ACADEMIC HOUR IPC-Notes (All 5 Units with case laws) Unie ‘About Indian Penal Code ‘The tndian secuty system has been one that has gone through 2 lat of tests and examinations thaughout the ime. Ths is due to the polities as well asthe socal situation and stancing ofthe country. Inia @ land of diverse cultures ana raion. Is & place where people rom various religions well as ethic backgrounds hve together. As result of these, there might arise certain esputes amongst the people. The cultural diversity is such that thre are disputes and clashes of interest between deren states, eznic to particular cultural consortiums, There ae also many intrusion from nelghbering courtris and terrorist organizations. Then, there s the isue ofthe Naxalites as well as he day to cay common cme. To counter all uch crimes and breach of aw, @ document has been formulated, that covers eacn of these suatons separately and ists out the penalties for ‘cade solo applicable tothe state of Jemmu and Kashmir Mowever,k was known in this state as the Rend Penal Code (RPC) ‘he Indian Penal code, in its basc form, is 2 document that Hts ll the cases ane punishments that a parson commiting any crimes ie lable tobe chargee witn. It cavers any Incan cizen ora persan of Indian origin, The exception nere le that any king of miltary or the armed forces crimes can not be chargeé based on the Ingian Penal Cade. Miltary as well 3s the armed Tarces have a diferent dedicated ist of laws and the Indian Penal Code does not have the privilege to supersede any part off. The Indian Penal Code also hs the power to charge for any crimes committed by a person who is an Then ckizen on any meons of transport belonging to India-an Indian aircraft or an Indian ship, ‘The Indian Peral Code has its roots inthe times ofthe Britsh rule in India, [ts known to have originated from a British legslaton account i's colonial conquests, dating back tothe year 1860.The frst and te introductory draft of te Indian Penal Code was formulates in 1860s ana was dane under the able supervision of te Fst Law Comission The commission was righteously enared by Lard Macaulay. The fest penal code came into existence way back in te Year 1862 Since then, alt of amendments Nave been 498-A.The total number of sections contained in the Indian Penal Code are five hundred eleven. All these sections pertain to @ Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-corsACADEMIC HOUR particular category of eres committed by cvllans of Indian origin. There are sectons related to Dowry Laws and jurisdictions In Ind, 25 wall as there are soveal sections that concern various types af criminal laws, The Indian Penal Coee is thus the most fundamental documento all the law enforcer as well a the entre juletary in India, 7 of erime- An act oF actives prohibited by Law (IPC) ‘he most precae an least ambiguous dtintion of cme i at which defines ae Behav whe Ie prohed by the ania invitation ofthe erminal low (statutory and cose lan), committed without defense Or excuse, and penalized by the ste Be 8 felony or misdemeanor, Crime s often seen as 2 social problem. Why is tat? here is no objective set of socal conditons wnose harmful etectsnacessanly make them social problems. Something is @ socal problem only fits perceived a5 such, What regarded as 2 social problem thus varies overtime, For example, in some places and times, prostitution ané gambling have been seen as socal problems, even ones worthy of eriinalzation, yt in others seca practices hove been seen af private vies best regulate by individual morality rather than criminal a Since there sno satisfactory definition of Cxime, the Indien Penal Code, 1860 uses the word “Offence in place of Crime. Section 40 ofthe IPC defines Offence as an act punishable by the Code. An Offence takes place In two ways, ether By commission of an actor Whon 3 Crime Is done, any member of the pubic can Insttute proceedings against the person accused of the ofence. Only in certain exceptional cates, the persone concernes alone can Institute the criminal proceedings. Example of such crimes includes Matrimonial cases, dowry cases, defamation etc, joments of crime ‘The fllowing elements are to be satisfied to constitute an act as a ce, 1. Human Being Download Website AcademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-corsACADEMIC HOUR 2 Mensa 3) Actus reus 3 funy frst eerentil element ofa Crime is that it must be committed by 8 human beng Is owmer's subject to ClilTortous abit. In case, the crime is committed by an animal, 2 Rvesienp 3 Rvs Mrs, Talson 3) Rvs Wheat & Stock o act par se (Sef Is criminal, the act becomes @ crime only when It's done with a gull mind, The jurist mines the Hens Rea. "guilty mind, produces criminal labity inthe comman law based criminal lw jursdleion IMlustration.& Elckam le coined by 2 gang of robbers ang he forced to areak tne doors of @ house for bbery to enter, ang the rebbere commited robbery intention-mens rea. This principle is embodied in the maxim, actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea. Meaning an act dows Rot make one gulty unless the mind Is also legally blameworthy. 3 Actus Reus: Comprises the felling 1, Human Conduct or an Activity 2 The Resul ofthe Act Proton by Law. ‘A phystcal act that attracts criminal sanctions Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-corsACADEMIC HOUR Actus reus, sometimes called the external element or the objective element ofa crime is the Latin tem for the “aul act" Wien, nen proved beyand a reasonable doubt in combination withthe mans rea. There should be an extemal act. The Act and the mans rea should be concutrent and related, ere should be some injury or the act shoule be prohibted under the existing law. The act should carry some king of. punishment Since thers is no saistactory deition of rime, the Indian Penal Code, 1860 uses the word ‘Offence in pce of Crim, Section 20 ofthe IPC dines Orfence a on act punssoble by the Cade. fn Offence taxes place in two woys, either by commission of an fact or By omission ofan act When a Crime is done, any member ofthe public can institute proceedings against the person accused ofthe offence, Only In czrain exceptional cases, tne persons concared alone can Institute the erninal proceedings. Example of such crimes Include atrmonial cases, cowry cases, defamation ste What are the stages of a crime? What Is an attempt to commit an offence? Distinguish between Preparation and Attempt. Conceiving the idea of performing a legally defined harm - Its immaterial whether the person concsving such an idea kKows that fs legal to serorm it At this stage, there sno acon taken to harm anvoody and is nota crime to mera CN Of oing narmful actwty because the parson thinking IE may not even Want to actualy do. Fer example, merely tine kiting 1000s af people instantaneously, is nat a crime Deliberation = At thi stage, a perso conadidates hie devious ideas ang identys ways of doing i. Agen, there no action taxen and tere iso harm dane to anybady nor fs there any intention to cause injury to snyboay Ts stil the thinking stage ne te not @ crime, For exemple, merely thinking abauk how to Bulls device tat com kl 1000s 9f people instantaneously, Not From a legal standpoint the above two stages are Inconsaquential because man being a thoughtful animal, he thinks about Innumerable things without any material result Intention (Mens Rea) ~ This tage isa significant progress from mere delieration towarcs actual commission of the crime, At ths stage, te person has made up Ns mind to actualy Impermant or execute Mis devious plas. Thre i an intention to cause harm but he hasn't yer taxen any acuon hat manifests ‘ls intention Further, there is no way to prove an Intantion because evan devi cant read'e human mind. Ths, Wis ls nat considered a crime. For examate, intention to Kl anyone is hata rime I se. Honever san essen greient of eis because what teton to cause ht, there can dato cite. Oo the ster Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-corsACADEMIC HOUR arts manifesting tel in the form of physical actions Preparation Commit tre crime, For example, purchasing polzon. However, fis possible for he person eo abandon his course of acon at this sage without causing any nar to anyone. In genera, preparation [Enos considered a erme because Ix cannos be proves beyond aoust tne goal of te preparation. For example, purchasing knife with an intention to kil somone is not crime because cannot be determined whether te kife was bought to kll someone oF Te chop vegetables. Preparation - As ths stage the intention to cause harms Eanatsts of arranging or bulldng things that are needed However, there are certain exceotions where even preparation for committing an offence is crime, These are ~ See 122" Callctng arms with an intention oF waging wer against te Govt. of Ila Sec 126 - Preparng fo comm deprecation a taritores of any power in allance or at peace with the Gov. of Indl, Sac 255 ~ Countarfating operations for curency. Sec 399 = Preparation fo comme dacoty tempt Tis sage sane by puoi phys actos at el urtonpe case ae bound acu icy Uorestited, he il complet the commission af the cme, Since the Intention ofthe person can be determines witout doubt from is actions, an attompt t commit a crime Is eoridered a erme because I lft unpunished, crime Is bound to happen ane Prevention of erie is equalyimprane fora healthy Socay. ‘Actual commission of the offence - This s the final stage where the crme s actully done, Distinction between Preparation and Attempt are isa vary ina lin between praparaton and attempt Wil IPC doas not define alter of them, I vary important atingin between then because aegis ime Dt preparation it Suh, Separation sna Aer p te phy trample, keeping a anol in pocket and long for the enemy to kil» preparation because one can asandon ene plan anytime, but taking out the piston and puling te tagger Is attempt because I leaves ne room for turing back. Thus, I general Preparaten involv callecing materal, resources, ana planning for commiting an act while aterpe signifies a drect movere towards commission ster the preparations are made. Ordinary, to consctute an attempt the ‘allowing elements are naaced ~ 1, mens rea to commit the crime 2. Snact wich constutes Oe actus raus of aerial atremot 3. falurein accomplenmant nthe case of R vs Cheesman 1862, Lord Blackburn idenbed a key dference between the two. He says that Ifthe actual transaction hae commenced which would have ended inthe ctime ft nt interrupted, there ls clearly an attempt to com the Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-corsACADEMIC HOUR ss that come in handy in éistinguishing However, this isnot the only er betweon ia for determining an attempt, The following are fur fe per ths test, anyining short Sf last step Is preperation ond not attempt. This fs becouse 2¢ long a6 there Isa step remaining for completion of the etime, the person can abandon Ie For example, A ebains poison to kil Band mixes With food tra B Is supposed to eat, Sut he has not Yat given the food to 8, Thus, ls sil preparation. As Soon as he Keeps the food on the table fom where 8 eats everyday, the last sep Is dane andi becomes an attempt Ine ct of va mya A 1984, he acute gave ods to pt om hat aod he they ware ram Berge Co ‘tthe said company, At this tine he mos arrestes for attempy to moke flee document uncer secon 464, However, Ros held hat fe was et an attempt because the name of the company and the seal were not put on tre forms and ntl that was done, he forgery would net bu complete. Inthe case of Abhayanand Misha vs State of Bihar AIR 1964, A apoicd tothe Paina University Yor Ma exam and he Supplied documents proving that he asa graduate and was werkng as heacmaster ofa [school Liter on was found that te documents ware fake, ie was Meld tat ie was an attamps to cheat because he hed done ‘verything towards achieving his goal. 2,“ Thdiapensable Element Test or Theory of Impossibility ‘as per thir test al of fnspesgble elements must be present fo equal attempt For example, a person hes the gun to kil bt he forgot the bul, In this case, t would not oe an attempt. Further, he goes to place whee victim srould be but isnot then eS ot gully of sttempe unger this tet. In other words enere i something's person needs to commit tne cme but is not son there ie ot an attempt, This test has generated alot of controversy ever ince was llc Inthe cove of Queen VS Coiling, where was held thats pickpocket was not guity of attempt even when he put his hand into the pocket of sameane With itarton to staal bat did not find anyting.Simiaty nthe case of Rvs Me Pherson 1857, the accused was ald not {uily of attempting to Break into ulling nd steal goods because the goods were not there. However, these cases were overuled in R vs King 1892, where tne accused was convicted for attempting to steal from the ana bag of 2 woman although there was nothing i te bap. Ilustaton (o) of section S11 Is basee on ths decision. a, "put For interruption Test 1 we action proves thatthe persan would have gone through with the plan If nat forthe Interruption such as arrest, then ittempt For example, = person pants a gun at anather ands about te pull the trggar. Hei overpowered and was stopped ‘ram pulng the tigger Ths shows hats he hod nat been fterrped, be WOuld have committed the cme and he thus guilty ‘of attempt even though the last step of the eime has not be performed, 4. “Unequivocality Testor On the Job Theory fa persen does something that shows his commitment to follow through and commit the ce then itis an attempt, For ‘example, In the case of State of Mah vs Mohd. Yakub 1980, three persons were “une wit a Wuck leaded with sivr near {he see dock Further the sound of engine of 2 machanizad Bost was Meard rom 2 nearby creck. They were convicted of ‘tempting to smuggle siver.9 Sarkariachssrved that what constitutes at attempts a mad question of fw ang the facts ota Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-corsase, attempt done when the cuit takes del Offence evan if the step Is not the penuleimate o ACADEMIC HOUR berate and overt step that show an unequivocal intention te commit the between Tort and Breach of Conta Sreach of Contract art acturs when the ght avaliable to al he persons fr general (cight.in rem) slated. witout. the istenee of any contrac Breach oF contact occurs due To 8 breach O18 duly (HEMT Th persona) Bareed UpOA BF he parties themseves. ‘Viet s compensated for uniquidated damages os per the juzgment of the Judges. Thus, damages are sways unigidated eis ts Compensated 8s par the terms OF Gre COnraer and damages are Usual Jeucares the persons. ay CoWGE Sah GING BAGH By Te CONTAC BgTEEG to By Be part Doctrine of pviy of contract does not apply because there ne contract between the partes, Yois was held the ease of Donaghue vs Stevenson 1932. ry he Paes win Whe pry OT cana can TaTaTEThe Su Tor applon even cones whore a contract & vow For example, ainor may be lable In Tor, enw contra VON, There po question of compensation: wth a minor is vole ab into and so ior cannot be hele Fable for any Tusice i met by compensating We vet Tor A ojunard exemplary dameges may aso be avardes In Bhim Singh vs State of AIR 1986 ~ the point" was bworded exemplary damages for violation ‘hs rights given by are 21 Tce Ts hat ery By compansatng We vein Yor SCAT oss In the ease of Donaghue vs Stevenson 1932, stan a ar of tana pea the rat nto = Download Website ArademicHourcom | purchased ginger beer in a restaurant for his woman friend. She dass. Thereby, she saw a dead snall In the drink. She sued the od a ty Oar he pic in general or mating sre there or Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-corscovplots was staying there took a dive in th Paralyzed ang cle after 13 ys, The defenda ACADEMIC HOUR © pool. The pool design wos defective and the person's head hk the ts pleaded that he was a stranger tothe contract. It was held thet he plea of strange to contract if relevant. The hotel wes Hels liebe for compensation even though tnere Wot Mo ontract between the person and te hotel andthe hotel was made to pay S0Lacs a= exemplary damages Distinction between Tort and Crime Tart occurs when the Aight avalable foal the personsin general (right n rem) is olted without the existence of any contrac Tort Sccars whan he FORE avalable toa the parsons h general Wight me) WolaEEa {and fe also sevously affects ha socety person TEs Comparaively ss serious and ates on We] Tet comparatively more serious nd afecta The parson bs WON 3 The HOR THREAT ET TSH TSONGA STIR STATA TOOHY AGT HO Tea private wrens Since isa private wrong the wronged individual Trust fie sit himselt for comoges Tis puble wrong Sneek iF publ wrong, The Sut Is fed by The Gow The su Tor demages Tompronise is passibie between the pares. For “cxompl, person who has been defamed, can compromise wien the defamer for a certain sum of Tiere fo compromise Tor the punishment: For example, Fa person Ts Guy of Murer cannot pay mney and reaice Ns sentence, Compeunding Ts posse Compounding Te generaly Pot posse Tuatice sme by compensating ve vic for Fis Injury ard exemplary damages may alo be awarded to the vicim. In Bhim Singh vs State of 2K AIR 1986 -tne plant was awarded exemplary damages for volation of highs given y ait 21, TUstce srt by puriahing the aggressor By prison or fine. In Some SpECHe caBES Bs ‘Wen In IPC compensation may be given to the victim. Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Mal ~ query@academichourcorACADEMIC HOUR re als grounds for tortious suk ‘34 €149-common intention and common abject Section 34 of the Indian Penal Cade refers to common intention. It says that when a criminal at is done by several parsons in furtherance of the comman intention of al, each of such persons le Hable for that actin the same manner os ft were ane by tim lone. Common objec: dea wn Secon 49 of IC. an tence cited by any member oh be Fikely to be committed in prosecution of that object, every person who, at the time of the committing of thet offence, is & ember ofthe same assembly, Is gully ofthat offence ‘+ Common intention recuires that the number of persons should be more than one. Atleast 5 persons are necessary for common objec (See-181] Specie ane substantive offence . ‘+ ommmon intention may 20 of any form where commen object must be one ofthe five objects specified In Section 141 of 1°. + In"Common intenten prior mevtng ef minds is necessary. But It f= net a regulrement under Common ebject. The only requiremart Ig tat thre must be 5 of more persons forming an unlawtl assem. + Substantive offence under 5-141 ofthe Pc, af unlawful assembly, caso valved in $149. But S.34 contains only a rule of tow. So while specie enrge is necessary fr 5.149 thats not necessary in the ease o 5.34 Decislons:Mohanan v. State of Kerala 2000 (2) KLT 562 Honble The Chef Justice Mr. Justice Art Pasayat & Hon'ble Mr. Justice KS. Rachakrishran Ried ‘Common object” lferent fram 9 commen intention’ a8 It oes not require @ prior concert and a cammen meeting of minds before the attack, It Is enough if each has the same object in view and thelr rumber Is five or more and that they act as an assembly to actleve that object. The ‘commen objec’ of an assembly Is to be ascertained from the acts and language of the rmamibers composing it and ffom a consideration of all the surrounding circumstances. It may be gatheres from the course of Conduct adopted by the members ofthe assembly, What the common abject ofthe unlawful assembly is ata particular stage of the incident fs essentially @ question of fact to be determined, Keeping in view the nature of the assembly, the arms caried by the Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-corsACADEMIC HOUR ‘members and the behaviour of the members at or near the scene ofthe incident, Its not necessary under law thet in all cases of Uuslawfulassemely, with an unlawful eommon object, the same must be translated into action or be successful. Under the Explanation to 5. 141, an assembly which was not unlawful when it was assembled, may Subsequently become unlawful. Tels not necessary that the Intention or the purpose which is necessary to rencer an assembly an Unlawful one comes into existence atthe autset. The time of forming an unlawfl intent is not material. An assembly which, a RS commencement or even for sometime thereafter, is lawful, may subsequently become unlawful. In other words, it can develop during the course af inccent atthe spet instant. (Para. 12) General Exceptions 1PC- Indan Ponal Code isthe major erinal aw in India which defines substantve offences and prescribes their respective punishments. Every offence Is treated as a crime against socity. One of the majr requirement to accuse anyone ofan offence iste presence of mens rea or gulty ming. I § the saying n law that an act should be coupled with necessary mens rea to constitute a crime. n certain cases even if the at is ot performed, one can be punished for his guilty mind. Thus forms the importance of mens re in In which the ming can be transformed by some external forces to perform the ilegal act. Thus even though an act is erminal the mind had no intention to perform the same. Such isthe case when an exteral force instigates the mind to do 3 crime, In criminal law the most heare saying fx that no Innocent must be punished even thousand cnminal escape, Ie ll act be just to Punish someone wno was contoled by a ciminal as @ puppet todo an legal ac. Lke wise, there are cetan cumstances which ‘would exempt @ person from major punishment of entitle to smaller punishments. Such eicumstances are termed ‘General the relevant sectons in brackets 1 Mistake (76,79) Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Mal ~ query@academichourcorACADEMIC HOUR Sutil act 77,78 ‘Reedentt60} Necessty(82 Infaney{ 2,63) Tnsentys4) Drunkenness85,86] CConsent{87 t0 83], Compulsion 94] 0. Triest 95). 2. vate Datence(96 to 108) ‘The above forms of exceptions are generally vied into two viz excusable ond fustMable. tn excusable the mens roe Is completely absent, In justifiable the ats are not left excused; but are juste. {Q. How for Is mistake of fact, accident, at of child, Insanity, and Intoxication are valid and good defences under 19C? TPC mistake of aw sno defence but mistake of fata good reasonable doubt then the benefit of doubt is given to the accused, The prosecution must prove beyond doubt that the accused performed the act with intention and with full knowledge of the consequences of the act, This ls based on the maxim, “actus fon face reum, nisi mens sh rea", which means tat mere deing oF an act wil not constitute guik unless there bes gu LPC defines certain rcumstances In which tis considered that the accused had no ev intanton, These crcumstances are nothing but exceptional stuations that negate mens ea. They create a reasonable doubt nthe case ofthe prosecution that te act Was dane by the accused with ev intention. However, i te burden af the accused to prove that such creumstances existed at the time of erme and tre presumption of such circumstances Is against the accused. If the secused proves ta such exeumstances Indeed existed, then his ect fs not considered 9 exme, in KM Nanavatl vs State ‘of Maharashtra AIR 1962, 1 was hola that If the cuty of te prosecution to prove the gull ofthe accused or the accused is presume to be nmocant unilhis guilt is estalshea by tne prosccutlon bayard doubt. Chaster IV (Sat 76 to 106) of IPC dees Evch creumstances. Upon close examination cf these sections & can be sean that they deine two types of ercumstances - one that make the act axcusabla (See 7020 5}, which means thatthe at felt saat an efance, and second (Sec 96 to 108) at ‘mate the at Jastilabe, which means that although the act isan ellence but ls alherwise mentors and the acused $istied by la in doing Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-corsACADEMIC HOUR Mistake of fact, accident, act of child, insanity, and intoxication ~ Al these cases are defined in General Exceptions of IPC ana they make the act ofthe accused excusable, Tha presence of any of these conditions Isa good defence because thay negate fe mens oa. Lat us lock a them one y one, Sometimes an offence is committed by & person inadvertently, Me nether intend to commit an offence nor does he know that his facts criminal He may be totally ignorant ofthe exsrence of relevant fact, The knowledge of relevant facts fe what resly makes fan ac evi or good, Ths, ira person isnot aware ofthe facts and acts to tre best oF his judgment, his at cannot be called el Under such circumstances he may taka the plea Wat his acts ware done under the misconception ofthe fects. Such @ MISEORE of facis acenowlecged asa vald defence in section 76 and 9 of IPC Section 76 - Act done by @ person bound or by mistake of fact believes tobe bound by lw - Nothing i an offence which is dane bya person who Is or who by reason of a mistake of fact and nat by a reason of @ mistake a law, in goed fath believes Rims £0 be bound by law t co "Rr an officer of court of jus committee no offence arrest Y, after due inquiry, believing 2 to be, arrests 2. He has ce, upon ordered by that court Section 79 - Act done by 8 person justified ar by @ mistake of fact believing nmi justified by law - Nething isan offence whien idan by ica pean wn sie yl rua by feaan ofa mtke of ack and Not Dy reson ot a mst of ln Illustration ~ A Sues z doing what appears to be murder. A, Inthe exercise to the best of his Judgment, exert in good faith of the power tihich the lw gives £9! persons of apprehending murderers in the act, seizes 2, in order to bring 2 before the proper Suthortles. A has commited no once though may ture oUt that Z was accng in sel defence. ‘The only ference between See 76 an 79s that in section 76, @ person beleves that he is bound by todo 2 certain act while in 73, he Believes that he Is usted bylaw to do a certain at. For example,» policeman belleving that © person fs his senior office {nd upon thet person's orders fires on mob, Here, nels bound by law to obey hs senior officers orders, But te policeman Baloves thata parsons ti, Re ls not our by law fo arrest the person, though hei Justed by law fhe arrsts the person. 0 be eligible In ether ofthe sections, the following conitons must be sated 2 the act must be done in good fat, Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-corsACADEMIC HOUR Meaning of Mistake ‘Ammistake means a factual error, I could be because of wrong informatio, Ie Ignorance or wrong conclusion. For example, an ambulance rver faking a vey sick paint to a hosplal may be driving faster than the speed limit harder to reach te hospital 2 soon possible but upon reaching the hospital, comes ths knenledge that te patient haa died longtime back and there twos no need to dive fast However, snes Ne was lgnorant ofthe foc, breaking the speed lit excusable for im A person sues Someane remove a bulb rom 9 pubie pote ve (nines tne person fs 8 tie! and catenes Nim and takes hi tothe pace ony to learn thet the person was replacing the fused bulb, Here, he eid the act n good ath ut Based on rang contusion so his Oc is reusable, 0 be excusable, the mistake must be ofa fact and not of lw, A mistake of fact means an error regarding the material facts of the Stuation, while a mistake of law means an error In understanding or irance of the law. Apefson who Kis someone cannot ‘ake the detence af mistake saying he lant know that ling sa cme acause this is 9 mistake af law and not of fect. But, a5 Waryam Singh v Emperor Ait 936, he can take else nace ying fabled tht he led pers es 8 Sos Rvs Prince 1875, isan importa caso whore 2 person was convicted of abducting 2 gi under 18 ys of age. The law made taking a woman under 18 from her guardian without her guardian's permission a crime’ In tis case the person had no Intention tp abduct ner. She had gone withthe parson with consent ana te person had no reason to beleve thatthe al was uncer 28 Fura, neo okadaic han 18 weve, was eld tet by taking» gr witrav er Quaaa'sprmasn be was ang tsewhere ~ 1. When an acts in tsa plainly criminal and is more severely punishable if certain circums ‘existence Is no answer to a charge for the aggravated offence 2. Wihen an act is prim face Innacent ond proper unless certain circumstances co-exist, the ignorance of such ‘Grcumstences isan answer tothe cerge, 13. The state of the mind ofthe defendants must amount to absolute ignorance of the exstence of the circumstance which 4. When on actin sai wrong, and under certein creumstances, criminal, @ person who does the wrongful act cannot set Up ae 8 detence that he mas Ignorant ofthe fets wien would turn the wrong into ee, 5. When a statute makes it penal to de an act under cntan eeumstances, it's 9 guestion upon the wording and object of the statute wheter responsibilty of ascerealning that tne creumstances exist 'sUirown upon the person wne Gees the act ‘retin the former cage, hie knowledge is mmateral nces coexist, ignorance of the above guidelines were brought in Indian law in the case of The King vs Tustlpada Mandal AIR 1951 by Orlesa HC. In R ve Tolson 4888, 3 woman's husoand was beleves tobe deae since the ship he was traveling had surke Mar some Yyoara, wnen the husband da not tum up, she arti another aetson, Howaver, her husband came back an since 7 yeas had hot elapsed since his alsppearance, whidh are required to legally presume & person dead, sve nas cherged with bigamy. It OS held that clearance for 7 Yrs ls ony one may to reach a ele that person Is dead, ifthe women, and os the exicenee Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Mal ~ query@academichourcorACADEMIC HOUR uly Believed thatthe husband dled in a shipwreck, this was @ mistake of fact and so she was showed, other people in town However, in R vs White and R vs Stock 1921, 2 person was convicted of bigamy. Here, the husband with mite Iteracy asked Is lawyers about sls evoree, who replies that they wil send the papers in a couple of ays. The husband constued a5 the fdvorce was done and on that Dele he married ansther woman, Ie was held that was ® mistaxe of aw Good faith [Another condition that must be sais to take a deface of mistake of facts that te act must be dane In good fal, Section Stay tat noting sand to be done obeleves in god fa) whch cone or eaved without dus care ard atetion Mu 113 person of average prudence in that situation can ascertain the facts with average deligence, a person taking the defence of mistake of toss facts cannot be sale to have taken due care and thus sno: excusable Accident Accidents happen despite of nobody wanting them. There ise intention on the part of anybody to cause acident and so 8 loss ‘huses dye toa becldent shoule note considered a rime. This fs ecemawledges In Section 80 of TPC, whieh states this = Section 80 - Nothing ison offence which is done by ecient oF misfortune, and without any criminal intention or knowledge in doing ofa lawful ac, n'a lawful manner by lawful means with proper care and caution Ilustration -A works with ahacchet; the haa fys off anc kl a person standing nearby. Here, if there was no want of proper (auton on the par of, is actis excusable ana snot an offence From section 80, it can be sen thet there are four essential conditions when a person can take the defence of an accident 1, The act is done by accident oF misfortune - Stephen in his digest of criminal aw explains that an eects sad to be Accidental rene at shat caused was not done wiry an intention fo aure t and the occurance ofthis effecs ce to tat acts Rot so prebable that a person of average prudence could take precautions against. The eect comes asa surprise tothe