INDIAN PENAL CODE UNIT 1

The states in primitive days were police states, their main task being the
maintenance of law and order within the country and protection from outside attack.

Wrong takes place in two ways Viz by commission of an act or by omission

of an act. The wrongs may be broadly categories under two heads namely 1. Private
Wrongs: - (Civil Court & Injury to individual)

2. Public Wrongs :- ( Public Wrongs & Injury to Society)

Crime is a public Wrong. It is an offence against the community or society as

a whole. it causes threat to social security and creates social disorder. Eg. (Murder,
Rape, Theft, Robbery, forgery, etc.)

Definition:-

1. Black Stones's : Sir william Blackstone, in his 'Commentaries on law of

England defined Crime as act committed or omitted in violation of public law
forbidding or Commanding it.

2. Sir james Stephen: Crime is an Act which is both forbidden by law and
revolting to the moral sentiments of the society.

3. Indian Penal Code: there is no satisfactory definition it is not defined in the

Indians Penal Code. The word offence is used in the penal code in the place of crime
according to sec 40 of the code; the word offence is an act punishable by the code.

An offence takes place in two ways viz.

1. Commission of an act Eg:- killing a person with knife or by administering poison
and

2. Omission of an act Eg. Killing a person without giving food.

Therefore all acts and omissions which are described as offences under
Indian Penal code are crimes and are punishable under the code. Crime is a
public wrong, in the sense any member of the public can institute criminal
proceedings against the person accused of an offence. However, there are
certain exception cases Viz. matrimonial crimes, Dowry Crimes, Defamation
etc. in respect of which the persons concerned alone can institute the criminal
proceedings.

Nature of Crime:

Crime is an act or omission, forbidden / prohibited by law. It varies from place

to place, persons to persons Eg :- Adultery is an offence in India under Sec. 497 IPC
but it is not an offence in America. It is a civil wrong in England. It changes from
time to time Ex. 1) Consumption of alcoholic drinks 2. sati system.

In T.K. Gopal alias Gopi V State of Karnataka.

S.C. Observed regarding the Crime as follows:

"Crime can be defined as an act, that subject the doer to legal punishment. It
may also be defined as the commission of an act specifically forbidden by law. It
may be an offence against morality or social orders"

The Nature of crime can be better understood by distinguishing b/w the torts
and crime as Explained below:
Definition of crime

1. oxford English dictionary “an act punishable by law as forbidden by statute

or injurious to the public welfare”
2. Blackstone “an act committed or omitted in violation of a public law either
forbidding or commanding it”

Crime is an act done in violation of public rights and duties.

3. sir James Stephen “crime is an act which is both forbidden by law and
revolting to moral sentiments of the society”

4. Indian penal code : offences sec. 40

a. commission of an act
b. omission of an act

The states in primitive days were police states, their main task being the maintenance
of law and order within the country and protection from outside attack.

Wrong takes place in two ways Viz by commission of an act or by omission

of an act. The wrongs may be broadly categories under two heads namely 1. Private
Wrongs :- ( Civil Court & Injury to individual )
2. Public Wrongs :- ( Public Wrongs & Injury to Society)

Crime is a public Wrong. It is an offence against the community or society as

a whole. it causes threat to social security and creates social disorder. Eg. (Murder,
Rape, Theft, Robbery, forgery, etc.)

Definition:-

1. Black Stones's : Sir william Blackstone, in his 'Commentaries on law of

England defined Crime as act committed or omitted in violation of public law
forbidding or Commanding it.

2. Sir james Stephen: Crime is an Act which is both forbidden by law and
revolting to the moral sentiments of the society.

3. Indian Penal Code: there is no satisfactory definition it is not defined in the

Indians Penal Code. The word offence is used in the penal code in the place of crime
according to sec 40 of the code; the word offence is an act punishable by the code.

An offence takes place in two ways viz.

1. Commission of an act Eg:- killing a person with knife or by administering poison

and

2. Omission of an act Eg. Killing a person without giving food.

Therefore all acts and omissions which are described as offences under
Indian Penal code are crimes and are punishable under the code. Crime is a
public wrong; in the sense any member of the public can institute criminal
 proceedings against the person accused of an offence. However, there are
certain exception cases Viz. matrimonial crimes, Dowry Crimes, Defamation
etc. in respect of which the persons concerned alone can institute the criminal
proceedings.

