INDIAN PENAL CODE

MAINS QUESTIONS

1. If a person committed any offence outside India whether he will be charged outside or in Indian Territory. Discuss briefly with case law.

2. ‘A’, a foreigner initiates the commission of an offence from his country, which is committed in India by electronic device. Is ‘A’ liable in India for the offence? Give reasons in support of your answer.

3. A citizen of India commits an Act in England, which is not a criminal offence there but is one under the IPC. Can he be held liable in India. If yes under what provisions of IPC.

4. A foreigner commits offence against another foreigner in a foreign vessel on the high sea. He then steps into India. Can he be sued by courts in India? Give reasons.

5. Under what circumstances can an offence be committed outside India be tried as an offence committed within India. Illustrate your answer with suitable examples.

INDIAN PENAL CODE

APPLICATION OF THE ACT (SEC 1-5)

• Section 1 provides for territorial application of the IPC
• Excludes state of Jammu & Kashmir
• Territorial not only includes land but also interest water like rivers, canals etc. also portion of sea using along its coast.
• The territorial waters of India extends into the sea to a distance of 12 Nautical Miles from the base line.

Section 2 Talks about intra territorial application of IPC is offences committed within India by any person

• Leading case

Mobarak Ali Ahmed v. State of Bom [1957] SC

• Who are exempted from criminal prosecution

Section 3 & 4 talks about extra territorial operation is offences committed beyond the territory of India.

• Section 35 has to be read along with section 188 Cr.PC

Section 5 Talks about the saving clause

• This code will not affect the provisions
• 

INDIAN PENAL CODE

PRE QUESTIONS

1. Which section gives the territorial application of the Indian Penal Code

A. Section 1

B. Section 2

C. Section 3

D. Section 4

2. As per section 18 of IPC, India means the territory of India:-

A. Including the State of Jammu & Kashmir

B. Excluding the State of Jammu & Kashmir

C. Can be both depending upon the nature of the offence

D. None of the above is correct

3. Which section of the IPC, reiterates the well known principle of intentional law that a ship on the high sea is a floating territory of the country whose flag ship is following:-

A. Section 3(1)

B. Section 3(2)

C. Section 4(1)

D. Section 4(2)

4. Who of the following are exempted from the application of Indian Penal Code?

A. The President of India

B. Diplomatic

C. Alter enemy

D. All of the above

5. Section 2 talks about:-

A. Territorial operation of IPC

B. Intra territorial operation

C. Extra territorial operation

D. Internal territorial operation

6. Who are not exempted from Intra Territorial Jurisdiction of the IPC?

A. The President of India

B. The Governors of State

C. Public

D. Alien Enemies

7. The territory of India includes:-

A. Land only

B. Rivers, canals & lakhs

C. Portion of sea

D. All of the above

8. The territorial waters extends into the sea to a distance of:-

A. Ten nautical miles

B. Twelve nautical miles

C. Fourteen nautical miles

D. None of the above is correct

9. Word “person” for the purpose of section 2 includes:

A. Citizens only

B. Non citizens also

C. Foreigners visiting the country

D. All of the above

10. Which sections of IPC deals with extra-territorial operation.

A. Section 2

B. Section 3

C. Section 4

D. Both section 3 & 4

11. Which section provides for the trial of offences committed outside India

A. Section 184 of Cr.PC

B. Section 185 of Cr.PC

C. Section 186 of Cr.PC

D. Section 188 of Cr.PC

12. ‘A’ an Indian Soldier, commits murder outside India. While in service can he be prosecuted for murder in India?

A. Yes

B. No

C. Depends upon the circumstances of the case

D. Only with the permission of foreign country

13. In cases of offences committed partly in India and partly outside India. It shall be deemed to be an offence committed within:-

A. India

B. Outside India

C. Either of the above

D. None of the above

14. The Indian penal Code will not apply to:-

A. Martial laws

B. Special laws

C. Local laws

D. All of the above

INDIAN PENAL CODE

MAINS QUESTIONS

1. What are the ingredients of section 34 of the IPC, which lays down joint responsibility in doing of criminal act?

2. A, b & C with an intention to assault & beats him; during the cause of which ‘A’ who has a provisions enmity with ‘D’ stabs him, resulting in D’s death. Can B & C be liable for 302 r/w 34?

3. Difference between common intention and similar intention.

4. Difference between common intention and knowledge?

5. Write short notes on common intention.

INDIAN PENAL CODE

JOINT LIABILITY/CONSTURCTIVE LIABILITY OR VICARIOUS LIABILITY

• Meaning of joint/constructive liability
• Section 34-38, 121-A, 396, 460, 141-149 are concerned with Joint/Constructive liability.
• S/34 creates no specific offence
• Meaning of common intention

1. Prior meeting of minds

2 .Pandrang tukia & Bhillia v. State of Hyderabad [1955] SC

3. Birendra Kumar Ghosh v. King Emperor [1925] PC

4.

Landmark Case:-  Mehboob Shah v. Emperor [1943] PC

• Common intention can be found on the spot on at the spur of the moment also.

Leading case- Kirpal Singh v. State of U.P [1954] SC

• Difference between “in furtherance of” & “during the furtherance of”
• Difference between common intention & Knowledge.
• Can a single person be held liable u/s 34?
• S/35

• Complementary to S/34. But scope of both section are difference
• Under S/34- Liability in joint on the basis of common intention whereas u/s 34 it is based upon similar intention

• S 38 person guilty of different offence.