doer Gr average prudence. since he does nor expect eto happen, he ls unasle to take any precaution agains For exemal, a frecraker worker working with Gun ponder kaaws that It can cause eolesin and must take precaution aganst fei causes an exposion and kil 2 third person, he cannot claim defence of tis section because the cutcame was expected fen though not intended Homever, i cor exploges lng # person, tis an accident because # person on average prudence des not expect @ car to fxplode and'so he cannot be expected ta take precautions aganst Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-corsACADEMIC HOUR 2, There must not be a criminal intent or knowledge in the doer of the act ~To claim defence under this section, the 236 causing the accldant must not ba Sone with a bad Intention or bad motia, For example, A prepares 2 ch for 6 and puts potson nit o as to kil. Howavar, C comes and eats the dish an cles. The death of C was inceud an aclgent because Was Pot expacteg by A, but the at that Caused the accident was cone wih 2 crm nal intention In Tunda va Rex AIR 1950, twa riencs, wna were fane of wrestng, were wresting and one got thrown away on a stone and fie. Tas was hel to be an acaent and since N was nat done withaut any criminal intention, the delensant was aequted 3. The act must be lawful, and done in a lawful manner, and by lawful means ~ An accident that happens while sing an untaw'ul acts no defence, Not ony that, butte act must also be ave Ina lawful manner and by lwul means. For teample, requesting rent payment from a renter is 2 ll act but threatening Rm with 9 gun 9 Pay ret le not lawful manner Sana I'thare ssn accent due tothe gun and the renter gets hur or klled,cefence under this section cannot be clad In Jogeshshwar vs Emparor, where the accused was fighting wth 2 man and the man's pregnant wie intervened. Te accused aired at the woman but acldently ht the baby who was kd. He was not alowed protection under ths secton Because Ne Was ot doing a lawful act na lawful manner By lawful means. Proper precautions must be taken while doing the act - The act that causes the harm must have been done with care and precautions, An secldenteaised de to negligence i nat excusable, & person must take precatons for prevent eiloren fling into because any person with average prudence can avlcipate that chile ould fall into en open borewel In Bhupendra Singh Chudasama vs State of Gujarat 1998, the apellant, an armed constable of SRPF shot at Ws immediate Supervisor while the latter was inspecting the dam site In cusk hours, the apscllant took tha pla tat was dark at tha time and he'saw someone moving near te dam with fe. He thought tat there was a miscreant. He shouted to Stop the person but uoan ering na response he Wed the shot However, Iwas proven that tne shot was fied fom a dase range and ft was Held that he di fot take enough precaution betore fring the shot and was convicted Accident in act done with consent ‘Seczon B7 extends the scope of accent to cases where an act was done wth the consent ofthe vim ays thus Section 87 - Nothing which is nat intended to cause death or grevious hurt and whichis not known tothe doer tobe kay to cause death or grevious hur ison offence by veeson of any har that may cause or be intended by the doer to cause to ny perso Ssbove eighteen years of ogo, who hae given consent whetner express oF mpl, to sir tra harm or by Fearon af any harm ‘which may be enown by the doer tobe kel to cause fo any such person who has consented to take the risk ofthat har Illustration -& and 2 agree to fence with each other for amusement, This agreement implies the consent by each to suffer any fam wk te core of uch fencing maybe eased without al py; ane, whe ying ry, hate ZA comes ‘This is based on the premise that every body isthe best judge for himself person knowingly undertakes a task that tkely to ‘Cause certain damage, then he eannet hold anybody responsi for suffering that damage. Thus, a person watching another iting Up firecrackers apres to fake tha rok of geting burned and must not Rold anybody responsible ihe gets burned. In Hagestwar ve Emperor, a person asked the accused to try dao on his hand alleving that Rs hand was dao proof dus toa charm. He got ut and Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR is section, The deceased consented tothe bled to death, However, the accused was acqulted because he was protected under Fisk of trying dao on his hand [Act of child, Insanity, Intoxication a menones sore to hold eran ingly response or @ ene genera el ention must be rove A eran whe i a Snevlintenton and thus snould not be punished, Such Ineapacty may arse due to age, mental ness, oF Intoweation, Let Us look at cach ofthese ane By one = ‘Act of child Te assumed tat a child dose not have an evil mind and he does not co things with evil intention, He cannot even fly Understand the implicatlans of the act that he doing. Thus, he completely lacks mens ea and should rot be punshed. TPC antane for flowing exemptions for 9 child = ‘Section 82 - Nothing Ison offence which is done by child under Seven years of age Section 83 - Nothing is an offence whicy is done by 2 child above seven years of age and bolow twelve years of age who has ot attained the sufelent mazunty of understanding to judge the nature and consequences of ths conduct on tat occasion rough these sectons, IPC acknowledgas the fact that chléren under seven years of age cannct have suffent maturity to commit 2 ‘time and fe completly excused. In Inclan law, a child low seven years cf age le cahed Dall Incapax, ‘> Queen vs Lukhini ‘Agradaninl 1874, was held tt merely the prot of age ofthe chié would be a conclusive proa of Innocence and would ipso fatzo bean answer tothe charge agenet Nin $ulfleontiy mature to understand the nature ond consequences ofthe ace neds tobe determined rom the fats ofthe case. Te ‘alm 2 defence under section 83, 9 child must 1, be above seven and below twelve years of ae, 2. not have attained suffetent maturity to understand the nature ard consoquences of his ac 3, Be vmmature at the tme oF commission of te ac Section 83 provides qualified immunity because presumes that a child above seven and below twalve has sufficient maturity to amma chme and the ourdcn Ison the cefence ts pave that Re cle not possess suMicier Thus, In Mralal vs State of Bihar S977, the boy who partepated na cancerted acton and used a snare weapon for a murderous atack, was ele guy absence of any evidence leading to boy's feeble understanding of hs actions. In Engish fam, 2 boy below 1A years is deemed incapable of raping a woman bat no such protection i offered in India and in Emperor ve Paras Ram Dubey, # boy of 12 years rage wos convicted af raping @ gi Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR Insanity ‘A parson may be rendared incapable of judging an action as right or wrong due to several kins of deficienty in mental facuty| Gra disease of mind. Such people are called Insane. Telr positon ‘s seme as crileern below tne age of cretion. From time to Sire Several epproces have een adoptes to undestan nsnty andto se wheter 2 person wes rsa or ot atthe ne of evidence, It wes clear that the person was mentally deranged, } Tracy lai the test as follows, “I he was under the visitation of God Sand could not distinguish between good and ev and dd not know what he Gd, though he commitec the greatest offence, yet he ould not be gulty et any offence against any law wneteoever." ‘TD ibs evaledn Hadeld's Case in 4800, wher adald was naroed with Ngh ean and ateting the asasation ‘determines by the fat of fixed insone delusions th rich the accused mas suffering and which were the direct cause of hs cme, He pointed out that there are people who are deprived of ther uncerstanding, efter permanently or temporary, an suffer under Galisons of alarming description which overpowers she faculties of er Vics IM Naghten's Rutes Ih tis case, Danial M'Naghten was ted for the murder of private secretary ofthe then prime minister of England. He was ‘scauitted onthe ground of Insanity Ts cause @ lot of Uproar and the ease wos sent to Dene af fee juges who were called Upon to lay down the law regarding criminal respansbilty Incase of lunacy. Some guestons were posed to the jucges which they hae to answer. Thase questons and answers are knows as MNaghten's Rules whic form tre basi of the moder law on Insanity. he following principals Were evelved In his case ~ 1. Regaraless ofthe fact thatthe accused was under insane delusion, hes punishable according to the nature ofthe crime if, {the time ofthe ac, he knaw that he was acting contrary to law. 2. Every man must be presumed tobe sare unl contrary Is preven. Tati, to establish defence onthe ground of insanity, t must ba clearly proven thatthe person sutered from a condition de to wich he was notable to Understand the natura ct he actor Gd nat know what he was dang was wreng 2. IF cated was coscios tat he atmos One ta Ne OU Pa do Ar tat ck wa contrary 4. It'the aecdsedsuifers with partial delusion, Ne must be considered in the seme sitution es to the responsibilty, as if the facts with respect to whieh the celsion exists were real. For examole, the accused, unde delsion that a person fs about to kil him and attacks and kis tha parson i self defence, he willbe exempted fom punishment, Sut the accusee, Under Gelision tat a person has attacked his reputation ard ls the person due to revenge, he wil be punishable. Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR il should nat be asked his opinion whether on evidence 5. Amodeal witness who has not seen te accused previous to hethinee that the acused was Insane, ‘The Indian Law recognizes the fist two prinloals an incorporates them in section 84. Section 84 = Noting Is an offence wrich i done by 2 person who, atte be of ding I, by the reason of unsoundhness of minds inespable of krowing the nature of the act r thet he fe Sing what fe eher wrong or contrary lo hus, 2 person claiming immunity under this section must prove the existence ofthe felling contons - 1, He was of unsound mind - unsound Mind Is nat defines in IPC. As per Stephen, its equivalent to insanity, which 2 State af mina where the functions of feeling, knowing, emation, and wiling are periormed In absarmal manner The ttm Unsoundness of mind is quite wide and incuges al varieties Of went of captcy whether temporary or Dermanent because of ines or birth defect: However, mere unsoundness of mind is not sutelentgroune. Te must be accompanied lrth she resto te condone, 2, Such incapacity must exist at the time of the act - A person may become temporary out of mind or insane for ‘xample due to a bout of eplepsy oF some otter clsease. However, such condition must exis a the te of the act INS KC Nair vs State of Punjab 1997, the accused was chorged for mutcer of one and grelvous assault on otter two. He plead sanity However wes eld Wa the ores apoen bythe scised at hetine of he ect cles show tat Pe 3. Bue to incapacity, he was incapable of knowing = 1 ae tne navure of the at 2 rtat the acts wrong Scrat ee acts contrary to law. “The accuse in not protected ihe knows that what he was doing was wrong even if he cd nat know that what Ne was dolng was antrary Io lot In hhagan vs State 1976, f was held thot mere queerness onthe pat ofthe accused or the eime des ot stein thot he wes insane. Trust be proved thot the cognitive foeulties of the person are Such that he doesnot Kaw whe fhe nas done or what wil follow his ac, Several umes intoxication due to drinking alcahal or taking ether substances cause the person to lose the judgment of right or ‘wrong. In early law, Rewer, this was no defence for criminal respensalty. In recent smes this has become a vald defence but nly the intoxication was involuntary, Section 85 says tus ~ Section 85 - Nothing Is an offence which is done by 2 person who at the time of doing Its by reason of intoxication, incapable iofknowing the nature of te actor that he ls dong what I lther wrong or contrary claw ° provided shat the thing which Intomeated him wa sdministerec to hm wthou ne knowledge or against Ne wl Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-corsACADEMIC HOUR ‘This means that to claim immunity under this section, the accused mus prove the exlstence of fllawing conditions ~ 2. He was intoncated 4, "Because af intoxication, he was rendered incapable of knowing the nature ofthe actor that what Is Was doing was wrong fr contrary t aw 5, The thing tht intoxicated him was administered to hin without his knowledge or against his wil Director of Public Prosecatlon ve Beard 1920 asa inporant cse oth pot. 0s cee, #1 yr ol wa ptaog hand on her mouth fo prevent Mer from sereaming thereby king her unistetionaliy House of los convicted Pim or murder ana the fllowing principles were aie down 1. If the accused was so drunk that ne was incapable of forming the intent required he could nat be convicted of a cme for labieh erly intent was reauired tobe proved 2. Tnsenity whether produced by drunkenness or otherwise sa defence tothe crime charged. The ciference between being ron tng diseases 10 which drunkenness leads is another The former is no excuse Buk the leer isa vole dence Ht 3, The evidance of crunkenness falling short of proving incapacty inthe accuse to form the intent necessary to commit 2 crme and merely establishing that hs mina was aftectec by the dnnk so that he more readly gave way fo Wolent fatslon oes not rebut the presumpton tht 2 man inane the natural consequences of the 2 @. Define the right of private defence. When does a person not have this right? When does this right extend to Causing death? When does this right start and when does it end? Its said that the law of sof dence isnot writen buts born with us. We do net lrarn I or acquire it some how but tis in our ature to defend ane proeset ourselves from any kin of harm. Wihan one is atacked by robbers, one cannot wat or law to protect oneseh Bentham nas said that fear at law can never restrain bad ren as much as te far of Individual resistance an You take away ths right then yau Became accomplice of all bas men 1 incorporates this princpi In secon 96, which says, Section 96 - Nothing isan offence which is dane inthe exercise of the right of private defence, Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-corsACADEMIC HOUR 1k makes the acts, which are otherwise criminal, justifiable if they are done while exercising the right of private defence Jn Section 97 through 106, 1°C defines the characteristics and scope of private defence in various stations, ‘Section 97 - Every person has @ right, subject to the restrions contained in section 99, to defend frst - his own Bod or body of Bny other person against any offence afecing the rurian body Second - the property, whether movable or immovable, of himself or of any other parson, agaist any act whichis an offence falling under the defison ofthe, robbery, mischief, o” minal Wespass,or Wich san atampt to comm thet, robbery, Imschle or ermal traspace. his allows a person to defend his or anybody else's body or property from being unlawfully harmed. Under English law, the eight te defend the person and property agalnst unlawful aggression was lied to the person Mise or onarea relations a 0 tose Having camarty reg pare ad ch, Nabandsnd wi Indoor tara, et, Homer, the scan slows hs forse defence, " Iti importent to note that the right exists only against on act that i an offence. Tere is no righ to defend agsinst something that lnot an offnee, For examal, a policeman Ras te right to andcu person on his belt tat the person Isa thet and so his act or handeuting is not am offenea and thus the person does no have any Aight under this ston Simiarty, an aggressor doos not have this right. An aggressor himsalf is doing an offence and even if the person being aggressed