Nature of Crime:

Crime is an act or omission, forbidden / prohibited by law. It varies from place

to place, persons to persons Eg :- Adultery is an offence in India under Sec. 497 IPC
but it is not an offence in America. It is a civil wrong in England. It changes from
time to time Ex. 1) Consumption of alcoholic drinks 2. sati system.

In T.K. Gopal alias Gopi V State of Karnataka.

S.C. Observed regarding the Crime as follows:

"Crime can be defined as an act, that subject the doer to legal punishment. It
may also be defined as the commission of an act specifically forbidden by law. It
may be an offence against morality or social orders"

History of Criminal Law in India.

1. ancient Hindu law

2. Mohammedan criminal law
3. English criminal law

1. Ancient Hindu law

• no law of crimes
• no classification of wrongs as torts and crime i.e., no difference between
criminal and civil wrong
• difference in nature of crime
• Ancient Hindu law duty of king is to punish the offender

2. Muslim / Mohammedan criminal law

• separate criminal law was introduced
• Quran and Hadis developed through Ijma and Kiyas
• Kazis elucidating and expounding of the laws

crimes were divided into 2 classes

1. crimes against god (eg. adultery and drunkenness)

2. crimes against man (eg. murder and robbery)

Private wrongs can be punished by individuals

Kinds of punishment:

1. qisas (retaliation)
2. diyut (blood money)
3. hadd (defined punished which could neither be increased nor reduced)
4. tazer and siyara (discretionary and exemplary punishment)
• no civilized government/procedure
• Mohammedan could not be admitted as a witness in evidence in any case
affecting a Mohammedan.

3. English criminal law

East India Company
1765: acquired Nizamat of provinces of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa (status quo)
1832
All India legislatures was created by the charter act of 1833
1st law commission in 1834: Lord Macaulay (chairman)
1837, 1856 bill was passed on october 6th 1860
IPC 1860 came into operation on 1st jan 1862.
impossible attempts- if the offender has done all the necessary acts for the crime but
the consequence does not take place as it can never take place, like putting the
hand into an empty pocket, breaking and opening the lock of an empty box
and firing on the bed when the man is not there, it amounts to attempt or not.
in other words, there is an attempt for an act which is impossible. Whether it
comes within the ambit of attempt and if so whether it should be punished.

Queen-v-collins: person put his hand in empty pocket of another, he could not be
convicted for attempt to steal.

R-v-mcpherson: breaking and entering a building for attempt to steal the goods
which were not there. Not offence.

R-v-ring: train arrived they were close to a woman when she was entering a
compartment and one of them attempt to steal money from her pocket which
was empty, Held guilty.

R-v-Epson: a person opened a hand-bag, searched through it and found nothing

worth to steal. He then put it back. He was held not guilty of theft since there
was no proof that he intended to deprive the owner of hand-bag permanently
from it.

Actual commission of the crime/accomplishment:

Madanlal-v-state of j and k

R-v-linneker

Abhyanand mishra-v-state of Bihar

or

Sharhi Bhushan-v-kind emperor

- there may be a crime where the whole of the actus reus that was intended has
not been consummated
- attempt to commit an offence can be said to began when the preparations are
complete and the culprit commences to do something with intention of
 committing the offence and which is a step towards the commission of the
offence.

Locus penitentiae : Latin word which means an opportunity to withdraw from the
commission of a crime.

ELEMENTS OF CRIME:

1. human being
• earlier societies when animals were punished
• vengeance/idea of retribution in earlier days
• animals would be liable for punishment
ex: snakes and pugs were burnt
Oxen stoned to death
Mad dogs convicted and punished like human beings
Animals, insects and inanimate objects were accepted as witnesses and also
punished with stones, pieces of iron or wood
Continued till 1846
2. mens rea
• guilty intention
• evil intention
• guilty mind
• mental element

Principle of mens rea denotes: state of mind, namely will, intention and
motive, etc.,

Specific words denoting mens rea in IPC:

“actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea”

Which refers to ‘act itself does not make a man guilty unless he intends so’

“acts me invito nonest mens actus”

Which refers to ‘an act done by me against my will is not an act”

1. voluntarily
2. dishonestly and fraudulently
3. corruptly
4. malignantly
5. wantonly
6. rashly and negligently

1. voluntarily:
s. 26 “reason to believe”- a person is said to have “reason to believe” a thing, if he
has sufficient cause to believe that thing but not otherwise.
s. 39 “voluntarily” – a person is said to cause an effect “voluntarily” when he causes
it by means whereby he intended to cause it, or by means which, at the time
of employing those means, he knew or had reason to believe to be likely to
cause it.