INDIAN PENAL CODE

PRE QUESTIONS

1. Which of the following is correct with respect to section-34?

A. Some criminal Act must be done by several persons

B. There must be a common Intention of all to commit that criminal Act.

C. Participation of all in furtherance of that common intention

D. All of the above are correct

2. Pandurang Tukia & Bhillia v. State of Hyderabad, [1995] SC, is a leading case on the point of:-

A. Similar intention

B. Common intention

C. Common object

D. Similar object

3. Birendra Kumar Ghosh v. King Emperor [1925] PC is a landmark Judgment on which of the following sections?

A. Section 32

B. Section 33

C. Section 34

D. None of the above

4. Mehboob Shah v. Emperor [1943] SC. is a landmark on the point of:

A. Common object

B. Common intention

C. Similar object

D. Similar intention

5. Which of the following is not correct with respect to section 34:

A. Mere presence of accused is sufficient for imposing common intention

B. Participation is a condition precedent for fixing liability under this section

C. Common intention can be formed on the spot also

D. None of the above is correct

6. ‘A’, ‘B’ & ‘C’ killed ‘D’, ‘C’, the main offence acquitted on technical grounds. ‘A’ is also acquitted because of minority. Can ‘B’ alone be tried for section 302 r/w Section 34?

A. Yes

B. No

C. Depends upon the circumstances of the case

D. None of the above

7. Which one of the following case is related to section 34 of IPC?

A. M Nanavati v. State of Man.

B. Kedar Nath v. State of Bengal

C. V. prince

D. Barendra Kumar Ghosh v. King Emperor

8. In which case the court made a clear distinction between common intention?

A. Barendra Kumar Ghosh v. King Emperor

B. Mehboob Shah v. King Emperor

C. Kirpal Singh v. State of U.P

D. R v. Tolsen

9. Common intention implies:

A. Common object

B. Similar intention

C.  Pre arranged planning

D. Common knowledge

10. Which is of the following is not correct:

A. Section 34 IPC credits specific offence

B. It only lays down the rule of evidence

C. Section 34 is the manifestation of Joint liability

D. None of the above is incorrect.

INDIAN PENAL CODE

MAINS

1. Define Unlawful Assembly and Discuss the more aggravated forms of offence related to unlawful assembly.

2. Difference between sec. 34 and sec.149?

3. A, B, C and D entered the room of the deceased armed with lathis. A exhorts the others to attack X. E, the servant of X, tries to save his master and sustains injuries in the process. E, in his evidence did not attribute any positive act on the part of D in the incident. A, B, C and D are charged for offence under section 302 read with section 34 of the I.P.C.
4. Mitha Mal dispossessed Ram Lal from his land thirty years back and is in settled possession since then. He gets the information that Ram Lal is coming to that place with armed men to get back possession of the land and would reach the site within half an hour. On getting this information Mitha Mal gathers seven of his friends immediately who are armed and prepared to resist Ram Lal forcibly. Does this assembly of Mitha Lal’s friends amount to unlawful Assembly? Decide
5. Whether every member of an unlawful assembly is guilty of an offence which is committed in prosecution of the common object? Why?

 

INDIAN PENAL CODE

LECTURE NOTES

Sec 141-149

• • S/149 is also a manifestation of group liability
  • S/ 149 has to be read with S/141,142,143
  • Section 141
    • It only defines what is an unlawful assembly
    • Requirements of S/141
    • Assembly of 5 or more
    • Assembly must have a common object
    • Common object must be to commit one of the 5 objects specified in Sec 141
  • Section 142
  • 
  • Section 143
    • This section provides punishment for being a member of an unlawful assembly
    • For this section it is not necessary that offence is committed by that unlawful assembly
  • Mere membership is punishable
  • Meaning of common object
  • Mere presence in assembly is not sufficient
  • Section 149
    • As per this section every member of an unlawful assembly having a common object is responsible for the acts committed by any other member of that assembly & hence punishable for that
• • Difference b/w S/34 & 149
    • Pandurang vs State of Hyderabad (1955 SC)

 

 

INDIAN PENAL CODE

Pre-Questions

1. For an unlawful assembly under section 141 of IPC, the minimum number of persons required is

(a) five

(b) seven

(c) ten

(d) twenty.

2. For an assembly to be unlawful, must have a common abject of the kind specified in

(a) section 141 of IPC

(b) section 140 of IPC

(d) section 142 of IPC

(d) section   144 of IPC.

3. Which of the following is not specified to be the common object of an assembly to make it unlawful, under section 141 of IPC

(a) overawing the Government of its officers

(b) resistance to legal process

(c) forcible possession or dispossession of property

(d) none of the above.

4. Which of the following shall not be an unlawful assembly within the meaning of section 141 of IPC

(a) an assembly of five or more person with the common object of only maintaining possession

(b) an assembly of five or more persons to vindicate a supposed right of one or all, by show of force

(c) An assembly of five or more persons to prevent arrest of a person, by the court amin under the orders of the court

(d) an assembly of five or more persons with common object of taking possession of property.

 

5. Rioting means use of force or violence by an unlawful assembly, or by a member thereof, in prosecution of the common object of such assembly , as per

(a) section 144 of IPC

(b) Section 145 of IPC

(c) Section 146 of IPC

(d) Section 148 of IPC

6. For rioting, which if the following is correct

(a) actual force or violence must be used

(b) mere show of force is sufficient

(c)mere possession of deadly weapon is deficient

(d) all the above.

7. Section 149 of IPC is

(a) declaratory provision

(b) creates a distinct offence

(c) a rule of evidence

(d) all the above.

8. For application of section 149 of IPC

(a) a person should be a member of the unlawful assembly and should actively participate in the commission of offence

(b) a person should be a member of unlawful assembly but need not necessarily participate himself in the commission of the offence

(c) need not be a member of unlawful assembly but must share a common intention to commit the offence

(d) need not be a member of unlawful assembly but must participate in the commission of offence.

9. nder section 149 of IPC if an offence is committed by a member of that unlawful assembly in furtherance of their common object

(a) every person who at that time was a member of that assembly shall be guilty of that offence

(b) only the person committing the offence shall be guilty of that offence and all shall be guilty of unlawful assembly only

(c) only that of any offence person committing the offence shall be guilty and others shall not be guilty of any offence

(d)  either (b) or (c).

10. For application of section 149 of IPC

(a)The offender must be a member of unlawful assembly

(b) The offence must have been committed in prosecution of the common object

(c) Both (a) & (b)

(d) Either (a) or (b).