Upan gets the better ofthe aggressor Inthe exercise af his right to self defence, tha aggressor cannot claim the right of self ference. As held by SC in Manu vs State of UP ATR 1979, when the Geccased was wayaid and attacked by the accused with fdangercus weapons the question of self datence by the accused id net srse ‘The right to private defence of the body exists against any fence towards human body, the Aight to private defence of the property existe only agatast an act thats ether the, robbery, mischie,or criminal tespass ors an attempt to do te same, {In Ram Rattan vs State of UP 1977, SC observed that true owner has every right to clspssess or throw outa trespasser wile the tespesses isn te actor process af trespassing nd has not sceomplised his possession, but this ight isnot ava able To the troe owner the trespasser nos Been succesful in secompishing te possession tothe knomiodge of tre tre owner. Ts such ercumstances the law Fequifes thatthe tre owner should clspossess te trespasser by taking resource tothe remedies Bvaleble under the aw Restrictions on right to private defence ‘As wth any rigr, the nn private derence isnot an absolute right ands nether unlimited. Is mit by the following restretions Imposed by section 99 Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR Section 99 - There Is no cght of private defence against an act which oes not reasonably cause the apprehension of death br of grieveus hurt, If dona, or attempted to be done, by a public servant actng in good fath under colour ef hs oes though that act may not be sry justhablaby lo. There le no right of private davance against an act which doas not reasonably cause the aporehansion of death or of grievous naif dane, or attempts be doe, by the ction of «pul servant acing god fath unde ealou tha ate tough "There is no ght of private defence in cscs in which there is time ta have recourse to the protection ofthe public authotties eis ncessary tole for the purpose of defence, Explanation 1A person isnot deprived of his righ af priate defence against an act done or attempted to be done by 2 public servant, 24 Such unless he knows or has reason te beleve thatthe person daing the acts such puble servant Explanation 2A person is nol deprived of his ight of private defence against an act done gr attempted to be dene by the direction oF» public servant, unless he knows or has reason to eleve that tee person doing the act's acting by such erection, oF Usless suen person states the authorty under which he acs or "he has author Ie wring, unless he produces such author Fr demandes! ‘Upon carefully examining tis section, we can See thatthe rght to private defence s nat avallasle in te folowing condone = 1. when an acs done by a puble servant or upon his drecton and the act 2 fe done under colour of hs oftce an off duty police aficer doesnot have the ight to search 2 house and right to pvate defence is available against him. A pace offcercarying outa seatch without a witen authority, cannot be Eaalto be acting under colour of his office. I the act of publi servant sulla vires, the right of private defence may be exercised agit 2, the'ect doesnot cause the apprshension of death or grievous hurt ~ fr example, a police man beating a person Sensclessly can cause apprehension of grievous hurt andthe person has the Hoht oF arvete efence oganst Oe policeman 3 done under good fan «there must be a reasonable caus of acton on part ofthe publle servant. For example, Dolceman cannet Just pick anybody randomly an put him in Jel as suspect fr a Ue. There must be some Vs 4. the ats not ly unjstiied «The section lary says that t 3 be strc justified bylaw, which Care ef the borer line cases wheres nok easy to determine whether an ats jutied By law clearly excuces the cts that are complecely unused For example, ia policeman fs beating 9 person onthe street on mere suspicion oF ete, nis acts clearly Unjust andthe person has the right defend Mimsel However this roht Is curtalle onl f the person knows or has reasons to bllve that the act is being done by 2 publc servant Fortexarple, FA vies to forebly evict Strom an llagaly occuped promises, and 8 does net know and nether docs ha have Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-corsACADEMIC HOUR ‘Als acting of the arection ofan authorized public servant, B has the ‘any reason to believe that Aisa public servant or Aight to peat defence In Kanwar Singh's case 1965, a ts2m organized by the municipal corporaton was tying to round up stray cattle and was sttacked by the accused, It was held thatthe accused hae no right of private efence against the team, 2. when the force applied during the defence exceeds what is requires to forthe purpose of defence. For example, IA tows a “mall pebble ot, B does not have the nght to shoot A Ori yo Ue, is running back leaving behind the property that he ied fo seal, B does "ot have the rit to shoot A because the threat posed by A has already subse, In many stuations ris not possible to accurataly determine how much force Is required to repel an attack and thus it is a {question of fact and has to be determined on a case by case bass whasher the accused was Jusiled im Using the amount of ‘orca that he sed and whether he exceeded Ms ght to prvate defence {In Kurvim Bux's case 4865, 8 thief wos trying to enter house thraugh a hole in the wall The accused pinned his head down ‘neha of hs body wa sil outelde the house, The thet died dus to suffocation It wat hala thatthe use of force by the Secusea was justines However in Queen vs Fukira Chamar, in asimlarstuation, a sis was ht on his head by a ple five times because of which he ded. it was nels tat exceesve fore wae used than requ. ‘2 than tis possible to approsen proper authorities ~ No man has the ght to take the law ito his hangs and so when he has the Spportnty cal paper autora, he does not have ie right ta prnate defence, usualy happens hen teres ie ‘The question whether 9 person has enough time depends on te farors such a= {the antocadent knowledge of the attack 2. how far the inormavon is reliable ane precise 5. the opsortunty fo gve the information tothe euthortes. 4 the proxmity ofthe police station tn Alodhe brated vs State of UP 1924, tne sccused ceived information Mat they were ging t at allacked by Senger of being pursues and so they waved togetner. Upon atack, they defended themscives nd one of te atockers ‘was killed Te was held that they ca nok exeaed the Pght of private defence, Right to private defence of body up to causing death ‘Section 100 of IPC specifies six situations in which the right of private defence of body extends even to eausing death. Section 100 The right of private defence ofthe body extends under the restcions mentioned in sacton 99, tothe volunsary ausing of death or of any ater harm to the assalant the offence which occasions the exercise of the ght Be of any of the ‘descriptions nere in after enumerated, namely = First such an assaut as may reasonably cause the apprehension that death wil herwise be the consequence of such assault. Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-corsACADEMIC HOUR ‘Secon = such an assault as may reasonably cause the apprehension that grievous hurt will otherwise be the consequence of such esau hid An assault with the intention of commiting rape. Fourth - An assaut withthe Intention of gratfying unnatural lus, Fh = As assaule win the intention of Kidnapping 0” abducting Sixth An assauk withthe Intention of wrongly conning person Under cumstances which may reasonebly cause him to pprehend that he wil be unable to have recourse tothe publ authori for his release, evan though ths section authorizes 2 person to cause death of another In certain station, salsa subject tothe same Festrictons as given in section 98. Thus, a person cannot apply more force than necessary and must contact the authorities there is an apportunty 1n Viswanath vs State of UP AIR 1960, when the eppellant's sister was being abducted fom her fathers home even though by her husband and there was an assault on her Body by the husband, it was hela thatthe appellant nad the right of prvate defence of te body of his sister tothe extant of causing eat, be oble to exten ths right p to causing death, the epprehenson of grievous hurt must be reasonable. Tn case of Shee rsan singh vs State of UP 1979, the crver of a truck drove over and kile two person sleeping on the road in the night People ancad of the truck stood in the male ofthe road to stoa the truck, newer, he overran trem thereby illng some of them, He plended right to private defence as he wos apprehensive of tre grievous hurt belng causes bythe people tying to stp fhm SC hald that aknough in many eaves people nave cele wit te errant driver very seriously, but that does not ge hin the Tigh of pvate defence ol ute people. The people on te rod had aight 0 atest he ver ana the Ser haa 0 ight ‘Yogendra Morarji ve State of Gujarat 1980 s an important ase in whien SC observed tht when lei in perl the accused tres nat oxpected to weigh In golden scales what amount of force does he need to use and summoraed the fw of private defence oF boay as unger 1 There is no right of private defence against an act which is notin tsalf an offence under this code 2. The right commences as soon as and not before a reasonable apprenension of danger tothe body asas trom an astemat orthread to commis same ofence athough the offence may nor have been commited and tis cortinuous withthe uration ofthe apprehension. 3. Itis'a defensive and nota puntve or retibutive right. Thus, the right does not extend tothe icing of more harm than 'sneessory for detence. 4 Theright extends to te king ofthe actual or potential assallat when there isa reasonable and imminent apprehension ofthe atrocious erimes enumerated inthe ab clauses of section 100 5, There must be no safe or reasonable mode of escape by retreat for of grave boaly harm except by ifleting death oh the assllant 1 person confronted with an impending perilto Ife or Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR 6. The right being In essence » defensive right des not accrue and aval where there is time to have recourse tthe rotation of public authentes. Duration of the Hight of private defence of body Section 102 species the curation ofthe right of private defence ofthe body as follows ~ body arses from an attempt or threat to commit the offence, though the offence may net have Been committed and it continues as long as such apprehension of danger to te body continues. “The ght to efend the body commences as soon as a reasonable apprehension of danger tothe body arises and it continues as long as such apprenension of danger tothe body conus. Right to private defence of property up to causing death Seezion 203 of IPC specifi four stuatlons in which the right of private defence of property extends even to causing death Section 103 - The right of private defence of property extends, under the restrc’on mentioned in section 99, to the voluntary Causing of death or of any other narm tothe wrong deer, the offence, the comming of which, or atempting te commit which occasions the exercise ofthe right, be an offence of any of the descriptions hereinafter enumerated, namely = 2 place for custody of property, Fourth - Theft, mische or house trespass under such circumstances as may reasonably cause apprehension that death or grievous nurt wil be the consaquance such ight of private defence s not exercised [A person may couse death in safegvarcing his own property or the property of some one else when there sa reason to apprenenc than the person whese death has been cause was about te commit one ofthe offences mentioned inthis Section oF to arempt to commit one of those afences. Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-corsACADEMIC HOUR force which he uses should not be weighed in golden (of detached objectivity whien would be so natural in a court reem, be possible to say thatthe means which a threatened person adopts or scales and ie woulé be inaporoprat to adopt Duration of the right of private defence of property Secon 208 specties the curaton ofthe right of private defence of the property as follows ~ Section 105 - The ight of private defence ofthe property commences as Soon asa reasonable apprehension of anger tothe property commences. (tcontioues obtained or the property has been recovered In case of robbery ~ as lng asthe offender causes or attempts to cause to any person death or hurt or wrongful restraint tras long 2s the fear of instant death or of instance hur or of Instance personal restraint continues, In case of eriminal trespass ~ as long a5 the offender continues inthe cammision of erminal trespass or mischiet in case of housebreaking by night ~ es lang as the house, trespass which has been begun by such house Breaking, continues. “The case of Amjad Khan vs State AIR 1952, is important. In this case, acriminal it broke out inthe ety. A crowd of ‘ne community surrounded the shop of A, belonging to ether commarity. The crowd started beating the doors of A wit ahs. A thon fred shot whi Killed 8, a member af the crowd Here, SC held that A hae the right of private defence which extended to ‘causing of death because the accused had reasonable ground to aporehend that death or gr'evous hurt would be caused to his family ithe di not act promety Section 107 of dian Penal Cate, 1860 deals with Abetment of a thir ‘A person abets the doing ofa thing, who Fiest-instigates any person to do that thing; or Secon. Engages with one or more ter person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing ofthat ting, f an act oF egal ‘mission takes place In pursuance ofthat conspiracy, and m order the doing ofthat thing; or “Tiraly Intentionally aids, by any actor legal omission, the Going ofthat thing planation 1.8 person who, by wil misrepresentation, or by wiful concealment of a matenal fact which he is bound to fisclse, vakntarly causes or procures, or attemats to cause or fracure, ating vo be one, esa to Instigate the doing of that thing Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-corsACADEMIC HOUR IMlustration| ‘A, 2 public offcer, is authonzad by a warrant om 2 Court of Justice to apprehend 2, knowing that fct and azo tat Cs not 2. wlfuly reorescnts to Atat Cis 2, ana tnerany Inentonaly causes Ato apprenang Hara'S abets by Insgation the Spprenersion of © Explanation 2-Whoaver, ether porto or atthe time of the commission of an act, does anything In order to faiitate the ‘mmission ofthat act, and tneeby faciitates the Commission there, said to sd tne doing of thats. ‘A person abets an offence, wo abets ether the commission of an offence, or the commission of an act which would be an ontence, committed by 8 person eapable bylaw of commiting an offence with te same intention or krowledge 25 that of the sbettor. Explanation he abetment of the illegal omission of an act may amount to an offence although the abettor may net himsel be bound todo that at Explanation 2 ‘To constitute the offence of abetment its not necessary thatthe act abetted should be committe, or thatthe effect requisite Constnats the ofence shoul be caused. IMlustrations (@)—Ansigatas 8 to murder C. 8 refuses todo so. A's guy of abetting & to commit murcer. (©) Ainstigates 8 to murder, in pursuance ofthe instigation stabs D. D recovers from the wound. As guity of instigating to commit murder Explanation 3 Its not necessary thatthe person abetted shoulé be capable by law of commiting an offence, or that he should have the sme ‘ulty intention of knowledge as tat ofthe abet, or any quky intention o> knowledge Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR IMlustrations (2)___ A, witha guy intention, abets a chil or a lunatic to commit an act which would be an offence if committed by 2 person apable by aw ef commiting an offeca, and having tre same Intention a5 A were A, whether the act be commited oF no, i= uly of abateng an ofance (©) _ A, withthe intention of murdering Z, instigates 8, a child under seven years of age, todo an act which causes 2's death Bin consaquance ofthe abetmant, des the act m the absence of A and tnereby causes Z's death. Here, though B was hat apable by law of committing an offence, is lable tobe punished in the same manner as 8 had been capable bylaw of ‘commiting an offence, and Rad committed murder, and he le theretore subject tothe punishment ot death (6) Anstigates 8 10 set fre to 2 welng-house. 