was done by an individual was accompanied by evil intent or
was good in good faith. In other words, if the act done was in a bona fide
manner or not.
Even Indian Penal Code defines it in a manner which usually depicts its negative
quality.
Section 52, under Indian Penal Code, provides with the definition of Good
Faith,
“Nothing is said to be done or believed in ‘good faith’ which is done or
believed without due care and attention.”
The definition provide by this section implies a negative expression of the
concept of good faith. Intention, reasonability and skill, these three are three
factors which are considered while determining if the act was done in good
faith. Also, the expression ‘due care and attention’ has not been defined
anywhere but in this section of IPC.
It is understood that a person exercised reasonable skill and care while carrying
out the act for it to qualify as an act done under good faith. The question of
whether an act was done with ‘due care and attention’ depends on the
circumstances of the case while taking into account the mental capacity of the
person whose conduct is I the question. Law is reasonable and does not except
the same care and attention from every individual.
The facts of the case Sukaroo Kabiraj v. Empress1 stated that the person accused
performed an operation with an ordinary knife on an individual who had
consumed internal pills, which led to his death due to excessive blood loss and
hemorrhage. The court held that the act could not have been done in good faith

1
Sukaroo Kabiraj v. Empress, (1887) ILR 14 Cal 566
since the accused did not hold any degree which made him legally entitled to
perform such an operation on an individual.
In Muhammad Ishq v. Emperor2, the court held that the accused was laboring
under a misapprehension. It was also found that there was an absence of due
care and attention on the part of the accused and therefore, it was held in the
court that the act could not have been done under good faith. The question
which arose in this case was whether the act was done in good faith, but under
bona fide mistake.

Section 88 of Indian Penal Code states, “an act not intended to cause death,
done by consent in good faith for person’s benefit”
It is not an offence if an intention of causing death of an individual is present
while commission or doing of such an act by a person. Such an act should be
done/ carried out in good faith of an individual.
The doer of such an act should have no intention of causing death, have the
knowledge that such an act can cause death of the person for whom the act is
being done, in good faith, one who has also given consent or somehow implied
that he is ready to bear the harm that can be caused to him by such an act.

Section 89 of Indian Penal Code states provisions for any act which is done for
the benefit of a child, a person of unsound mind, by the consent of their
guardian, and in good faith.
An act is not an offence if it is done by an individual for a child who is of 12
years or younger or for an insane person/a person with unsound mind, with the
consent of the guardian of such a child or a person, either openly expressed or
implied. It is not an offence if done in good faith or by reason of any harm
which can cause or be intended to cause to that person.
Exceptions to section 89 under IPC are:
1. If there is an intentional attempt of causing death by the doer of the
person for whom the act is being done.
2. If the doer of such an act has the knowledge that such an act can result
in death of the person for whom the act is being done, in good faith.
3. If intentional grievous hurt is caused or an attempt is made to cause
grievous hurt, by the doer.
2
Muhammad Ishaq vs Emperor, 25 Ind Cas 331
 4. If such a person who does the act in good faith for another, abets
someone to commit an offence, can’t take defense under this
provision.

PLEA OF GOOD FAITH AS A DEFENCE

Plea of Private defense has been an excessive part of the Indian Penal Code
1861(IPC) since its inception.
 Section 76 of IPC states that it is not an offence if it is done by an
individual by reason of mistake of fact and not that of by mistake of law,
if such a person believes that he is bound to do it, by law.
 Section 77 of Indian Penal Code mentions an act of a judge while
exercising his judicial powers while being under the impression that such
rights are provided to him by the law.
 Section 78 of IPC states that any act done in accordance to an order or a
judgement, while the said judgement is still in force, in spite of whether
the court had the jurisdiction to pass such an order, given that the accused
did the act under good faith, and believed that the court who passed the
order had such jurisdiction.
 Section 79 of IPC states that it is not an offence if the accused believes that it is
justified by law to do such an act by reason of mistake of fact and not due to
mistake of law.
In R v. Princes3, the accused unlawfully took an unmarried minor girl and appealed
that he had bona fide intentions and was unaware of the act that the girl was a minor.
The court held that the act of abduction is immoral and wrongful and the defense of
mistake of fact did not apply in this case.
In Keso Sahu v. Saligram Shah4, it was held by the court that it was shown by the
accuse that he, in good faith, brought the cart of rice and the cartman, to the police,
believing all the while that that there was an illegal activity going on in the household.
Since the act was done under good faith, the defense was applicable and valid.

 Section- 92 of IPC provides defense for an act which was done by an individual
for another, in good faith, without that that person’s consent.
reasons which are provided under section 92 for such an act are:

3
R v. Princes (1875) LR 2 CCR 154
4
Keso Sahu v. Saligram Shah (1977) Cri LJ 1725
 1. The person for whom the act was done in good faith, endures some
sort of harm;
2. The act was done during such circumstances, that it was impossible
to take the person’s consent for whom the act was done, in good
faith;
3. The person for whom the act was done was incapable of providing
his consent to such an act;
4. An individual with no guardian, or a person who has been given the
lawful charge of that person, for whom the act was done in good
faith.
Essential Ingredients of section 92 under Indian Penal Code are:
 the act done should benefit the person who is going to or has suffered
harm.
 It should be done in good faith.

IPC also provides with the exceptions to section 92. These are:
1. If an act was done intentionally for causing death or an intentional
attempt of causing death by the doer.
2. If the individual who is committing/committed/commits an act with
the knowledge that such an act can cause death or is likely to cause
death.
3. If the doer voluntarily causes hurt or attempts to cause hurt to the
person for whom the act is being done, in good faith.
4. If a person is instigated or abetted to commit an offence by the doer
due to intentional enhancement of his act.

 Section 93 of IPC states that if a communication is made by an individual to

another in good faith, such a communication will not amount to an offence
even if the person suffers some kind of harm due to such communication.
The communication which has been made, under section 93, should be:
1. Made in good faith;
2. For the benefit of the person to whom it is made.

 Section 300, exception 3 of Indian Penal Code states that it is culpable

homicide not amounting to murder if the accused is, a police servant or is
aiding a police servant or acts for the advancement of general justice, and while
doing such an act, exceeds the power which is provided under law, to him and
cause death of a person while doing such an act, in good faith. Such person also
believes that such an act, he will be discharging his duty.