INDIAN PENAL CODE

GENERAL EXCEPTIONS

MAINS QUESTIONS

1. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is bound by law to do it. Discuss.

2. Referring to relevant legal provisions and decided cases, point out what offence, if any, has been committed in the following case:- ‘A’ sees ‘B’ comment what A appears to be a murder. ‘A’ in good faith seizes ‘B’ in order to bring ‘B’ before proper authorities. Later on it turns out that ‘B’ was acting in self defence.

3. Referring to relevant legal provisions and decided cases, point out what offence, if any, has been committed in the following case:- ‘A’ a soldier, fires on a mob by the order of his superior officer in conformity with the commandments of law.

4. Point out the difference between mistake of fact and mistake of law with the help of suitable examples.

5. Decide case and point out what offence if any, has been committed in following case- “A, a soldier, fires on a mob by the order of his superior officer, in conformity with the command of the law”.

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY

General Exceptions

• General exceptions has to be always read along with section 6 of IPC and Section 105 of Indian Evidence Act
• As per Section 6 of IPC, every definition of an offence, every penal provision and every illustration should be read subject to general exception.
• Section 105 of Indian Evidence Act puts a burden of proof upon accused to prove this his case comes within any of the exception.
• This section also talks about the presumption.

(Eg. Unsoundness of mind)                                                                          (eg. Necessity)

• Section 76- exempt the liability of a person who is perse bound or by mistake of fact in good faith believe himself to be bound by law.
• Meaning of good faith- anything which is done with due case and attention (section 52)
• Leading cases- 1. R. v. Tolson (1889) QBD

2. 2. W.B.v. Shew Mangal Singh (1981) SC

• Difference between mistake of fact/law
• Section 79- Exempt the liability of a person who is perse justified or by mistake of fact, in good faith believes himself to be justified by law.
• Both Section 76 & 79 deals with mistake of fact & not mistake of law.
• Leading cases- 1. Chirangi v. State

2. Bonda Kui v. Emperor (1943)
3. 3. Waryam Singh v Emperor (1926) Lah HC

• Both section 76 & 79 are based upon the maxim “ignorantia facit doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat” means ignorance of fact excuses and ignorance of law is no excuse.

Preliminary Questions

1. Which of the sections of the IPC 1860 is a key to the chapter of General Exceptions?

(a) Section 6

(b) Section 5

(c) Section 4

(d) Section 7

2. Which of the following sections of the IPC 1860, mandates that definitions in the code are to be understood subject to exceptions?

(a) Section 6

(b) Section 5

(c) Section 4

(d) Section 7

3. A, a police officer, without warrant, apprehends Z, who has committed a murder

(a) Here, A is guilty of the offence of wrongful confinement because the arrest was without warrant or any authorization

(b)  Here, A is not guilty of the offence of wrongful confinement for he was bound by law to apprehend Z and therefore, the case falls within the general exception which provides that ‘nothing is an offence which is done by a person which is bound by law to do it’

(c) Either (a) or (b)

(d) None of the above

4. Which of the following is a part of the definition of every offence contained in the Indian Penal Code?

(a) Mens rea

(b) Actus reus

(c) General Exceptions

(d) None of the above

5. One who is empowered by law to act judicially alone, or a body of judges, which is empowered by law to act judicially as a body, when such judges or body of judges is acting judicially is called as …….

(a) Judge

(b) Court of justice

(c) Judicial officer

(d) None of the above

6. Is the immunity under section 77 of the Indian Penal Code available to a Collector/Land Acquisition Officer/Special Officer who makes an award, by way of settlement or otherwise, under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894?

(a) Yes 16

(b) No

(c) Depends

(d) None of the above

7. Which of the following chapters of the Indian Penal Code deals with ‘General Exceptions’?

(a) Chapter II

(b) Chapter III

(c) Chapter IV

(d) Chapter V

8. Which of the following is a valid defence under the Indian Penal Code?

(a) Mistake of fact

(b) Insanity

(c) Good faith

(d) All of the above

9. The punishment for offences which come under genera exception is

(a) Generally small

(b) No punishment

(c) Entitled for probation under Probation of Offenders Act

(d) None of the above

10. General exceptions are available to

(a) All the offences

(b) First offenders only

(c) Except the offences against the country

(d) Offenders under 21yearsof age

11. General exceptions are

(a) Acts done by persons justified in law

(b) Acts done under justifiable conditions

(c) Both (a) and (b)

(d) None of the above

12. General exceptions are available to

(a) The offences under the Indian Penal code only

(b) The offences under special and local acts also

(c) Except the offences against the country

(d) None of the above

13. Which of the following is not a defence under the Indian Penal Code?

(a) Mistake of law

(b) Ignorance of law

(c) Both (a) and (b)

(d) None of the above

14. Which of the following sections places the burden on the accused to prove that the case falls within one of the general exceptions?

(a) Section 105 of the Indian Penal Code

(b) Section 105 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

(c) Section 105 of the Evidence Act

(d) None of the above

15. A, a soldier, fires on a mob by the order of his superior officer, in conformity with the commands of the law. A has committed.

(a) Culpable homicide

(b)Culpable homicide not amounting to murder

(c)  No offence

(d) Murder

16. A, an officer of a court of justice, being ordered by that court to arrest Y and, after due enquiry

        Believing Z to be Y, arrests Z. A has committed

(a) Wrongful confinement

(b) Wrongful restraint

(c) No offence

(d) None of the above

17. In the case of State of West Bengal v Shew Mangal Singh AIR 1981 SC 1917, the Deputy Commissioner of police ordered to open fire to violent mob. A sub-ordinate police officer opened fire and it caused the death of two people. The accused took the defence that the act is excusable under section 76 of the Indian Penal Code. A question was raised as to whether the command of a superior officer to open fire affords a complete defence to a subordinate officer if, while acting in the execution of that command he causes injury or death. In this case the Supreme Court held that

(a) Accused is liable, since they are not supposed to obey the illegal orders of superior officers.