2. Ingredients:

a. acts done with plan or design

c. acts occurring with the knowledge or

d. reasonable belief
e. knowledge and reasonable belief
f. it is physical expression of the desire of will

3. dishonestly and fraudulently:

s. 24 “dishonestly” – whoever does anything with the intention of causing wrongful
gain to one person or wrongful loss to another person, is said to do that thing
“dishonestly”.
s. 25 “fraudulently” – a person is said to do a thing fraudulently if he does that thing
with intent to defraud but not otherwise.

4. corruptly:
Ex: intentional use of false evidence is also a corrupt act.
s. 196 using evidence known to be false – whoever corruptly uses or attempts to
use as true or genuine evidence any evidence which he knows to be false or
fabricated, shall be punished in the same manner as if he gave or fabricated
false evidence.
s. 198 using as true a certificate known to be false – whoever corruptly uses or
attempts to use any such certificate as a certificate, knowing the same to be
false in any material point, shall be punished in the same manner as if he gave
false evidence.
s. 200 using as true such declaration knowing it to be false – whoever corruptly
uses or attempts to use as true any such declaration, knowing the same to be
false in any material point, shall be punished in the same manner as if he gave
false evidence.
s. 219 public servant in judicial proceeding corruptly making report, etc.,
contrary to law – whoever, being a public servant, corruptly or maliciously
makes or pronounces in any stage of a judicial proceeding, any report, order,
verdict, or decision which he knows to be contrary to law, shall be punished
with imprisonment of either description for term which may extend to seven
years, or with fine, or with both.
s. 220 commitment for trial or confinement by person having authority who
knows that he is acting contrary to law – whoever, being in any office which
gives him legal authority to commit persons for trial or to confinement, or to
keep persons in confinement, corruptly or maliciously commits any person for
trial or to confinement, or keeps any person in confinement, in the exercise of
that authority knowing that in so doing he is acting contrary to law, shall be
punish with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend
to seven years, or with fine, or with both.

5. malignantly:
“Malicious” “malice” which means wrongful act which is done intentionally without
just cause or excuse.
s. 153 wantonly giving provocation with intent to cause riot – if rioting be
committed – if not committed – whoever malignantly, or wantonly, by doing
anything which is illegal, gives provocation to any person intending or
knowing it to be likely that such provocation will cause the offence of rioting
to be committed, shall, if the offence of rioting be committed in consequence
of such provocation, be punished with imprisonment of either description for
a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both; and if the
offence of rioting be not committed, with imprisonment of either description
for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both.
s. 270 malignant act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life – whoever
malignantly does any act which is, and which he knows or has reason to
believe to be, likely to spread the infection of any disease dangerous to life,
shall be punished with imprisonment of wither description for a term which
may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
according to Russel “malice is a formed design to commit a mischief”
Ordinary malice means spite or ill-will law – act done by the accused with he knows
to be illegal and perverse.

6. wantonly:
“Wanton” means a reckless or thoughtless act without any regard to the
consequences which may fallow.
• The act which is done without any reason/evil design but for the sake of pleasure
with the knowledge of the consequences likely to follow is a wanton act.

7. Rashly and Negligently:

• The acts which are not done intentionally but carelessly are rash and negligent
acts.
• They are made punishable because they affect safety of others.
• When there is not premeditation in doing the acts and no purpose to produce
to consequences but the act is over hasty and done without due deliberation
and caution.
• Person doing the act never expects consequences rather he may be regretful
for the consequences.
• he is guilty for the manner of doing the act
• No foresightness of the effect caused on act.
• positive duty: to do legal duty
• negative duty: who breaks the duty which is under duty to forbear but he does
not act accordingly
Rash act: means knowledge of the consequences of act but an over confidence that
it will not happen.
Negligent act: the consequence is never adverted to.

Case laws:
1. r -v- Crossman
2. r -v- prince
3. r -v- Bisshop
4. r -v- Mrs. Talson
5. r -v- Wheat and Stocks
Ex. to mens rea: - A intentionally kills B with a knife or by administering the
poison. A is quality of murder and is awarded serious punishment Viz. life
imprisonment or death sentence under sec 302 IPC.

If a commits an accident causing death of 20 people he is punishable up to 7

years imprisonment under sec 304A of IPC, in this example even though A killed 20
people he was awarded small punishment. But he was awarded serious punishments
i.e. life imprisonment or death sentence for killing only one person, the reasons is in
all cause of former intentional killing Mens Rea is present. But in the case of the
latter (accident) means rea is absent. Thus mens rea plays an important role in
imposition / determination of criminal liability.