8, In consequence of the unsoundness of his ming, being incspable of rowing the nature ofthe ac, or that he is doing what is wrong or contrary to law sets ire tothe house In consequence of A's instigation. has committed o offence, Dut As guilty of abetting the offence of setung re to a cweling-nouse, and fs isle to the punishment provides for that offence (2) A, Intending to cause a thet to be committed, instigates B to take property belonging to Z out of 2's possession. A induces B to bolieve tat the property belengs to A.B takes tha property out o” Z's possession, mgood fath, believing I to be A's property 5, acing undar tis misconception, does net take dshonastl, and therefore does net commit theft. SuE Al guilty of abeting| tft, andi lable to the same punishment as IB had commited tet Explanation 4 he abetment ofan offence bing an offence, ye abetmant of such an abetment is also an offence, Illustration Alnstigates 8 to nstigate C to murder Z. 8 accordingly instigates Cto murcerZ, and C commits that ofence in consequence of Bs instigation. 8s lable to be punished for is offnce wth the punishment fr murders ane, 28 h instigated 8 to comme the fence, Ais aso lobe to the same punishment 1 not necessary tothe commission ofthe offence of abetment by conspiracy thatthe abetor shoul concert the offence with the person who commis fs sufficent ihe engages in tre conspiracy in pursuance of which the offence Is committed IMlustration ‘A concerts with B a pln for poisoning 2. Its agreed that & shel acminister the poison, B then explins the plan to C mentioning that a third person isto administer te poison, Sut witeut mentioning A's name. C agrees to procure the poor, and procures and delves tts 8 forthe purpose of ks being used in the manner explained. A administers the polson; Z'des In consequence, Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR ugh A and C have not conspired together, yet Chas Been engaged Inthe conspiracy in pursuance of which Z has been rmuréerea C has Werefors committed the ofenes defined In tls section and Is Hable tothe punishment for murder {riminal Conspiracy = Section 120-A, 1PC Section 120-A ofthe L9.C. deine ‘conspiracy’ to mean that when two oF more persans agree to do, oF cause to be done an legal fc or an act whch e not ileal by legal means, such an agreament Is cesignated as "criminal coneaiacy. No agreement except an agreement to commit an offence shall amount to a criminal consplray, unless some act besides the Section 120-8 of the L?.C. prescribes punishment for criminal conspiracy. Is not necessary that each conspirator must know all the detals of the scheme nor be a pertcpant at every stage. tis necessary that they should agree for Gesgh af abject af the anspiracy. Conspitacy Is conceived as having the elements (2) agreement (2) betwoen two or more persons by whom agreement i effected and (3) a crminalobjact, which may be eltner theultimate alm of te agreement, or may constute the means, or one ofthe means By wnich tat aim is to be accomlihes, 18s Immaterial whether this fs founé in the ultimate objects. The commen law cefrition of ‘criminal canssracy’ was stated fst by Lota Denman in Jones’ case (1892 6 & AD 348) that anindctment for conspiracy must “charge a conspracy to Ga an unlawful act by unlawful means” and was elaborated by Wills, J. on behalf of the Judges white refering the question tothe House of Lords Mutconyv. Reg (1668) L®. 3 H-L. 308 one the House of Lords In unanimous decision reltersted In Quinn v. Leathe 1901 AC 495 ot 528 as under "A conspracy consists not merely inthe intention of two or more, but in the agreement of two or more to do an unlawful ac, oF to do a Tawcl act by unlwl means. So lng as such a design rests in intention ony es not ndetable. When two apres to carry Ie Inte effect, the vary pot Is am actin tel, and the acx of each of the paris, promise against promise, tus contra Scum, capable tf beingeivorced, wu, punishable of fra crminal abject or for he use of criminal means he lscussion pertaining to standard of proof required for proving the offence of conspiracy can be summarized by the folowing observatons of Supreme Court inthe decision reported 2s State (NCT of Del) . NavJot Sandhu AIR 2008 Sc 3820: "a fw bts nare and a few Bs there on which the prosecuton relies cannat beheld to be adequate for connecting the accused Inthe offence of enminal conspiracy. Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-corsACADEMIC HOUR ‘Section 141, Unlawful assembly olent,boisterour or tumultuous manner Polis! gathering and demonstration raise the most troublesome issues Involing unlawful asseraly. The "Unlawful assombly" isthe mest debated took in the present political scenario, While te Indan Constitution uderthe article 19(2) (b confrs upon all ctizens of india the right to assemble peacefully and without arms, But this Aight Is subject to reasonable restricon n the interest ofthe sovereignty and integrity of Inala and publ orcer For the implementaton of the same, the indian Penal Code, 1870 defines “Unlawful Assembly” and te Code of Criminal Procedure, ‘maintain pubic order. The ne of distinction between protecting Ireedom of assemdWy and protecting peace ond tranquility af the Community soften etic forthe courts to dra Seczion 129 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 glves power in the hands ofthe Executive magistrate or an officer in charge ofthe police station, ora paie officer not below the rank of the sub- Inspect to command to disperse. Incase of nefecualy the same hal be made to dlperse by the miltary with the use of minimum force according te Section 130 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 ‘The same power has been vested with the Commissioned or Gezetted offer in ease of emergency and the same shall Be communicated to the nearest magistrate atthe earliest according to Section 121 of Criminal Procecure Code, 1973, The aficer has the power to take Into the custody any eflender (Section 131, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973), SECTION 149 1PC: Scope and Object, Section 149 IPC has essentially two ingrecients viz () offence commited by any member ofan unlawful assambly consisting five or tare members and (i) suen‘flence mast be commited i pronecton ofthe common abject (under Seton tal PC) ofthe ‘The Supreme Court in Ramachandran Vs: State af Karla nos examined the low floing to offences commited by persons i pursuance of common object being pat of an unlawful assembly, as entailed In Sectlon 149 ofthe Inelan Penal Code. Te relevant fxtracts om the Judgment are reproduced Nereuneer For “common object”, its not necessary that there should be a prior concert in the sense of a meting of the members of the Unlawful assembly, te common abject may form on spur of the moment ii enough Iles adopted by ll the members and Is Shore by alo them” In order thatthe cate may fl under the Fat pat te ofene carted rt Be connected nvredetly Me, (2008) 16 SCC 6571 Ever irthe offence committed is notin ciroct prosecution ofthe common object ofthe assembly, it may yat all under second part of Seczon 149 IPC can be hele thatthe offence was such as the mambars knew Was likly #0 be committed The expression Know Goes not mean a mere sassy, such as might or might net happen. For instance, fs 8 mater oF comman Knowledge that ogy of persons go armed to tak frelbia possession of the and, k wauld be ght to soy tat someone fs ikly co be Ke snd a Download Website ArademicHourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR ketnood ané would be guity under the second part of Secton 149) the members of the unlawful assembly must be aware of We, here may be cases which would come within the second part but not within the fst. The distinction betwen the two parts of Seton Ip IN carat ete orate (Se Maa) & iv Sate of UP AR 185950372 and cangatar Shere However, once iti esteblshed that the unlawful assembly hed comman objec, it isnot necessary tha all persons forming the tslawful aszemtly must be srown to have committe some over act. For the purpose of incurring the vearous laity under te prowsion, te labity of ether members of the unlawful assembly for the offence commited during the cantnuance of the ccurrence, rests Upon the fact whetner the ther members knew before hang that te offence actualy commited wae Heel toe amnmttes in prosecution of the common abject. (See Daya Kishahv. State of Haryane, (2020) 5 SCC 81; Sikandar Singh. State ft Biner, (2010) 7 SCC-477, and Dedesis Daw v. State of WB, (2010) 9 SCC 111] ‘The crclal question for elermination In such a case Is whether the assembly consisted of five or more persons and whether the Said persons entertained ove or more of the common objects specined by Section 141, While determining ths question, becomes Felevart to consider whether the assembly consisted of some persons which were merely passive winesses ana had jned the BEssomaly as a mater of lle curlosty without Intending to enteral the common object af the assembly (vide: Masai v. State of Utter Pracesh, lk 1985 SC 202) In KM. Ravi & Ors. v. State of Kornateka, (2009) 16 SC 337, this Cour abserved that mere presence or association with other emer slone does not per se be sufcent to ole every one af them criminally liable for the afences commited by the others Unless tere is suteent evidence on record to show that each intended to or knew the Ikellood of commission of such an offending Simiadly In State of UP. v.Krishanpal & Ors, (2008) 16 SCC 73, this Court held that once a membership of an unlawful assembly i= fstabliehad Irie not Incumbent on the prosécuton to establen whether any spectic avert act has been assigned to any accused Mere membership af the Uniawial assembly is sufclent ang every member of an unlawful assembly i vicariously Table fr the acts fone by sthers etter 'n prosecution of common abject or members of assembly xnew were key to be commited In America Rai & Ors. v. State of Bhar, (2051) 4 SOC 677, this Court opined that for a membor of unlawful assemly having ‘common objet what Is able to be seen is 8s {0 whether there wos any active patkcpation and the presence ofa the accused fear that even the mare presence in the unlawful assemaly, but with an active Min, to achieve the common abject makes such 8 person vicariously lable for tre acts ofthe unlawful assembly. ‘Thus, tis cour has been very cautious n te catena of judgments that where general allegations are mace against a large number of persone the court noula categorically scrunise the evidence ang nestats to convc: the ge numoer of persone the evgence Svalebie on fecord Io vague. It ablgatory on the par of the court to examine tat if the offence committed is not in direct prosecution of the comman cect, yet may fll under second pat of Secon 149 IF; the fence mas such 9s the members Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR re of injuries Is also relevant to be considered merely passive witnesses; what were ther arms and weapons. Number and na Comman object” may also be developed atthe te of neler Rioting: Visec 146: Whonever force or vilenceis used by an unlawful assembly or by any member theref in prosecution of the common objoct of such assemely fs guy ofthe offace of rioting. Fellowing are the ingredients of an offence of riting, (Use of Force or Violence: ‘There must Be use of force oF violence by an unlawful assembly or any member thereot to can (i) By Unlawful Assembly or Any Member: “The force oF violence must be use by an unlawful assembly or any member of it, soto constitute an offence of rioting all the Ingredients of sec. 141 need to be file. (1) In Prosecution of Commen Object: ‘uch force or valence should nave been used in prosecution ofthe comman object of such assembly (Gm) Punishment u/Sec 147: with ine or wth both (QV) punishment Wnere Riting Armee With Deadly Weapon U/Sec 188: However Is guy of noting being armea with deadly weapon or with anything which used as a weapon, offence, Is Ikely to cause death shall be punished with imprisonment of ether description for a term which may extend to tives years or with fine of with ‘person cannot be fours guiy under this section unless he actually has 8 dangerous weapon in his hands. (PLO 1981 S<286) Attray: U/Sec 153: Whon 2 or more persons by Nahting n a publlc place disturb the pubic peace, they are sald (4 Ingrectents: (Two or More Person A attray requires two sides fighting. Case Law PLD 1959 LAN 1018, Twas hele that onthe offence of afray there must be to or more person, Passive submission by one party to a beating by the other snot atray. (i Public Pace: Fighting must beat public place. A publ place Is one where the pubic Qo, on matter, Whether they have a rght to go oF not. (ii) Disturbance of Public Peace: is essential that there must be a disturbance ofthe pubic peace Le assault or breath of te peace. Mere quareling is not sufficient to atvract section 159, ute an offence of rating ts net commit an affay Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR (Gn) Punishment u/Sec 160: Whoever commits an afray shall be punished with imprisonment of either for aterm which may extend to one menth or with fine Which may extend to one hundred RS. With beth, Distinction Between (Place ting can be commited at anyplace whether private or public. fray can be committed at only Publ pace (GD) Numaer OF Parson ting requresfve-or more persons. Ary requires two or mare persons. (am Usbtty Inia every member of on unlawful assembly ¢ punshable although some of them may not have personaly used fore oF violence. In aay only those actually engages ae Hable. Gv) Object: In iating the object to use force or violence must be one mentioned in sec. 244. In affray, the object sto estur the pubic peace (¥) Panishment: Tn io, punishment awarded is imprisonment which may extend to two years oF which ine or with both ‘The punishment for afay Is Imprisonment whieh may extené tone month er wits Aine which may extend to RS. 100 or wien both (V1) AS To Enhancement Of Punishment: Enhanced punishment is provided for ting If 2 person Is armed witha deadly weapon usec 148. For loting And Aftray: PERJURY as It Is cal 191: Giving falze evi Whoever, being legally bound by an eath or any express provision of lam to state the tut, or being bound by law to make 2 Gedaratlon upon any subject, makes any statement which Is false, of does ot believe to be tua, Is sald fo be gluing false evidence ESSENTIAL CONDITIONS FOR PROSECUTION OF JUDICIAL PERJURY 1. Lepa ebigaton to state the truth Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR 3 Belefinits ality, Cte fs establishing offense (@) The statement is alse to be tue, (©) The parson making the statement knew or believed itt be false or dt not believe (9) The statement was made intentionally Falke evidence is sad to be given intentions, if the person making the statement i oware or has knowledge thet i flee ‘and has detbverately used such evidence in ajuk proveecng with tre Intention of decalving the Cour, ELEMENTS OF PERJURY: False statement made by a person Who is -2. bound by an oath 3. By an express provision of aw 4 Aecuration wich a person bound by an ta make on any subject comtevete vou 2." Gath must be administered by a person of competent author. The authority must be competent to aeminister the oath he proceecings where oath is administered must be sanctiones by law xpress provisions of aw incuge—Paints, Waten Statement, and Verification of pleadings is a legal obligation, 4, Afidauis are decoration made under eat, Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR Statement that he beleves 8 thing which he does not believe, Statement thing which ne doesnot know. Statement that he knows to be false or does net believe to be true Statement need nat be on 2 point materlal to the proceedings. In order to sustain and maintain sanctiy and solemnity of the proceedings in law courts itis necessory that parties should not make false or krowinaly, inaccurate statements or misrepresentation and/or should net conceal material facts witha design to gain some advantage or benefit at the hands of the court, when a court is considered as a place where truth and justice are the solemn pursuits. If any party attemats to pollute such 2 pace by adopting recourse te make misrepresentaton and Is concealing material facts t does goat its ak and cost Read a judgment about the above in Vay Sval Vs, State of sc 24a Puniab AIR 2003 $C 4023, 2003 (2) 3K3 197 SC, 37 2003 (5) 192. Fabricating ase evidence. Whoever causes any circumstance to exist or makes any false ent in any book or record, of rmokes any document contining false stotement, intending that such circumstance, fale eney or false statement may eppear in tvigence In 2 judicial proceeding, on a proceeding taken by aw before a public servant as such, or before an arcitator, and that such creumstarce, false entry oF false statement, so appearing n evcence, may couse any person who in such proceeding sto form an apnion upon the evidence, to entertain an erroneous aplnion touching any peint material tothe result of such proceeding Is 12) _Aputs jewels into.a box belonging to Z, withthe intention that they may’ be found in that box, on that this Creumstance may cause Zto be convicted of the. & has fabricated false evidence. 