(b) Accused is entitled to the protection under section 76 of the Indian Penal Code

(c) Accused is not entitled to the protection under section 76 of the Indian Penal Code

(d) None of the above

18. In a case of ‘mistake of fact’ the court has to determine the guilt on ……..

(a) Real facts

(b) Believed facts

(c) Either (a) or (b) is correct

(d) None of the above

19. In a prosecution, the burglar, who breaks into House No. 5 took the defence that he mistook the house for House No. 6. Here:

(a) Burglar cannot be punished

(b) Burglar can be punished

(c) Depends

(d) None of the above

20. On a charges of assaulting a constable in the discharge of his duty, the fact that the assailant did not know of his official character is

(a) A valid defence of mistake of fact

(b) Not a valid defence

(c) Either (a) or (b)

(d) None of the above

21. Section 76 to 79 of the Indian Penal Code are based on the Common Law Maxim

(a) ‘Ignorantia facit doth excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat’

(b) Volunti non fit injuria

(c) Res judicata pro varitate accipitur

(d) None of the above

22. The maxim ‘Ignorantia facit doth excusat’ means

(a) Ignorance of fact is an excuse

(b) Ignorance of law is an excuse

(c) Ignorance of fact is no excuse

(d) Ignorance of law is no excuse

23. A man before going in to church, fired his gun, and left it empty. During his absence someone went out shooting with the gun, and left it loaded. Later the man took up the gun again and, in doing so, touched the trigger. The gun went off, and killed his wife. Here:

(a) He is excused as mistake of fact

(b) No defence is available, he should have taken reasonable precautions

(c) Either (a) or (b) is correct

(d) None of the above

24. In which of the following cases the act is excused as mistake of fact:

(a) An accused, at night in the jungle, mistook a human being as a wild animal and killed that person

(b) A fires a bullet in to a bush where, unknown to him, B is hiding and the bullet kills B

(c) N, a nurse in a hospital gives P, a patient, poison thinking it to be a medicine which killed the patient

(d) All of the above

25. ‘Act done by a person judgment or order of court, is excused under the provisions of ……………… of the Indian Penal Code 1860.

(a) Section 76

(b) Section 77

(c) Section 78

(d) Section 79

26. A judge, believing that he had jurisdiction, sentenced an accused person to death. He had no jurisdiction to do so. In this case:

(a) He is excused under section 78

(b) He is not excused under section 78

(c) Either (a) or (b)

(d) None of the above

27. A magistrate having no jurisdiction, believing that he had jurisdiction, issued a warrant to search A’s house. B, a police officer, searched the house. Here:

(a) Magistrate is excused but not the police officer

(b) Police officer is excused but not the magistrate

(c) Both are excused

(d) None of them is excused

28. ‘Act done by a person justified, or by mistake of fact believing himself justified, by law’ is excused by virtue of …………… of the Indian Penal Code.

(a) Section 76

(b) Section 77

(c) Section 78

(d) Section 79

29. A sees Z commit what appears to A to be a murder. A, in the exercise, to the best of his judgment exerted in good faith, of the power which the law gives to all person of apprehending murderers in the act, seizes Z, in order to bring Z before the proper authorities. Here A commits:

(a) Culpable homicide

(b) Culpable homicide not amounting to murder

(c) No offence

(d) Murder

30. The accused was the producer of the film ‘Satyam Sivam Sundaiam’. He was charged for an offence punishable under section 292 of the Indian Penal Code alleging that the film was obscene and indecent. Petitioner argued that he got the certificate from the Censor Board and therefore he had bona fide belief that certification justified the public exhibition. In this case:

(a) The accused is entitled to protection under section 79 of the Indian Penal Code

(b) The accused is not entitled to protection under section 79 of the Indian Penal Code

(c) Cannot be determined

(d) None of the above

31. The maxim ‘ignorantia juris non excusat’ means

(a) Ignorance of fact is an excuse

(b) Ignorance of law is an excuse

(c) Ignorance of fact is no excuse

(d) Ignorance of law is no excuse

32. A judicial officer was found copying while writing his first semester LLM examination. Here A is:

(a) Entitled to the protection under section 77 of the Indian Penal Code

(b) Not entitled to the protection under section 77 of the Indian Penal Code

(c) Cannot be determined

(d) None of the above.

Indian Penal Code

General Exceptions (Section 84, 85, 86)

Mains Questions

1. “Mere medical insanity is not a valid defence under the IPC but legal insanity us”. Discuss.

2. Under what conditions the defence of insanity may be pleased on behalf of an accused?

3. “Voluntary intoxication is no defence”. Discuss the statement in the light of relevant provision.

4. Find out the test do distinguish the State of intoxication and state of unsoundness of mind within legal provisions.

4. Critically examine the law relating to intoxication exonerating the accuse from Criminal Liability.

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY (PLA)

Indian Penal Code

General Exceptions (Section 84,85,86)

• Section-84:- Nothing is an offence which is done by a person of unsound mind.

Rational:- He cannot form necessary mens rea

• Section 84 has been drafted in the light of M’ Naughten Rules [Landmark Judgment]
• Section 85:- Nothing is an offence which is done by a person under intoxication

Provided:- Intoxication must be without his knowledge & will.

• Section 86:- Talks about the rule of presumption in cases of voluntary intoxication.
• This section raises the presumption of knowledge
• No presumption as to intention
• Landmark cases-
• Basdev v Pepsu [1956] SC
• Director of public prosecution v Beard [1920]

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY (PLA)

Pre Questions

1. For unsoundness of mind, the impairment of the cognitive faculty of mind to escape criminal liability

(a) must be total

(b) must be partial

(c) both (a) &(b)

(d) none of the above.

2. Intoxication as defence is contained in

(a) Section 85 of IPC

(b) Section 86 of IPC

(c) Section 87 of IPC

(d) Both (a) & (b).

3. For a defence of intoxication, to escape criminal liability, the degeneration of escape criminal liability, the degeneration of mental faculties

(a) must be total

(b) must be partial

(c) both (a) & (b)

(d) only (b) above is correct & (a) is incorrect.