Case law with related to mens rea

R –V-PRINCE

Facts of the case: - According to Sec 55 of the offences against person Act. 1861
(in England) "Taking away an unmarried girl below the age of 16 years from the
lawful custody of her parent or guardian against the will of her parent guardian is an
offence and such person is guilty of misdemeanor'

Mr. Prince, the accused in the instant case was in love with a girl miss. Annie
Philips,Who was below the age of 16 years. The accused had taken away the
unmarried girl from the lawful custody of her parents with an intention to marry her.
He thought that she was above 16 years and the girl told him that she was 18 years
old. The father of the girl lodged a complaint alleging that prince had illegally taken
away his unmarried minor daughter below the age of 16 years prince was arrested
and the criminal proceeding were instituted against him.
Judgment: - The court through black burn. J. rejected the contention / defence on
the part of the accused that he bonafide believed and had reasonable ground for
beveling that the girl so taken by him was over sixteen, and held that the accused
was guilty of misdemeanor (Kidnapping) under sec 55 of the offences agent person
Act 1861.

The accused though he had no mens Rea, was collected on the ground that his
act of taking away an unmarried girl below 16 years from the lawful custody of her
parent itself was an offence punishable irrespective of the proof. Of mens rea.

Principle:

The principal applied in the instant case was "Whosoever shall unlawfully
take any unmarried girl, being under the age of 16 years out of the position and
against the will of her father or mother shall be guilty of a misdemeanor".

In R.V. Bishop: - The accrued in this case was convicted for receiving in an
unlicensed house, although he honestly and reasonably believed that they were not
lunatics.

R.V. Mrs. Talson: “marrying again during that life time of the other spouse
amounts to bigamy and is punishable under Sec. 57 of the offences against person
Act. 1861. Similarly bigamy is an offence under Sec 494 of the Indian penal code
1860.
Facts of the case: Mrs. Talson married Mr. Talson in sep 1880 Her husband deserted
her in 1881. Mr. Talson's where about were unknown for more than 7 years she made
all enquiries about her husband and learnt from reliable sources that he died in a
ship-wreck, Mrs. Talson got remarried in 1887 reasonable believing that her husband
died. sometime after her remarriage, her 1st husband reappeared and charged her for
bigamy.

Judgment:-

The trial court convicted her for one day on appeal; she was acquitted on the
ground that she had no mens rea.

Principles:-

The court of appeal laid down that the doctrine of mens rea would be applied
in statutory offends. The court opined that the statutory limitation the absence of the
spouse for 7 years (i.e. the where about are unknown for 7 years) was completed at
the time of the second marriage (Statutory limitation. A person whose whereabouts
are unknown for a period of 7 years or above is presumed to be fear. if the
whereabouts of one spore (Wife or Husband) are unknown for seven years, the other
spore has a right to get remarried legally without any fear of criminal liability for
bigamy.

Actus Reus: “physical act”

s. 32 words referring to acts include illegal omission – in every part of this code,
except where a contrary intention appears from the context, words which refer
to acts done extend also to illegal omissions
s. 33 “act”, “omission” – the word “act denotes as well a series of acts as a single
act: the word “omission” denotes as well a series of omission as a single
omission.

Act includes commission of an act / omission of an act

• furtherance of common intention

• actus reus is the result of conduct
• it is an event
Ex: in a murder case the death of the victim is actus reus which is done with an
intention (mens rea)
• the conduct which may be an activity or omission produces the result of event
Exceptions to criminal liability:-

• Criminal liability arises for only those events which law forbids and makes it
a crime.
• if law does not forbid the actus reus and thus keeps it out of the definition of
crime is not a crime
Ex: 1. under command of law if he does, it is not a crime ex. Judgment
executer

2. A person trying to save a man caught by a tiger pulls the trigger on

the tiger to save the man but the bullet hits the man and is killed this in not
an actus reus as to hold the person pulling the tiger guilty of crime.