12) _Amakes a false entry in is shop- book forthe purpose of using It as corroborative evidence in a Cour of Justice. A has Fabricated fase evinces. 12 A, wth the intention of causing Z to be convicted of » criminal conspiracy, writes 2 lester in imitation of Z's handwriting, purporting to be adcressec to an accomplice in such criminal conspiracy, and puts the letter in a place which he knows thatthe DOfcers of the police are key to search. Aas fabeeate false evicence, Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR Section 268 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 deals with Public nuisance. ‘person Is guity of @ public nulsance who does any actors gulty of an legal emission which causes any common injury, danger fr annoyance tothe pubic o a the people in generel who del or occupy property inthe vicinity, or which must necessary eause Injury, obstruction, danger or annoyance to persons who may have occasion to use any public ight ‘common nuisances net excused on the ground that t causes some convenience or advantage, he alstncion between private and public nusance Is» matter of fact ang not law and can cllpse In skuatons where the ght being aloe a ue ng bu te my causa to anda and at te pubic tg. ray ces eae Puble nuisance doesnot consider easement rights as aceptable defence for natare, Merely the fact thatthe cause of ulsance fas been in exstonce fora fang time doesnot tar any challenge against oso length o me can gale a publ navance, he defintion 0 nusanee excludes fom fe amb the Instances of legalized nuisance. Legalzea nuance are cages nhen te nutsance eauue is statutonly approved andin she interest of greater Qoed and socal welfare. For nstance, the runnin of r=inay thgines and Wains or establishment of the yar, despte being a legiimete cause of nulsance, Is not punishable Unde PC. Section 269, Negligent act likely to spread infaction of dis ase dangerous to life Whoever unlawfully or negligently does any act which is, and which he knows or has reason to belleve to be, key to spread the Infecion of any lsease cangeroust fe, shall be punished with Imprisonment of either descrpton fora term Which may extend Intec fay cleaaecangerov Sections 269 and 270 ofthe 1°C are patent weapons in case ofcminal transmission. These provisions, in the past, have been Used to address the spread of cholera, plagus, syanils, gonorrhea and other sexualy Wansmted dicases. However to establish Bn offence under Section 269, the acon of te accused must be unlawful negligent and cantar tothe proven of the Indian iam, Aso, its necessary thatthe accused knew or had reason to ballove that hs or her action cau cause harm, Tols means, that the clement sf matgnancy is eucalin the commision of an afence under Section 270. “The main problem in prosecuting person who Nos fully transmitted HIV visto another the ofiuty In establishing that the accused was aware ois 0 her HIV status andthe Implications of such status at tre time the virus was transmitted tothe Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR Unie ot 7 Tn what circumstances Culpable Homi fone when Culpable Homicide does not amount to Murder? ‘does not amount to “The word homicide is derived from two Lain words - homo and cide, Homa means hursén and cide means kiling by 8 human, Homicide moans kiling of @hurnan being by anther human bein. A Romie ean be lawful or unlawful. Lawful homicide cudes Stuations wnere a parson who has caused the deat of ancthercanret be blamed for his deat, Fr examole, in exercising the Fight of private defense or In ether stuatons explainac In Chapter IV of IPC covering General Exceptions Uniawfulhamiige means where the king of another human Is not approved or Juste by law. Culpable Homicide isn this category. Cupable ieee Bae warty. Thus, capable Homie mens king of «hua Ding by anther urn being ns Darnewarthy oF Secon 299 of IPC defines Culpable Homicide as Follows ~ Section 299 = Wha ever causes death by coing an ace with the Boally jury ass ksi 2 cause death, or with the knowledge CUlpaote Homicide ontion of causing death, or withthe intention of causing such hes Iikely by Such ac fo cause death commits the offence of 1. A lays sticks and turf over a pl, withthe intention of there by causing death, or with the knowledge that death i kly 0 be thereby caused. 7 believing the ground to be rm treads on It fais In an Is lied, Aas commited the offence oF culpable Homie, 2. Ricows 2 to be behind a Bush. 8 does not know It, intending to cause, or knowing it to be likely to cause 2's death 5, nace res and il 2 Here B may De guity afr afc ut & has commited te tence f Cpe Hamid ‘eathBy doing an act tat he new was Hely to couse oe ” Explanation 1 - A person who causes Boal injury to another who is labouring under 9 disorder, disease or body infirmity, and thereby ocelerates the death ofthat ether, shal be deemed to have caused his Seath, Explanation 2 Where dete cased by boalyInury, the aersen whe causes such boaly injury shal be doom to nave caused tre death, although by reserting to proper Femadies and skilful treatment the death might nave been prevented. Explanation 3= Tha causing ofthe dath of cil Inthe mothers womb is ot nemicice. Bus may amount to Culpale womicice t cause te death of a ving chi, any prt ofthat ita has bean brought ‘orth, though the child may not have breathes been carpletely orn. Based upon the above definition, the Flowing are the essential elements of Cuipable Homicide 1, Death of a human being is caused - tis requires thet the death of @ human boing i causes, However, it doesnot include the death of an unborn child unless any par of tat childs brought fort, Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR 2. By doing an act - Death may be caused by any act or example, by poisoning or by hurting with a weapon, Here act Ineludes even on omission of an act for which one is allgated by lan to co, For exame, Ira ocor has a required Injacton in is and and he sll does not give fo te dying pavent and the patent des, te doctr Is responsible, 53, Intention or Knowledge - There must bs an nterian of any of tre felling ~ {intention of eausing death ~The doer of te act must have intended to c2use death. AS seen in tlustation 1 the dor wante or expected someone de is mpartant orate ak inet of using ea doesnt Intention of cling 8 but Ai kes Instead, hei sil considered to have the Intention 2, Intention of eausing such bodlly injury as is likely to cause death - Tre Intortion ofthe offender may not have been to cause death but only an injury that is likely to cause the death ofthe injured. For example, Aight Intend oly to it onthe sxul of a persan so 2s to make nim uncaneclous, But te person des. inl case, the Interton of the parson was only to cause an inyuty ut the injury is suen Ens is aly to cause death af the person. Thus, he is gully af Culpable Homeide: However, ATi B wih a broken glas. Add nat know tna B was Feemophi 8 leeds to death Ais not guity of Culpablo Homicide out only af grlevous hurt because he nether Fad an intention to kil 8 nor he had any intention to cause any ody Injury ass Tkely to cause death ‘Or tne act must have been done with the knowledge that such on act may cause death - When 9 person does an at whieh he knows that it has a nigh propabilty to cause death, he is responsible forte death whlen is caused asa result of he 2c. For example, A knows that bosening te brakes cf @ vehicle has a high probability of causing death of someone, IF Fides such a bite and ih Ges, A wil be responsible for ls death, In Jamaluddin's cage 1893, the accuse) wile txorcsing a spit rom the body of irl beat her so much that she clea They ware held Guly cf Culpable Homicide Negligence - Zometmes even nagigence is cons dered as Knowledge, In Kangla 1896, the ctused stuck z man whom he baieved was nat humon Seing but someting supernatural. However he sid not take ony steps to stisty himself het the person was sot a hurnan Berg and was thus grossly negligent and was hela gully of Culpable Homiede Murder (When Culpable Homicide amounts to Murder) Murders type of Clpable Horse where culpability of the accused is gute mace than in @ mere Culpable Homicie, Section 300, says that Culpable Homicide fs Murder the act by which the Geath le caused done "wth the intention of causing death 4 Sewith an Intention of eausing such Body injury as the offender knows to be tkely to cause the death af the 5. Sruith an intention of eausing such body inury es is sutcentn ordinary course of nature to cause death 6, TU abo Murder irthe person commiting the act knows that tne ae sso dangerous that mil cause death or Such injury asf aly to cause death nal prebabity and Me has valé reason for dong that act IMlustrations - [Ashocts 2 With an intention of klling him. Z dies in consequence, A commits Murder. ‘Alntensonally gives Za sword cu tat sufcent in ordinary course of nature to cause death. Z des bacause of the cut A Commits Murder eventhough he had no itention fo kl Z Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-corsACADEMIC HOUR A without any excuse fres a loaded canon on a crowd One person dies because of ft, A commits Murder even though he had felintetion to kl that person. “Thus, can be seen that Murders very similar to Culpable Homicide and many a times its dificult to dferetite between ‘hom. 3 Melil inthe case of Rvs Govinda 1876 Bom. arlyzod bath inte flloning ble Cuipabie Homicide Murder ‘person com = Culpable Homa [i person commits Murder W the act by which death Is cause’ actby which death is caused ls done T wih The ention of causing death wih The ietion of causing death with an intention to eause Such Bodily injury] 2 with an tation fo cause Such badly injury asthe ofander wows tobe a5 1s lkaly to cause death, Tee to cause death ofthe person to wom the har is couse b. with an intention of causing bosly Injury to any person end the body riury intended to be inflcted Is suMclent in rcinary course of nature to caus rath wh the Knowledge hak such an 8a Waly | @, Wh Whe Krowedge Val the acs 60 Wrnenly Gangerous WaT THETA te cause death ‘il probablty cause death Based on ths table, he pointed out the diference ~ when death is caused due to body injury, is te probability of Geath due to that injry that determines whether i fs Culpoble Homiede or Muraer If death is only Healy ts Culpable Homie, death Is ight probable, iis Murder, In Augustine Saldanha vs State of Karnataka L3 2003, SC celibersted on the difference of Culpeble Homicide and Murcer, SC observed that inthe scheme ofthe IPC Culpaole Homicige genus and Murcer ts specie, Al Murcer’ Is ‘culpable Homicide’ but act vice-versa. Speaking general, ‘Culpable Homlcde sans special charactaristes of Murder Ie culpable Horicde at amounting to Murdar’ For the purscce of fnlog punishevent, proportionate tothe gravity ef the generic offaca, the IPC Pratiealy recognizes tives degrees of culpable Nemicie, The “st, wnat may be calag, ‘Culpable Homicide of the first ogres’ This isthe grestest form of Culpasle Homie, which fined in Section 300 2s Murders Tne second may be termed 6s “Culpable Homicide of the second degree’. Ths is punishoble under the fst port of Section 308. Then, tere Is "Culpable Homicide ofthe third degree’ Tiss the lowest type of Culpable Homie and the punishment proviged fore is also te lowest among the punishments provided for te twee grades. Culpable Horice ofthis degree Is punishable uncer the Second part of Section 304, Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Mal ~ query@academichourcorACADEMIC HOUR Murder has always It further observe thatthe academic dstincton between Murder and ‘Culpable Homicide not amounting vexee the Courts, They tie fe remove confusion through te flowing table ~ Cuipable Homicide Murder “A person commits Culpable Homicide | Subject to certain exceptions , Culpable Homicide Is Murder i the act by ‘the act by which death is caused ie done |which death is caused Is done INTENTION TB) with the tenon of easing death, oF T with the Ttenton of ening deathy oF {By with an vatetion to cause such Boaiy [= wih an ilenion to cause such bodly wofury as the offender Krawa Ta | Injury a5 Iaaly to cause death Tkly to esse death ofthe person to whom the harm i caused with an intention of causing bool Injury to any person and the boc] riury intended to be infeed Is suMclent in ordinary course ef nature to caus at RNOWLEDGE Te with the Krowledge Dat such an Ba |W Teely to cause dea probabil cause death ‘Thus, Bois down tothe knowledge possessed by the offender regarding 2 particule victin in a particular state being in such andtion gr state of health tha the internal Norm cause to hi key to be fata, nottnstanding the fact that such Nat would not, in the ordinary ercurstances, be suelent fo cause death Ih such a ease, Intention to cause death snot an lesen rgulrenent. Oly the Fntrtion of causing such injury coupled wits the Knowledge f the effencer Tikal to couse ceaty is enough term teas Murder, Situations where Culpable Homicide does not amount to Murder Secuon 300 also species certain stustons when the Murder Is considered as Cupable Homicide nat amounting to Murder. These are” (Short Detalls) such Injury Is 11 eater der des an act tat cases death becouse fave and sudsen tovoatlon by the ate Ifthe offender fo puble servant and does an ac that he, In good fit, Bel eves toe ffl Ifthe acc happens Ina sudden ght inthe heat of pasion Ifthe deceased Ie above 18 and én Gesth ts caused By ns own consent. Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Mal ~ query@academichourcorACADEMIC HOUR (Full Details) Exception I~ Culpable Homicide isnot Murder f the offender, whilst deprived ofthe power of se¥-control by grave ang sudden provocaton, causes the death of the person who gave the provacaion or causes the death of any other person By mistake oF Ecsaant. ‘The above exception s subject tothe folowing provisos - 1. That the provection Is not sought or voluntarily provoked by the offender as an excuse for Kling oF doing harm to any he powers of sun public servant i, 3, That the provecations net given By anything done in the lawful exercise of the rght of private defence, Explanaton-Ahether the provecation was grave ané sudden enough to prevent the offence from amounting to Murder isa question of fac 1. A, under the infuence of passion excited by a provecatlon given by 2, intentionally kil, ¥, 2's cll. Ths is Murder, In as ‘uch as the provocation was not given by te Chg, ana the death ofthe child Was not caused by acaent oF misfortune in doing an ac coused by the provacati 2. ‘ives grave and sudden provocation to A.A, on this provocation, res a pistol a ¥, neither intending nor knowing himself fe be tke to kl'Z, whe fs near Him, But out of sight Als Z. Here A hasnt commited Murder, ue merely Culpable woricce 3, Ritlowfuly arestd by 2,» bali, A is excted to sudden and violent passion by the arrest, ang kis Z. This Murder, in ‘3s much asthe provecaton was gen By » tng dane bya puble servant In the oxerise of hs powers. 4. Kaponaé aa nes bear 8 Mage says the dos nex eve 8 moe fA Gepost, and Ua A has -mpis to pull 2's nose, Z, in the exercise of the right of private defence, lays hold of a to prevent him form doing so. [Ais moved to sudden and vielont passion In consequance, and klls Z, This le Murder, in a much asthe provocation Was Given by a thing dane nthe exercise of tha ign of private defence, 66. _ZStrkas B.B is by tis provocation exctad fo Volant rage. A, a bystander, Intending to take advantage of B's rage, and to ause him to kl.2, puts a fe inca B's nane fr that purpose. 8 kils Z with the kre, Here B may Nave commited only uipsbte Momicge, but Ais guy af Murcer Exception 2 - Culpable Homicide isnot Murder ithe offender, in the exercise in ood fitn ofthe Fight of private defence of person or property, exceecs the power given to him by law and causes the death of the person against whom he i exerising Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-corsACADEMIC HOUR ny intention of doing more harm than is recessary forthe purpose of such right of defence without premedita such defence, Ilustration - 2 attompis to horsowhip A, notin such a manner 25 to cause grevous hur to A. A draws out a pistol Z persist in the assault, A beleving in goed fat that he can by no other means prevent himself from being nersewhippd, shoots 2 deed. A has not committes Murder, but only Culpable Homie, Exception 3 - Culpable Homicide is nat Murder if the effender, belng a public servant or aiding a publc servant acting oF the advancement of pubic Justice, exceeds the powers given to him by law, and causes death by dolng an act which he, In good ft, betieves tobe lawful end necessory fr the due discharge of his aty 6 such puble servant dnd without -nil towards the person whose desth is caused Exception 4 - Culpable Homicide is not Murder If I Is committed without premesitaton In a sudden fightin the heat of passion upen a sudden quarrel and without the offenders having taken undue advantage of acted In 3 cruel or unusual Explanaton-Is immaterial in uch casee whlch party offers the provocation or commits the fst assault In 2 very recent ‘case of Byvarapu Raju ve State of AP 2007, SC held that in a Mutder case, there cannot be any general rule to specify whether the quarrel between the secused and the deceased was due to sudden provocation or was premeditated Tes ‘question of fet and whether 9 quarrels sudden or net, must necessarily depend upon the proved facts of each case,” a bench of judges Ait Pasayat and D K Jan observed while reducing to 10 years the life imprisonment of a man accused of ling his fatver. The denen passed the ruing wile upolaing an appeal flea by one Byvarapu Raju who challenge the fe sentence Imposed on him by a sessan's court and later affirmed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court fr killing his “drunkard! father [Exception 5 - Culpable Homicide snot Murder when the person whose death fs caused, being above the age of eighteen years, suffers death or takes te risk of death with his own consent. Ilustration - A by instigation, voluntarily causes, Z, 2 person under eighteen years of age to comms sulelde. Here, on account of 7's youth, Ne was incapable of giving consent to his ohn death; A has therefore abetted Murder Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR Detine Hurt and Grievous Hurt, Explain the difference, In normal sense, hurt means to cause bodily injury and/or pain to another person. IPC defines Hut as follows - Section 319 Whoever causes bodily pan, disease, or infirmity to any person Is sad to cause hurt. Based on this, the essential ingredient of 1. edly pale, dsease or infirmity must be caused - Body paln, except such sight harm fr which nebey would compa, Is hurt. For ekampl, pricing person with pointed object Ike 9 needle of unening somebcy in the face, or puling 8 ‘oman’ Rar. The Guration ofthe pais is mmotero-Inirmity means when any Booy organ is notable Co function Mormaly tcan be temporary or permanent, Tt also includes state of mind suchas hyStera oF taro 2, Teshould be causee due to 9 voluntary act of the accused When there is no intention of causing death or bodily injury ass key t cause death, and tere is no knowledge that infcting Such injury would cause deat, the stcused wel be gully of hurt the Injury Is no: Serious. In Nga Shwe Po's case 1883, he Ssczused struck 2 man one blow on te head witha bamboo yoke andthe Injured man deg, pamanly aue te excessive opm Seminteres by na rand oleate pa He was hl gly under thi seo. the stars ofthe ce have obaeved tat For example, if leaves food mixed with poison on B's desk and later on B eats the food causing hurt, it cannot be a case of esau Ifthe accused dis nat know about any special condition ofthe deceased and causes death because of hurt, he wll be hes guy of only rurt, Tus, In Marana Goundan's ease AIR 1944, when the accused Klexed 8 person and tie person dled because of 3 “seased spleen, ne was Feld guity of arly mur. {A shysical contac is nat hacessary. Thus, 3 when an accused gave food mixed with dnatura and caused polsoning, he was hel sgulty of Ha es severe ae csi ger revo hr The us of he ide ober ta wou be very dl to a fare deariy more than hurt, This, secton 320 of IPE defines Grievous Hurt a= = Section 320 - The folowing kins of hurt only are designated as “Grievous” 1 Emascuaton 2. Permanent pavatin of the sight of ether eye 3. Permanent prvation ofthe hearing ot athe ea Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR Destruction or permanent impairing of powers of any member or joint Bormanent dsiguraton ofthe Read or face. Fracure or dislocation of bone or toch [Ray hure which endangers fe or which causes Unde to alow hs ardinary pursue, 72 sufferer tobe, during the space of twenty cays, in severe body pan or “Thus, it can be seen that grievous hurt isa more serous kind of hut. Since it isnot possible to precisely define wali a serous hor and wet if not, to simply the matter, only hurts deserbed In section 320 are considered serous enough to be ealee Grievous Hurt. The words "any hurt which endangers Me" means thatthe Ife is only endangered and not taken away. Stabbing fon any vial par, squeezing the testis, thurstng lati int rectum so that bleeding is cause, have all been held as Murs endanger fe and tus Grievous Hurts. As with Hurt, in Grievous Hur, IIs nt a physical contac Is not necessary. Difference between Hurt and Grievous Hurt COniy hurts that are defined in section 320 are calles Grevous Hurt. Punishment for voluntarily causing Hurt as defined in section 323 Is imprisonment of either description up to 1 year and a fine up to 1000 Ré, while punishment for volintarly causing grievous hurt is imprisonment of either description up to 7 years 08 wel os fie, ‘Te ine sepsrang Goevocs Hon ané Cubable Homies very thi, 1 Grievous Hut, the Me is endangered veto nh whe in Culpale Horie, death i ky tobe caused, Thus, acts nether nkendes nor likey to cause ceath may amu > grievous hur even though death ie caus. Incase of Formina SbastioAzardeo vs State of Goa Daman and Diu 1982 CLI Sc, te deceased was making publty about the ili otimacy between Nard On the fateful dy, NW, and her husband A caught hla oD and tid him up to & pee and beat him asa es of which he ied. Tey were nol arined with any dangerous weapon end had no itetion to kl Bn. Wand W were hel guity of only cousing grievous hurt. Wrongful restraint and wrongful confinement Section 339. Wrongful restraint Fant to proceeds said wrongly ta restrain thot person Wrongful restraint meens preventing @ person trom going to place where he has right to go: Ta wrongful confinement, a person Is kepe wit certan limits out of which he wishes to go and has a ght to go. In wrongful restraint, a person Provented fem proceezing In some particular cretion though fre to go elsewhere, In wrongful cntnement, tere Is rstal Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-corsACADEMIC HOUR from proceeding in all directions beyond a certain area, One may even be wronfuly confined in one's own county where by a threat Issue to a person pravents nim fom leaving the shores of Ms ld ‘Object ~The object of ths soction is to protect the freedom of a person to utlize his right to pass in his. The slightest Unlawful cbstucton Is deamed as wrongful restraint. Physlealcostracon is not necessary always, even by mere wards {anstitte offence under ths Section. The main Ingrdlent ofthis secuon Is that wien a person abstructsarotner by causing ito Sppearto that other that it's Impossible cfleut or dangerous to proceeds as wall as by causing I actually tobe Impossible, deat or dangerous for that ta proceeds Ingredients: 1,4, An obstruction, 2.2. Obstruction prevented complainant from proceeding in any direction. Obstruction:-obstrucion mans physical obstruction, though ft mey eause by physical force or by the use of menaces or threats Waen such obstruction fs wrongful becomes the wrongful resrolnt- For ® wrongful retrain is necessory that ove persos rust obstruct another voluntaniy.in simple word Ie means keeping 9 person out ofthe place where his Wishes to, and has aright ‘This offence is completed if one's freedom of movement is suspended by an act of another done voluntarily. Restraint necessarily implies abridgment erty 10m against his wil. What s require uncer ths section is obstrcton to free movement of a person, the method used for such obstruction is Inmate. Use of physical force or causing such obstruction is ret necessary. Normally verbal prohisiien or remonstrance des not amount ts austructon, but certain ceurstances It may be causes BY treat or by mere wores. Effect of such ‘Word upon the mind of the person obstructed le more Important than the method, Obstruction of personal lberty:9ersonal liberty of 2 person must be obstructed. A person means a human being, here the {question ares whether a child cf a tender age who carat walk of his own lege could also be te subject of restraint Aas aise ih Mahendra Noth Chakarvarty v. Emperer. fas eld thatthe section fe not confined te only such person who can walk on his own legs or ean move by physical meens within his own power. Te wes further said that I? only those who can move By Diysical meass within tele gw power ore to be tresled a person who wishes to prosned then the position woul! become Sbsurd in ease of paralytic or scx who on account of his sickness cannot move Another points that needs our attention here is whether obstruction to vehicle seated with passengers would amount to wrongful Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR An interesting judgment of our Bombay High Court in Emperor v. Ramlala: “Where, therefore a driver ofa bus makes his fence under See. 31 of the Penal Cade of wrongfully restraining the der and passengers of another bus "its absurd to say that because the crvar and the passengers ofthe other bus could have got down from that bus and walked away in different arections, or even gone in that bus to erent dastnavons, In reverse dechons, there was therefore no. ‘erongful estan Is the ldgnent of our High Court whieh Is applicable ta Ur busmen who suddenly perk the buses across the ‘ade showing Unie protest an some issues 1. was onthe ro0f af a house. B removes the Inder and thereby detains & on te rok 1, and 8 were co-ower ofa wel. A prevented 8 ‘rom taking aut water from the well Section 340. Wrongful confinement. ioe ergy rsa ay enn sch 8 annar 8 preven a prsn om procesings Deon certain Spots, oy voluntarily act done by another . Wrongful confinement of person. 1, Wrongful restraint ofa person 2. Such restraint must prevent that person from proceeding beyond certain timits. Prevent from proceedings: Wrongful confinement is kind of wrongful restraint, In whieh © person kept within the limits out anstitute confinement For wrongful caninementproo! ef actval physical odstuction i not esse circumscribing Limits: rangfl confinement means the notion of restrain within some Imi defn by a wil or power Mort force: Detention though te eck of mara fe, without the accomplishment of physical ce saute to Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR Degree of offensetironsful restraint is not a serious offence, andthe degree of ths offense is comparatively lees then confinement. AVrongful eonnement Is a sane offence, andthe degree ef this offense is comparatvely Intensive then restraint Principle slement In wrongful retrant voluntary wrongful obstruction of a person personal ibery, wines he wishes to, and he have a right tein Wrongful confinement voluntanly wrongfully resiaint a person where he wishes to, and he Ras a POMC Within a crcumsening imi, sonal liberty s 2 paral restrain: ofthe personal iberty of 8 person in Wrongful restraint. A person is retrain is fee :o move anyaere cther than to procaed ina partal dracon it's absclte or total restraint or obstruction of 2 personal iberty in Serongtl confinement Necessity limits or boundaries are required In Wrongful restraint. But in wrongful confinement certain circumseibng mits oF boundores requires, Force: FORCE Under Section 249 of Indian Penal Code the term ‘force! has been defined. The term ‘Force! defied inthis section contemplates foree used by one human belng on anather human being. The term Force nere defined occure In the Englen Dibase" VI EL Armis*-Exertion of energy producing change in the outer word In order to constitute force there must be atleast Jn order to constitute force thare must be at least: ~ (I) Causing of a metion (i) Change of a mation or (li) Cessation of 2 In, Shadshiv Mondal v. Emperor Jn, Shadshiv Mondalv. Emperor The court held that Farce does nat contemplate the use of force against inanimate objects, This le ear trom the use ef word "another" In this section The word "another" refers to another human beng in the ambit ofthis In, Ramakant rajaram v. Manuel Fernandes 1, Ramakant raaram v. Manuel Fernandes It was held inthis case that , a motion or change of mation or cessation of mation ‘used to Property without afecting a human being snot the ‘Use of Force to Another within the meaning of ths section In Chandrika a0 v. State of Bia ate of Bihar Supreme Court inthe case held that it woulé be clear from a Bare Perusal ofthe section that another ithe causes motion or cessation of motion to that ater, Sy en hand ofthe mands of offical would be to affact the sence ofthe fesings of In Chandrika sa0v. fone person can be said to have used foes again Sway the accused necessary caused a jerk to Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR to use of force as contemplated by Section hands ofthe official. Therefore the court he 2349 of Incian Penal Code, the action ofthe accused amour 1n,3ai Ram v. Emperor In a1 Ram w- Emperor In this case the Accused rales his stick to strike the Plain, the psi seeing the accused raising the stick moves away. It was helé by the Court trat A uses the force within the meaning ofthis section In, Sheo pratap singh v. Emperor In Shea pratap singh v. Emparor Tt was held in the case that inducing an animal to move may amount to using force. Criminal Criminal Foree The last Section defined “orce! which by itself isnot an offence , forthe use of force may take place under Ccreumstances the mest benevolent, as where a person pulls another out ofa wall o save him from being drowned in the well such an act isnot an offence, When does force becomes Criminal Force? When does force becomes Criminal Force? The previous section has defined Section 349, which can also be put to postive or goed use. Force Becomes enminal only when ~- tis used without consent and In order of coramiting offence, wnen iis used to ‘cause injury, fear or annoyance to another to whom the forces used. ‘The essential ingredients of this section are as follows:~ ‘The essential ingresients ofthis section are as fellows: (i Intentional use of free to ary person. (i) Such Force must have Been used without the person's consent (i) The Force must have been used ~ (3) In ofder to commituing ofan effence.