4. For a defence of intoxication, to escape criminal liability, the intoxication

(a) can be self administered

(b) administered against his will or knowledge

(c) should not be self administered

(d) all the above.

5. In case where the act involves a specific mens rea, in case of intoxication under section 86 of IPC

(a) the existence of mens rea is presumed

(b) the specific mens rea is not presumed

(c) the specific mens rea depends upon the attending circumstances & the degree of intoxication

(d) none of the above.

6. An act of a person of unsound mind is excused by virtue of ………………… of the Indian Penal Code.

(a) Section 84

(b) Section 85

(c)  Section 86

(d) Section 87

7. Mc Naughten rule is related to

(a) Doctrine of necessity

(b) Doctrine of insanity

(c) Doctrine of infancy

(d) None of the above

8. Which of the following is protected under section 84 of the Indian Penal Code?

(a) Medical insanity

(b) Legal insanity

(c) Both (a) and (b) are correct

(d) None of the above

9. Which of the following is protected under section 85 of the Indian Penal Code?

(a) Voluntary Drunkenness

(b) Involuntary Drunkenness

(c) Both (a) and (b) are correct

(d) None of the above

10. Which of the following is a leading case on intoxication (Sections 85 to 86 of Indian Penal Code)?

(a) Basudev v State of Pepsu

(b) Nanvati v State

(c) Kehar Singh v Delhi Administration

(d) None of the above

Indian Penal Code

General Exceptions (Section 80,81,93,94 & 95)

Mains Questions

1. ‘A’ with the intention in good faith of saving human life and property in a great fire, pulls down houses in order to prevent the conflagration from spreading it. ‘A’ pleads that the harm to be prevented was of such a nature and so imminent as to justify on excuse his act. Decide whether ‘A’ has committed any offence.

2. ‘A’ with the intention to kill ‘B’, shoots ‘B’ but accidently ‘C’ comes in between that shot hits ‘C’. Decide, whether ‘A’ has committed any offence.

3. Law will not take action of truffles. Discuss.

4. When is an act considered as an “accident” so as to be covered under section 80 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860?

5. State the law relating to “necessity” as a ground of excuse from criminal liability.

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY

Indian Penal Code

General Exceptions (Section 80,81,93,94 & 95)

• Section 80- Nothing is an offence which is done by accident or misfortune & without any criminal intention or knowledge in doing a lawful act in a lawful manner by lawful means & with proper care and caution.

• Meaning of accident & misfortune

• Section 81- This section protects acts which are likely to cause harm but done without criminal intent and to prevent other harm.

• Based on maxim “Quad Necessitas non habet legam” which means necessity knows no law.

Queen v. Dudley & Stephens [Landmark]

• Section 94:- Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is compelled by threats.
• Based on maxim “actus ne invite factus est nisi actus” which means an act which is done by me against will is not my act and hence I am not responsible for it.

• Section 95:- Act causing slight harm
• Law will not take action on trifling acts.
• This is based upon the maxim “de mimis non cusat las” which means the law will not take notice of trifles.

     General Exceptions (Section 80,81,93,94 & 95)

Pre questions

1. Accident as an exception has been dealt with in

• Section 77
• Section 78
• Section 80
• Section 82.

2. Under section 80, the exception of accident is available when an offence is committed while

• Doing a lawful act in a lawful manner by lawful means
• Doing a lawful act in any manner by any means
• Doing a lawful act in a lawful manner by any means
• All the above.

3. The principal as to the way in which a man should behave when he has to make a choice between two evils illustrated in

• Section 80 of IPC
• Section 81 of IPC
• Section 82 of IPC
• Section 78 of IPC

4. The motive under section 81 of IPC should be

• Prevention of harm to person
• Prevention of harm to property
• Both (a) and (b)
• Either (a)or (b).

5. An act likely to cause harm, but done without criminal intent, and to prevent other harm (act by necessity) is excused by virtue of ……….. ..of the Indian Penal Code.

(a) Section 80

(b) Section 81

(c) Section 82

(d) Section 83

6. A, the captain of a steam vessel, suddenly and without any fault or negligence on his part, finds himself in such a position that, before he can stop his vessel, he must inevitably down a boat B, with twenty or thirty passengers on board, unless he changes the course of his vessel, and that, by changing his course, he must incur risk of running down a boat C with only two passengers on board, which he may possibly clear. Here, if A alters his course without any intention to run down the boat C and in good faith for the purpose of avoiding the danger to the passengers in the boat B, he is ……………… .. of an offence, though he may run down the boat C by doing an act which he knew was likely to cause that effect.

(a) Guilty of offence

(b) Not guilty of offence

(c) Cannot be determined

(d) None of the above

7. A, a surgeon in good faith, communicates to a patient his opinion that he cannot live. The patient dies in consequence of the shock.

(a) A has committed no offence, though he knew it to be likely that the communication might cause the patient’s death

(b) A has committed the offence, if he knew it to be likely that the communication might cause the patient’s death

(c) Cannot be determined

(d) None of the above

8. X, a smith is threatened for his life and compelled to take his tools to force the door of a house for the dacoits to enter and plunder it.

Here:

(a) X commits offence

(b) X commits no offence

(c) Cannot be determined

(d) None of the above

9. Act causing slight harm is excused by virtue of ……….. .. of the Indian Penal Code.

(a) Section 95

(b) Section 96

(c) Section 97

(d) Section 94

10. Which of the following section of the Indian Penal Code is based on the maxim ‘de minimus non curat lex’?

(a) Section 95

(b) Section 94

(c) Section 93

(d) Section 92

Mains Questions

1. “Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of right of private defence”. Discuss.

2. “Right of private defence is available only against offence”. Discuss.

3. Can a stranger protect the body and property of another person in right of private defence? Comment.

4. When does the right of private defence of body extents to causing death?

5. The Right to private defence is said to be a limited right. Explain the limitation of the Right to private defence. ‘A’ was under attack from ‘B’. ‘A’ had ample opportunity to save himself by fleeing away instead ‘A’ defended himself and thereby caused harm to ‘B’. Is it a valid exercise of the right to private defence?