3. Surgical operation was done by surgeon without any consent.

▪ Acts done in necessity with the knowledge that the act is going
to harm someone in body or property but done to avoid a
greater harm.
▪ The omission to give notice or information to public servant by
a person legally bound to give it is offence under s. 176 if the
omission is intentional.
• 3) Acutus Reus or Act committed or omitted Actus Reus in furtherance
of evil intent :
• The expression Actus Reus denotes "Physical Act" which includes an
act or omission as well omission of an illegal act. When the intention is to do
a prohibited act it is known as 'actus Reus' the term act is defined in sec 32
and 33 of IPC.
• Act reus is the result of conduct. It is an event. i.e. consequential
occurrence of the conduct. It must be distinguished from the conduct or
activity which produced the event.
• In a murder case, the death of the victim is actus reus which is done
with an intention (mens rea) to cause the death.
• The conduct which may be an activity or omission produces the result
or event. The criminal liability arises for only those events which law forbids
and makes it a crime.
• Section 32 :- Words referring to acts include illegal omission :- In every
part of this code, except where a contrary intention appears from the context,
words which refer to acts done extend also to illegal omissions section 33:-
Act omission :- The word act denotes as well as series of acts as a single act :
The word omission denotes as well a services of omission as a single persons.
• Contributory negligence, superfluous participation operating and
substantial cause are all also included in actus rea.
• Case Laws :-
• 1. R –V- Cheshire: In a fish and chick stop there were some agreements b/w
the deceased and the applicant the appellant shot the deceased in leg and
stomach and seriously wounded him. The deceased was taken to a hospital
where he was operated on and placed in his wind - pipe, for helping him in
the breathing trouble which remained for weeks in the wind-pipe the deceased
suffered chest-infection and some further complications and difficulty in
 breathing. This wind-pipe had become narrow where treachtomy had been
performed and as a result of it, he suffered cardio-respiratory arrest and died.
A consultant surgeon as defence expert was not the result of shooting in the
leg and stomach but improper treatment of respiratory problem the appellant
having been charged with the murder, the trial Judge directed the Jury that the
appellant was responsible even if the hospital staff was incompetent and
Negligent. The appellant having been charged with the murder the trial Judge
directed the jury that the appellant was responsible even if the hospital staff
was incompetent and negligent the appellant was entitled to be acquitted only
if the hospital staff was recklell in the treatment. The appellant was convicted.
The court of appeal while dismissing the appeal held that the judge erred in
inviting the Jury to consider the degree of fault in the medical treatment rather
its consequences but there actuarial no miscarriage of justice even if more
experienced doctors than those attended the deceased would have recognized
the rare complication was a direct consequence of the appellants acts. Which
remained a significant cause of death.
• Omprakash – V- state of Punjab :
• In this case the accused omitted to provide food to his wife and locked
her in a room she had escaped and charged him, the SC convicted for attempt
to commit murder.
• 4) Injury: - The last ingredient to constitute crime is injury "Injury means to
cause harm to any person in body, mind, reputation or property.
• The term injury is defined in Sec 44 of IPC the act by which injury is
called must be illegal
• Sec 44 :- The word injury denotes any harm whatever illegally caused to any
person, in body, mind, reputation or property.
 • An injury is simply an act contrary to law obtaining against tell will of
a person on threat of loss of appointment may be extortion, Threat of a forged
decree that cannot be executed is a threat of injury under section 44 A police
officer arrested a person and released him on bail when the bribe was paid to
him It was held that the action of the a caudal amount to putting person
arrested in fear of injury and therefore he was guilty of extortion under sec
383.

novus acuts interveniens:

• another person intervenes in the course of the event.
• ex. a stabs b on a vital part of the body intending to kill b and c on his own
comes there and takes b and leaves him at a place so as not to be seen by any
other persons and b dies. the chances of b’s recovery in case of immediate
medial help would not absolve a from the crime of homicide.

contributory negligence:
R -v- swindall and Osborne:-

super flaous participation:

Causation:
R-v-Cheshire
Omprakash -v- state of Punjab
DEFINE STAGES IN COMMISSION OF CRIME

Commission of a crime involves four stages namely:

1. Intention

2. Preparation

3. Attempt and

4. Accomplishment

1. Intention or contemplation:
 It is the 1st stage in the commission of an offence. It is very difficult for the
prosecution to prove the guilty intention of person to commit an offence.

Intention to commit the crime is not punishable unless it is made know to the
others either by words or conduct. In Indian law also mere intention to commit a
crime is not punishable however law takes place notice of much intention. Eg.
Waging war against the government (Sec 121 to 129 IPC) Sedition (sec 124 A IPC)
are considered as serious offences and mere intention to commit then is punishable
similarly mere assembly of person for committing the dacoit without any further
preparation is punishable under sec 402 IPC)

2. Preparation:-

The second state in commission of a crime is preparation means "to arrenge

the means or measures necessary for commission of the intended criminal act". It is
very difficult for the prosecution to prove that necessary preparation has been made
for the commission of the offence.