(b) Intending te cause or knowing thats tkely to cause Injury, fear or the annoyance tothe person to wham the Force Is used Criminal Force CCemiral Foree Crminal Force is Equivalent to "battary" In English law which means the intentional infliction of force by one person upon ancther against latter's cansent. fA spits ever B, than A would be lable fr use of Criminal Frce as must have ‘use annoyance to 8. 1n, Haystead v. DPI In, Haystead v.DPP In this case accused punched a Woman, 25a result of which the child inher han fell tothe floor. His prosecution Included the charge of “battery, onthe child. He contended thatthe battery requ rea direct apaeation of force ‘which involved iret physical contact with vit either with the body of medium such as Weapon. I, Haystead v. DPP «5, Hayateadv. OPP The court rejected tis contention and sid that battery does nat require direct nfietion af volonce. The accused 125 gulty because the childs fal to lor hac result directly from the assault of mother, Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR 1n, Bihari Lal v, Emperor In, Bian Lal v. Emperor In this case a person broke the house inthe absence ofthe occupant, then itis clear that the accused hae taken te possession ofthe house without any force or erminal force. But If, 2 parson struck a pot which another person was carrying and which was in contact with his body, It constitutes the offence of criminal force. Thus the Dysical presence ofa person makes a crucial iference, between an acl amounting to criminal force or not. Intentional : Intentional The word intentional excludes all voluntary, accidental or even negligent acts, An Attendant at a bath, who from pure carelessness turns on the wrong tap and causes bollng water t fall on another, ar lus. (¢) to Sec.380, could not be Convicted forthe use of Criminal Farce In, Mohd. Ishaq Khan v. Emperor I Mond, 1shaq khan v. Emperor A person raises stick for any purpose of his own ané the other B, runs away because of sheer fright thon the accused would not be liable fr criminal Force. Though in this case the act ofthe accused A caused fear inthe rindsot ofthe ether person 8 even then the accused wil ot be lable asthe ac: Was not cone with an Intention te do So doing on act "without one's consent” and "against his wil. The later involves active mental opposton of the at- MAYNE states Where itis an element ofan offence thatthe act should have Been done without the consent ofthe person affected by It, some evidence must be offered thatthe act was done t him against hs wil or without his consent. Assault An assaults nothing more than 2 threat of violence exhibiting an intention to use eximinal free, and the present abity ‘and intention to cerry the threat nto execution. The Section basically requires two things: ~() Moking of any gesture oF preparation by 9 person in the presence of another, i) Intention ar knowledge of the xenon that such gesture or preparation ‘wll caus the person present to apprehend thatthe person making It's about to use Criminal Force to nim Gesture or Preparation : Gesture or Preparation According to this Setion , the mere gesture or preparation with the intention or knowledge that tis Hiely to cause apprehension In the mind ofthe vie, amounts to an afence of assault. The explanation to this section proves rere words do not amount to assault , unless the words are used in the aid ofthe gesture or preparation which amounts to an esau Gesture or Preparation : Gesture of Preparation The following have been held to be instances of assault: -()Polnting ofa gun, whether laaged ar Unloaded (i) Fetching a Sword and aevancing towards victim (i) LMting one’s Lath (iv) Torowing brick into another's Download Website Arademiciourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR house (v) Advancing with threatening atte to strike Bows In, Read v. Cooker In, ead v. Cooker An assault is constituted by an attemst to apply unlawful force te anather or any threat which s accampanied by or consists of any actor gesture showing @ present intent to use unlawful force and also accompanied by * a present abity to In, Stephens v. Myers. In Stephens v. Myers A advanced towards 8 In a threatening atttude and withthe intent of stnking &, but was stopped by any other person just before he reached & The Court nelé inthe case that A's blow would almost immediatly have reached & ha not been stoppec he hed committed an assault Jn Hunter v. Johns In this case, the master ofa board schoo, detained a chi afterschool hours for not doing home lessons whic, under the Elementary Educations Act, 1670 and 1876, he had ne power to set. The court held that he was guy ef an Unlawful desertion of the child and threfore an assault. Mare words cannot constitute an aeeoul Defense to ASEOUR The accused has got two defenses available to him: - (i) That the fats of the case do not constitute on assault or battery If t was an accident or done by consent. (i) That he was justified ané excused. He may, als, where the Creumstances permit, specially plead the defense that the matter has already been disposed of by 2 court of summary surislcton Difference between Criminal force, ASSAUR and Hurt :- Section319 ofthe Indian Penal code defines Hur. The word assault, {iminal force and hurt have dst meanings and éefrition in IPC. They deal with ferent stages ofthe commission of orfence with different eects. Legally assault enotes the preparatory acts which cause apprehension of the use of criminal fore against the person, ASsau falls short of actual use of Crmina force the motion without the consent ofthe person, inorder to corsmitan offence or intending to cause or knowing Ie will cause injury, fear or annoyance, When the use of such criminal fore ruts in ausing ef bodly pain or injury, then it would 12 offence of Hur’ under Section 323, Inlan Penal Code Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR 1 from guardianship, and abduction? Differentiate between What is meant by kidnapping from India, kidnay Kidnapping Kidnapping from India - Kidnapping fom Incia means taking anybody, without his consent, out ofthe borders of India Section 1360 defines 0 follows ~ Section 360 - Whoever conveys any person beyond the tts of Indie without the consent ofthat person oF of so ‘uthorized to consent on ena of that person, i sid to Kdnanap thal person from Indl For example, if A takes 8 without his consent of without 8's lawful guerclans consent te Pakstan, A would be committing ths, Dilence. The essential ingredient of Kidnapping are 1, The person should be conveyed aut ofthe borders of Tn 2, The person should be conveyed without his consent or witrout the consent af the person who is legally authorizes to Consent on his bona “Thus, ia person isnot capable of giving valid consent as inthe case ofa minor or a person with unsound mind, the consent of his low guard seared to take him ouside Tne. kidnapping from Lawful guardianship - Kidnapping from lawful quaralanship means taking a child away fom hs eu dguatalon without the guardians consent, Secton 361 defines It a olows Section 361 - Whoever tes or entices any minor uncer 16 yrs of age f male or 1B yrs of age if female, oF any person of unsound Imind, ut of the keeping ofthe lawful guardian of such minor ee person of unsound ming, without the cansent of such Quarian Sato fidnap such miner er pessan from low gardens. Explanation - The words lawful guardian in tis section include any person lawfully entrusted with the care or custody oF such minor or other person, Miegitrote child of who in good faith believes himself to be entled to the lawl custody of sven che, unless sven act ke {commited for an immoral at unlawful purpose bared onthe sacvon the eecential Ingredients are 1. The person should either be a minor oF @ person of unsound mind - This implies thatthe person Is not capable of ‘lung consent: In case of ate cnid the age © 16 yrs while n case cf fomale cid the age fs 18 yas Fors person on nsolind mind, age fs imaterio, Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR 2. Such person be taken or enticed away - This means that ther force used or any enticement that causes the person foleave domain ofthe lawful quarclan Is used, For examale, FA shows tofoe to 9 child C thereby eausing the eld to ome cut of the Rouse and follow A, fall uncer this catagory. 3. Such person must be taken or enticed away from the lawful guardian - Only when the child is under the lawful {Quartlan, can he be Kidnapped, Tha means that te cle should be under the damain ofthe lawful guardian. For exam, [Sn orpnen wandering onthe slrects cannot be kidnapped because he doesn't have a lawful guardien: However, this does hot mean that 9 chi must be withthe awful quardan, For exemple, @ child singin @ scnool algo under the dominion of hie father and f taker sch 2 cid away, woule be Kisnapping, Foren", a lowful uordanship does not necessary ‘ean a legal guarcian. legal guaréian may entrust the custody of his cif to someone else. Tang a child away fom Suen custody wil also fall uncer tis sacuon, For example, A entrsts fis child to, is servant, to take the chil to schoo 1, C takes the child away from she servant, this would be kidnapping because the Servant hes the lawful Quardanshia of Distinction between taken away and allowing a child to follow — In Vardrajon vs State of Madras AIR 1965, SC observed tot there i a diference between taking awey a min and allowing the minor to follow. fa persan knowingly does on act which he hes reason to elewe wil couse the eis t lave the uardion, then t would amount t taking away the ile, Nowever,f child fellows @persen even when a person does not co any act meart torentce a child to leave his quarsian, he cant be held responsible, For exampla, Ira ld flows a icecream vender, weneut any entcarsent fom the vendor, whe the guaran ‘also Keep the watch, the vender cannot be held gully under tis secton, Jn Chajju Ram vs state of Punjab AIR 1968, a minor sil was taken away out of the house for only about 20-30 yares twas held that was kidnapping because dstance is immateral Kidnapping i complete as soon as the minar oF the person with unsound mind eaves the custody ofthe guardian is not a ontinung offences This, when a eh idnepped frm place Pl and taken to ploce P2 ad then Irom P2 to PS, keOpDINg twas done ony one Abduction ‘Section 362 of IPC detines Abduction a follows Section 362 whoever by force compels, or by any deceitfl means induces, any person to go fram any place said to about tal person. 1 means compeling 2 person, or to induce him to go from where he ste another place. The essental ingredients are ~ {A parson goas from one place to another « person cannot be abducted atthe same place where he is. For bdutcion€o take place, the person shoul physically move fem one place to another, Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR Either by forcible compulsion or by inducement - The movement of the peson must be because of some compulsion or because ef some inducement, For example, A treater Bon gun point to go from his Rouse to another ly. Here, A Ras {orpelled 8 to go from his house andi us gully under ths section Hera, the age of the abducted person is immaterial. Thus, even a major ean be abducted If he is forced to go from one Toeation, But I'2 minor's abducted, t may amount to Kidnapping as well Further, itis a continuing affence. As long as 8 person Is Forces to go from place to place, abducton cortinues. Differences among kidnapping from India, Kidnapping from lawful quardian, and Abduction, Kidnapping from India | Kidnapping from lawful guardian (Section 361) | Abduction (Section 362) (Section 360) ‘parson is taken aut ofthe] —A parson i taken away Wem te lal guardian TA parson is compalied by Yarcaor reduced By] eception to go fom any place Tints of Inca “Rye of te person is | The parson must be lee than 16 yrs oF age Fale, | Age of the parson i imateral rater lose tron 16 female, or of unsound mind TEs naka conning Ts neta continuing offence Wiss continuing offence “The parson 5 conveyed | Consent ot the person Wanapped is lnmnateal, | Person moves without Fis consent oF he ‘onsent is abealned by dectetful means TEs always dana by the use ot Yor oF Tecan be done witout use | Tecan be Gore witout use of fore oF Gataption. of force New Rape in Indian 860 Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, ‘A Caminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 passed to amend the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the Code of Criminal Procectie, 1973, the Indian Evidence Act) 1872 and the Protecton of Children fom Sexual Offences Act, 2012. it amends sectons 100, 228A, 5354, 370, 370A, 375, 376, 3764, 3768, 376C, 376D and 309 af inclan Panal Code, 160. I also Inserts naw sactloné 166A, ea, 226, 3265, 354n, $548, Ss4C and 2540 In Incian Panal Code, 1880, 1 also amance sections 26, S4A, 154, 169, 163, Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-orsACADEMIC HOUR Inserts new sections 53A In Indian Evidence Ac, 1872, It also amends section 42 of Protection of Chien from Sexual Offences bet, 2012, “eCrna tow amensrent oa 2013 eo Incas lon ests ye Lok Saba on 19 March 213, bythe Rays Subno on 21 Morch 2013, when provides for amendment of dian Sera Cada, Ladin Eudeace Ac on rzctte 1297 on fas coed fo zaxun flanges" The il receved Present assent on # Apr 2OLY and Gene to came nto fore from 3 February 2013 Iewas ongally an Grdinance promulgated by the Ecsdent of inca, Pranab Mukherie, on S'Febrvary 2013, ligne of the pocerts in the 2033 Delni gang. tape case Contents +L Baeigroung 2 Fine criminal caw (amendment ordinance, 2013 Chom a ou Tasrermees Seetersatinis Background: 2012 Dei gana cape case (on 16 December 2012 a female ahysiatharaby inter! was beaten and gana ranad in Dal. She Gied from her injuries thireen days later, cespte receiving Weatmant in India and Singapore. The Incidene generated international coverage and Wor condemned by the United Nationg Ently for Gander Equal’ and the EmpowscTnent of Women, ‘oho called’ on the ‘Government of india and the Goverment of Beh To-do everyting nthe power to take up acteal reforms, ensure justee fd reach out with robust puble services to make womed’s tea more safe and secure” Puble protests took place in Del Where thousands of protesters clashed with secury forces, Snir protests tok place In major ees throughout the County. Download Website ArademicHlourcom Help Others: Send Notes and Previous Questions to Upload, Malt query@academichour-ors