General Exceptions

[Section 96-100]

• Private Defence [Sections 96-100]
• This is an inherent right
• These section merely acknowledges the right
• Right of private defence is available against own body and property and also against another’s body and property.
• Preventive right and not a right of retribution.
• Only necessary force is allowed but slight excess of use of force may be permissible in certain circumstances.

• Section 96
• This section only declares that nothing is an offence which is done in the right of private defence.
• However, this right is not absolute and is subject to restriction.
• Section 97 to Section 106 state the limit within which the right can be exercised. The extent of injury that can be inflicted and against whom this right can be exercised.

• Section 97 Right of private defence of body and property.

• Section 98- This section extends the right of private defence even against person of unsound mind, intoxicated etc.
• Section 99- Provides for the cases in which there is no right of private defence.

There is no right of private defence:-

1. Against an act of public servant in good faith

2. Against an act of those who are acting under the authority of public servants.

However the protection of public servants is not absolute i.e. there are cases where private defence is available against public servants also, following are-

• Where their acts causes reasonable apprehension of death
• Where their acts causes reasonable apprehension of grevious hurt
• That the person acting under private defence does not know that the act is being done by a public servant or under his authority

3. No right of private defence if time to have recourse to public authorities

4. Right of private defence should not exceed to the inflicting of more harm then it is necessary.

• Section 100- provides for the cases in when private defence of the body extends to causing death
• Leading case:- Vishwanath v State of UP [1960] SC

• Section 103- provides for cases in which right of private defence of the property extends to causing death.

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY (PLA)

General Exceptions (Sections 96-100)

Pre-Questions

1. A citizen is not expected to run away for safety when he is faced with grave and imminent danger. The law gives him a valuable right to defend which is covered under …………….. .. .

(a) General exception

(b) Private defence

(c) Res ipsa loquitur

(d) None of the above

2. The law relating private defence is codified in …………… .. of the Indian Penal Code.

(a) Sections 100-106

(b) Sections 96-100

(c) Sections 96-106

(d) Sections 100-116

3. Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence by virtue of Section ……….. .. of the Indian Penal Code.

(a) Section 95

(b) Section 96

(c) Section 97

(d) Section 94

4. Which of the following sections of the Indian Penal Code deals with right of private defence of the body and of property?

(a) Section 98

(b) Section 96

(c) Section 97

(d) Section 99

5. Right of private defence is available to

(a) One’s own body

(b) The body of any other person

(c) Against any offence affecting the human body

(d) All of the above

6. Right of private defence of property available in case of

(a) Immovable property only

(b) Movable property only

(c) Both movable and immovable

(d) None of the above

7. Right of private defence of property is available to defend the property ………………

(a) Of himself

(b) Of any other person

(c) Both (a) and (b)

(d) None of the above

8. Z, under the influence of madness, attempts to kill A; Z is guilty of no offence. Here:

(a) A has no right of private defence because it is available against an offence only

(b) A has the same right of private defence which he would have if Z were sane

(c) Cannot be determined

(d) None of the above

9. Z, under the influence of madness, attempts to kill A. A in attempting to defend himself caused grievous hurt to Z.

Here:

(a) Z is liable for attempt to murder and A is liable for causing grievous hurt

(b) Z commits no offence and A is liable for causing grievous hurt

(c) A commits no offence and Z is liable for attempt to murder

(d) Both ‘A’ and ‘Z’ are excused

10. A enters by night a house which he is legally entitled to enter. Z, in good faith, taking ‘A’ as a house-breaker and under this misconception attacks ‘A’. Here: .

(a) A has no right of private defence because it is available against an offender only

(b) A has the same right of private defence against Z, which he would have if Z were not acting under that misconception

(c) Cannot be determined

(d) None of the above

Mains Questions

1. “Consent excuses the act”. Explain. Are there any exceptions to this general rule?

2. What offence, if any, has been committed in the following case- “ ‘Z’ is thrown from his horse, and is insensible. ‘A’ a surgeon, finds that ‘Z’ requires to be treated. ‘A’, not intending ‘Z’’s death, but in good faith, for ‘Z’’s benefit, perform trepan. Will he be liable?

3. Define ‘Consent’ in Criminal Law and State the cases in which the consent of the harmed or his guardian exempts the person inflicting the harm from Criminal Liabilities.

4. A boy of 13 years studying in class IX created indiscipline in the class. Even after the warning of the teacher he did not mend himself. The teacher caned him. During caning he removed his hand and one cane fell on another student and he was permanently deprived of his one eyesight. Decide the liability of the teacher.

5. Discuss the law of exemption from criminal liability in the case of minors.

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY (PLA)

General Exceptions (Sections 87 to 92)

• Section 87-91 deals with defences in cases of consent
• Section 92 deals with defence in cases where act is without consent
• Section 87- Act not intended & known to be likely to causes death or grievous hint done by consent
  • Rationale of this section is that the man in the best judge of his own interest
  • This section is based upon the maxim volenti non fit injuria which means he who consent cannot complain of it.
  • Leading case- Poonai Fatterah case [1869]
• Section 88- Act not intended to cause death, done by consent in good faith for that person’s benefit

• Section 90- defines consent in a negative sense ie it provides the cases, which will not deemed to be a proper consent.

As per this section, consent is not a free consent for the purposes of this code if-

1. Given under the fear of an injury or under a misconception of fact and the person doing the act knew or had a reason to believe that consent was given consequence of such fear or misconception

3. Given by child below 12 years of immature understanding

Section 92- Act done in good faith for benefit of person without his consent

• This section covers cares of emergency

PRE-QUESTIONS

1. A child met with an accident. Someone took him to a hospital. The doctor found the injuries so serious that there was an urgent need of an operation. There was no one related to the child to give consent. The doctor performed the surgery, but the child died.