Eg. 'A purchased a pistol and got it loaded keeps the same in his pocket in order to
kill 'b' but it is not possible to prove that 'A' is carrying the loaded pistol only to kill
'B'

Mere preparation is punishable under IPC in respect of the following offences:

1. Waging war (Sec 122)

2. Preparation to commit dacoity (Sec 399)

3. Preparation for counterfeiting coins and Govt. stamps (See 233 to 235,255 and
257)and
4. Possessing counterfeit coins, false weight or measurement and forged documents
(See 424, 243, 259, 266 and 274)

3) Attempt: The 3rd Stage in commission of a crime is attempt "it is also know as
preliminary crime prof. kenny and sir Stephen called it as "Inchoate Crime"
(inchoate means incomplete). The term attempt is not defined in the India penal code
chapter XXIII (Sec 511) of the penal code deals with of attempt to commit offences
and provides for punishment for attempt.

Essentials of attempt:

To constitute attempt the following essentials are to be satisfied

1. Guilty intention to commit an offence.

2. Some act done towards the commitment of the crime

3. The act must full short of the completed offence

An attempt to commit itself is an offence was approved by Mansfield in the

case of R.V. Scofield (1784) Cald 397.

In R.V. Linneker 91996) 2KB 99- " A took a loaded revolver out of his pocket
and said repeatedly that he was going to kill 'B' His arm was seized however he was
held guilty for an attempt.

Abhyanand Mishra –vs- state of Bihar

 In this case, the accused obtained permission from Patna university to appear
for M.A. In English aganist the forged documents stating that he was a graduate and
employed that he was neither a graduate nor employed as a teacher .

The accused was convicted under Sec 420/511 for offence of attempt to cheat.

As stated above Indian penal code prescribes punishments both for completed
offences and also for attempt to commit certain offences under the IPC attempt had
been described under the following 3 ways ;-

1. Completed offences and attempts have been dealt in the same section and same
punishment is prescribed for the both.

2. In case of certain offense attempts are described separately and separate

punishment is prescribed for complicated offence and attempt.

3. in other cases of attempt, are covered under sec 511, which prescribes longest
term of imprisonment or with fine or with both.

Eg. Punishment for theft is up to 3 years imprisonment or fine or both fine and
imprisonment, punishment for attempt to commit theft is one and half years
imprisonments or with fine or with both.

ATTEMPT

In Indian penal code, the attempt has been dealt within four different ways:

1. In some cases, the offences and their attempts fall in the same sections with
the same punishments. there are twenty seven such sections

121, 124, 124a, 125, 130, 131, 152, 153a, 161, 162, 163, 165, 196, 198, 200,
213, 230, 240, 241, 251, 385, 387, 389, 391, 397, 398 and 400
2. In some cases the attempts and their offences fall in separate sections and
therefore as different offences there are different punishments. there are three
such sections-
a. Section 307- attempt to commit murder.
b. Section 308 - attempt to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
c. Section 393 – attempt to commit robbery.
3. Section 309 makes attempt to commit suicide punishable. This is the only
section in IPC which punishes only attempt not actual commission. The
reason is obvious when the suicide is complete, the doer not remain in the
world.
4. The attempts not punishable under the above mentioned 31 sections fall under
section 511 of IPC. Thus it is a residuary section.

impossible attempts- if the offender has done all the necessary acts for the crime but
the consequence does not take place as it can never take place, like putting the
hand into an empty pocket, breaking and opening the lock of an empty box
and firing on the bed when the man is not there, it amounts to attempt or not.
In other words, there is an attempt for an act which is impossible. Whether it
comes within the ambit of attempt and if so whether it should be punished.

Queen-v-collins: person put his hand in empty pocket of another, he could not be
convicted for attempt to steal.

R-v-mcpherson: breaking and entering a building for attempt to steal the goods
which were not there. Not offence.

R-v-ring: train arrived they were close to a woman when she was entering a
compartment and one of them attempt to steal money from her pocket which
was empty, Held guilty.

R-v-Epson: a person opened a hand-bag, searched through it and found nothing

worth to steal. He then put it back. He was held not guilty of theft since there
was no proof that he intended to deprive the owner of hand-bag permanently
from it.
Actual commission of the crime/accomplishment:

Madanlal-v-state of j and k

R-v-linneker

Abhyanand mishra-v-state of Bihar

or

Sharhi Bhushan-v-kind emperor

- there may be a crime where the whole of the actus reus that was intended has
not been consummated
- attempt to commit an offence can be said to began when the preparations are
complete and the culprit commences to do something with intention of
committing the offence and which is a step towards the commission of the
offence.

Locus penitentiae : Latin word which means an opportunity to withdraw from the
commission of a crime.

4. Accomplishment:

The last stage in the commission of a crime is accomplishments if the accused

succeeds in his attempt he is quilty of the offence in other words the act is
accomplishment, other wise the is guilty of attempt only

Eg. 'A fires at 'B' with an intention to kill him if 'b' dies 'A' is guilty of murder. If
'B' is injured 'A' is guilty of attempt to murder.
 JURISDICAITON

Meaning: jurisdiction denotes power conferred on the court, by a status to decide

dispute/cases.

• limits of court
IPC: “power of a criminal court to try a person for commission/omission of criminal
act.
• Power and extent of authority of the court to try the causes is called
jurisdiction.
• award punishments
• impose fines and
• grand relief

Types of criminal jurisdiction:

1. Personal jurisdiction.

2. Territorial jurisdiction.

a. intra territorial jurisdiction

b. extra territorial jurisdiction

1. Personal jurisdiction:

s. 2:- punishment of offences committed within India: every person shall be liable
to punishment under this code and not otherwise for every act or mission
contrary to the provisions thereof of which he shall be guilty within India.

• Where a crime is committed by any person whether an Indian national or a

foreigner, within the territory of India, the code shall apply because the person
who commits the offences causes the effect on Indian soil.

Exceptions to the personal jurisdiction:

1. Foreign sovereigns:

2. High dignitaries of the state

President/governors a. 361

3. Ambassadors and diplomats

4. Alien enemies: (only under martial law)

5. Foreign army
 6. Warships

7. Corporation: only natural persons not including judicial person

8. Vicarious liability of master for acts of his servants:

A master is not criminally liable for the unauthorised acts of his servants.

Exceptions to the above rule:

a. statutory liability: s. 154 owner or occupier of land on which an

unlawful assembly is held was made liable.

b. public nuisance: owner carried on for his benefit by his agents, is liable
to be charged for public nuisance

c. neglect of duty: entrusts work to unskillful hands master will be liable.

If skilful person is employed the employer will not be liable because
absence of express malice.

2. Territorial jurisdiction:

Where a crime is committed within the territory of India, the code shall apply and
the courts can try and punish irrespective of the fact that the person who had
committed the crime is an Indian or foreigner.

• Within the territory of India as defined in article 1(3) of the constitution.

• within the territorial water of India and
• On any ship/aircraft wither owned by India or registered in India.

Two types of territorial jurisdiction:

a. intra territorial jurisdiction: crime is committed within the territory of India by

any person. s. 2 every person shall be liable to punishment under this code and
not otherwise for every act or omission contrary to the provisions thereof, of
which he shall be guilty within.

Every person: including citizen of India as well as non-citizen. Irrespective of his

nationality, rank, caste or creed is tribal by Indian courts provided the offences
 with which he is charged have been committed on nay part of the Indian
territory.

- ex: -
• a person native of Baghdad was charged for committing an unnatural offence
on board an east Indian ship
• corporeal presence(Indian citizen found in foreign country )
• adultery s. 497

nullum tempus occurrit regi: lapse of time does not bar the right of the crown.

b. extra territorial jurisdiction: s. 3 punishment of offences committed beyond, but

which by law may be tried within India

Article 245(2) provides that “no law made by parliament shall be deemed to be
invalid on the ground that it would have extra territorial operation”

Mobarik Ali -v- state of Bombay:

Facts: A Pakistani national doing business in Karachi with dishonest intention made
false representation to B at Bombay through letters, telegrams and telephonic
talks that he would ship rice to B on receipt of money. The complainant B sent
the money in the hope of getting the supply of rice which was never shipped.

A was arrested when he arrived in Bombay and was prosecuted

Judgement : a has committed the offence of cheating and can be prosecuted in India

Principle: s. 3 punishments of offences committed beyond Indian territories but he

may be tried India. Indian courts has jurisdictions.

s.4 extension of code to extra territorial offences:

1. Any citizen of India in any place without and beyond India

2. Any person on any ship/aircraft registered in India wherever it may be

3. Any person in any place without and beyond India committing offence targeting
a computer resource located in India

Illustration:

“A, who is a citizen of India commits a murder in Uganda. He can be tried and
convicted of murder in any place in India in which he may be found.”