Here:

(a) Doctor is not entitled to protection

(b) Doctor is entitled to protection since he acted for the benefit of the child in good faith

(c) Cannot be determined

(d) None of the above

2. Under section 89 of the Indian Penal Code, nothing which is done in good faith for the benefit of a person under ……………………….. ..years of age, or of unsound mind, by or by consent, either express or implied, of the guardian or other person having lawful charge of that person, is an offence by reason of any harm which it may cause, or be intended by the doer to cause or be known by the doer to be likely to cause to that person.

(a) 10 years

(b) 12 years

(c) 7 years

(d) 14 years

3. Which of the following statements is true regarding section 89 of the Indian Penal Code?

(a) That this exception shall not extend to the intentional causing of death, or to the attempting to cause death.

(b) That this exception shall not extend to the doing of anything which the person doing it knows to be likely to cause death, for any purpose other than the preventing of death or grievous hurt, or the curing of any grievous disease or infirmity.

(c) That this exception shall not extend to the voluntary causing of grievous hurt, or to the attempting to cause grievous hurt, unless it be for the purpose of preventing death of grievous hurt, or the curing of any grievous disease of infirmity.

(d) All of the above

4. In which of the following cases, consent is not such consent as intended by any section of the Penal Code, as mentioned in 90 of the Code?

(a) If the consent is given by person under fear of injury, or under a misconception of fact, and if the person doing the act knows, or has reason to believe, that the consent was given in consequence of such fear or misconception.

(b) If the consent is given by person who, from unsoundness of mind, or intoxication, is unable to understand the nature and consequence of that to which he gives his consent.

(c) If the consent is given by a person who is under twelve years of age.

(d) All of the above.

5. A consent is not such a consent as intended by any section of the Indian Penal Code, as mentioned in section 90 of the Indian Penal Code the consent is given by a person who is under the age of …………. .

(a) 10 years

(b) 12 years

(c) 7 years

(d) 14 years

6. The consent is not a valid consent under section 90.

(a) If given under a fear of injury or misconception of fact

(b) If given by a person of unsound mind.

(c) If given by a child below 12 years of age

(d) All of the above

7. Consent given under compulsion arising out of threat of injury.

(a) excuses the causing of death

(b) excuses causing of any offence against the state punishable with death

(c) Both (a) and (b)

(d) Neither (a) nor (b)

8. The defence of consent is not available in cases of.

(a) Consent to cause death

(b) Consent to cause grievous hurt

(c) Both (a) and (b)

(d) Either (a) or (b)

9. Operation of consent to all offences, short of causing death intentionally, has been extended under.

(a) Section 88 of IPC

(b) Section 90 of IPC

(c) Section 91 of IPC

(d) Section 87 of IPC

10. Under Section 89 the consent in respect of infants under 12 years of age or persons of unsound mind.

(a) Can be given by their guardians without any restriction.

(b) Can be given by the guardian subject to restrictions mutually agreed upon.

(c) Can be given by the guardians subject to restriction imposed by law

(d) All of the above

Mains Questions

1. “For criminal conspiracy to commit an offence mere agreement is sufficient”. Discuss.

2. Difference between criminal conspiracy & abetment by conspiracy.

3. “Agreement is the gist of the offence of criminal conspiracy”. Explain.

Criminal Conspiracy  (sec 120A & 120B)

• Difference between criminal conspiracy & abetment by conspiracy

• Can a single person be convicted for criminal conspiracy?
• If all the other accused are acquitted on technical grounds – then single person be convicted
• Bhimdhar Pradhan v. st of Orissa [1956] SC

• Difference between general conspiracy & special conspiracy
• Difference between S/ 34 & 120A

Pre Questions

1. ‘Abetment and conspiracy are inchoate offences’. The statement is

(a) Correct

(b) Incorrect

(c) Partly correct

(d) None of the above

2. Criminal conspiracy is a

(a) Rule of evidence

(b) Substantive offence

(c) Defining clause

(d) None of the above

3. ‘It is necessary for all the conspirators to know each other.’ The statement is

(a) True

(b) False

(c) Partly correct

(d) None of the above

4. Which is the following sections of the Indian Penal Code provides the punishment for ‘Criminal conspiracy?

(a) Section 120

(b) Section 120A

(c) Section 120B

(d) Section 121

5. When two or more persons agree to do, or cause to be done …………………., such an agreement is designated a criminal conspiracy.

(a) An illegal act

(b) An act which is not illegal by illegal means

(c) Either (a) or (b)

(d) None of the above

6. In criminal conspiracy

(a) There is no actus reus

(b) The agreement is the actus reus

(c) Mental element is sufficient

(d) None of the above

7. Which of the following is the gist of offence of criminal conspiracy?

(a) Common intention

(b) An agreement to commit an illegal act or by illegal means

(c) Common object

(d) None of the above

8. The appellant along with other three named accused were charged for offences under sections 471, 420 read with section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. All the other three accused were acquitted for all the offences. The appellant was convicted for criminal conspiracy. The conviction is

(a) Legal

(b) Illegal

(c) Proper

(d) Irregular

9. The appellant, government servant was prosecuted along with four others, for offences under section 409 read with section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. One of the accused turned approver. All other accused except appellant were acquitted for all the offences. Appellant was convicted under section 120B for entering in to a criminal conspiracy with the approver. The conviction is

(a) Legal

(b) Illegal

(c) Irregular

(d) Improper

10. Which of the following cases is/ are related to criminal conspiracy?

(a) Major Bassey v State, AIR 1961 SC 1762

(b) State v Nalini, 1999 (5) SCC 253

(c) Ram Narayan, v CBI 2003 (3) SCC 641

(d) All the above

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY

ABETMENT

MAINS QUESTION

1. A instigates B through a letter to kill X. The letter however is lost in transit and never reaches B. Decide as to whether A has committed any offence.

2. What do you understand by ‘abetment of an offence ‘? Discuss with the help of illustrations and decide cases.

3. Distinguish between the offences of abetment of an offence and criminal conspiracy.

4. Abetment; conspiracy; common intention: Do they overlap? Discuss.

5. Who is an ‘abettor’? Explain in detail when does he become liable for the offence committed or even not committed.

Section 107 defines the mode of abetment.  It can by instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid

The section does not make the abetment of an “offence” but of a thing which may or may not be an offence.