Trial:

1. He may be given up for trial in the country where the offence was committed i.e.,
he may be extradited to that country

2. He may be tried in India

The application of the ipc is excluded in the following cases:

1. Martial law and

2. Act of state

Indian courts have power to try offences committed outside India on

1. Land: s. 3, 4 of IPC and s. 18 of Cr P C citizens

2. High seas: admiralty jurisdiction: the jurisdiction to try offences committed on

the high seas in known as admiralty jurisdiction.

• High seas are considered to be a floating island belonging to the country

whose national flag she is flying.
• admiralty jurisdiction extends over:
- offences committed on Indian ships on the high seas
- offences committed on foreign ships in the territorial waters of India
- pirates
Special or local laws:

Offences defined by special or local law have been excluded from the operation of
the code and made punishable as under those acts.

THEORIES OF PUNISHMENT:
1. Deterrent theory: method of punishment is only method of social security

• deter means to abstain from doing an act

• Warning to others – criminals and others (public) not to repeat
• deter (prevent) crimes
• Object:

1. to deter the offenders from repeating the same course of conduct so that the
person and property of others or the society at large may not be harmed
 2. Fulfillment of one’s vengeance that underlies every criminal act

3. by adequate penalty and exemplary punishment to offenders which keeps them

away from criminality

According to Locke: the offences is made ill bargain to the offenders. By getting
punishment the offender is afraid of with the pains of punishment.

- The lenient attitude should not be taken when the crime is committed in a
brutal (harsh), gruesome (shocking), barbarous, cruel and abhorrent manner.

2. Retributive theory:

• To give in ‘return’ – repaying, punishing suitably

• based on the idea “taking revenge” against wrong doer
• Evil should be returned for evil without any regard to consequences
• Victim could inflict the same injury to the wrong doer
• Men should be given their due
• Mathematical equation of crime

Guilt + punishment = innocence

Hegal: opposed the theory of retribution and observed that it is the manifestation of
revenge for an injury. to quote him “you hurt me so i will hurt you. Indeed
that is the literal meaning of retribution. and if i cannot hurt you myself, i
demand that you should be hurt by others”

the desire to make the offender suffer, not because it is needed so that the guilt is
purged, not only because suffering might deter him from further crime, but
simply because it is felt that he deserves to suffer, is the essence of retribution.

It is practiced in Islamic countries:

Tooth for tooth

Eye for an eye

3. Preventive theory:

• Theory of disablement
• Based on the proposition not to ‘avenge’ (an injury or wrong done to oneself
or others) crime but to prevent it.
• ex. “trespassers will be prosecuted”
• to make threat generally known rather than putting it occasionally into
execution
• prevent criminal from committing crimes by keeping him away so that the
society is free from the incidence of crimes
• disable the criminal in order to prevent repetition of crimes

- ex. of punishment:

1. death and

2. life imprisonment

- offenders is eliminated from the society so that the offences of the same nature may
be prevented

Broadly there is no real difference between the deterrent theory and preventive
theory.

Reformative theory:

• Object is to reform the criminals

- No one is criminal by birth
• Criminal by social, economic and environmental conditions
• Crime is a mental disease caused by different social elements
• Mental cure of criminals rather than awarding punishment will serve the
purpose
• The offender should not be hated but his offences should be despised
• Reformatory schools
 • The motives behind the offences and the other backgrounds of the offenders
should be clearly examined and there should be made a way so that the
offenders mental environment may be changed
• The theory aims to convert an offender into a civilised man
• The object of punishment should not be physical or mental torture but a
healthy atmosphere

Provide education and providing him with the facilities and opportunities with
which he was lacking and which promoted him to lead such a life

This theory holds good for young criminals

Probation of offenders act 1958 s. 4

- Inder Singh -v- state of Delhi

two young men were convicted under s. 302 read with s. 34 and 307 IPC
should be sent to rehabilitation.

5. Expiatory theory:

In Hindu law expiation means the sin is washed away

Crime is done away with, cancelled, blotted out or expiated by the sufferings of its
appointed penalty

- To suffer punishment is a debt due to the law that has been violated
o guild + punishment = innocence
• this theory holds that the punishment wipes away the sin and the offender
becomes innocent
• a pardon reaches both the punishment prescribed for the offence and the guilt
of the offender
• When the pardon is full it releases the punishment and blots out the existence
of the guilt, so that in the eye of the law offender is as innocent as if he had
never committed the offence.
• types of punishment: uttering mantra, fasting, self immolation or even burying
oneself to death