Example: Where a person abets a child below 7 years of age to commit an offence. Here what the person abetted has done is not an offence as per section 82.

Abetment implies the involvement of the abettor as he knowingly encourages or assist the person abetted. Therefore, M.R. (knowledge) is implicit in the section.

But where mens rea is not essential in the substantive offence, then the same is also not necessary in the abetment [offences of strict liability]

Section 107 does not create the offence of abetment rather it only defines the act of abetment. It is section 108 which creates the offence of abetment Section 109, 115 and 116 provides punishment for the offences of abetment.

Thus to make a person liable 2 things are necessary:-

1. He abetted that offence by opting any of the manner provided under section 107.
2. What was abetted, was an offence.

It is clear from the language of section 108 thus, it is not important, in whose respect it is an offence i.e. w.r.t. the abettor or person abetted.

INSTIGATION-

Inciting another to do a wrongful act. It includes provocation, persuasion, active suggestion, counseling (direct or indirect) It may be in any form. May be by words or conduct.

Words, without necessary intent, uttered in a quarrel or in anger or in a spur of a moment does not constitute instigation.

Sometime request to do a thing would amount to instigation.

Example: A offers, bribe to B a public servant to show some favors to which B refuse. Here, A is liable for abetment.

Sometime approval of an act, would also amount to an instigation.

1. Tej Singh v. State of Rajasthan [1958] Rajasthan H.C. Woman preparing herself to be a sati on the pyre of her husband, person who followed & applauded her by shouting “Sati Mata ki Jai” were held to have instigated.
2. Similar to the facts of Queen v. Mohit (187)

Example: A says to B – I am going to kill C, B replies, Do as you wish” where upon A kills C. B cannot be said to have instigated.

Example: ‘A’ fighting ‘B’

C who is standing nearby said to ‘A’ what are you waiting for? Go & kill ‘B’. Whereupon ‘A’ kills ‘B’. Here ‘C’, is said to have instigated [active suggestion]

• Mere acquiescence, silent assent or passive suggestion would not constitute instigation. If in the above example – ‘C’ said to ‘A’, had I been there in your place – I would have gone and kill B- does not amount to instigation [passive suggestion]
• Advice per se does not necessarily amounts to instigation unless it is proved, it is given to stimulate the commission of an offence.
• It can be by willful mis-representation or willful concealment of a fact [explanation no.1]
• Instigation by letter is complete as soon as the letter is read by the addressee. If the letter does not reach the addresses, the sender would be guilty only of an attempt to abet

ABETMENT BY CONSPIRACY-

A person is said to abet by conspiracy if he is engaging with one of more person to commit an offence and some act is done in pursuance of that conspiracy.

Example: A & B agrees to bribe a public servant and in pursuance of that agreement approached the public officer

Example: A & B agree to prepare false documents and in pursuance of that agreement A, purchases paper.

It has to be read along the explanation (2)

Which says : A person is said to aid the doing of and act, who either prior to or at the time of the commission of the act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act and thereby facilitate thereto.

For this clause offence should have been committed in consequence of such aiding.

Mere knowledge that his act would facilitation or mere presence at the crime scene is not sufficient. Intention to aid is the gist of the offence.

Example: A priest who officiates to a bigamous marriage was held to have intentionally aided in the commission of marriage, which is prohibited by law [Urmi vs. Emperor]

Example: Omission to give information that crime has been committed does not amount to aiding as it is not intended that crime should have been committed

If offence has not been committed after intentional aiding – then it will amount to attempt to abet

There can be over-lapping between the clauses.

Example: A  abet  B to kill C

And also gave knife in his hand. But B, did not kill C, here A will be liable for abetment by instigation

But if B, killed C, then it will fall under 103(3)

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY

ABETMENT

PRELIMINERY QUESTIONS

1. A, in Indid, instigates B, a foreigner in Goa, to commit a murder in Goa.

a) A is guilty of abetting murder

b) A is not guilty of abetting murder

c) A is guilty of murder

d) None of the above

2. Punishment of abetment, if the act abetted is committed, in consequence and where no express provision is made for its punishment is provided in section ………………. Of the Indian Penal Code.

a) Section 107

b) Section 108

c) Section 109

d) Section 110

3. A instigates B to give false evidence. B, in consequence of the instigation, commits that offence.

a) A is guilty of abetting that offence

b) A is liable to the same punishment as B

c) A is liable to less punishment than provided for the offence

d) Both (a) and (b) are correct

4. A and B conspire to poison Z. A, in pursuance of the conspiracy, procures the poison and delivers it to B in order that he may administer it to Z. B, in pursuance of the conspiracy, administers the poison to Z in A’s absence and thereby causes Z’s death. Here:

a) B is guilty of murder

b) A is guilty of abetting that offence by conspiracy, and is liable to punishment for murder

c) A is not guilty of abetting that offence by conspiracy since the murder was committed in his absence

d) Both (a) and (b) are correct

5. Section 109 covers

a) Abetment by instigation

b) Abetment by aiding

c) Abetment by conspiracy

d) All of the above

6. Whoever abets the commission of an offence shall, if the person abetted does that act with a different intention or knowledge from that of the abettor, be punished with the punishment provided for the offence………………….

a) Which would have been committed if the act had been done with the intention or knowledge of the abettor and with no other

b) Whish was committed with the intention of the person abetted

c) Cannot be punished

d) None of the above

7. When an act is abetted and a different act is done, the abettor is liable for the act

a) Abetted

b) Abetted and committed

c) Done, in the same manner and to the same extent as if he had directly abetted it

d) None of the above

8. A instigates a child to put poison into the food of Z, and gives him poison for that purpose. The child, in consequence of the instigation, by mistake puts the poison into the food of Y, which is by the side of that of Z.

Here:

a) A is liable in the same manner and to the extent as if he had instigated the child to put the poison into the food of Y.

b) A is not liable

c) A is liable for abetting to kill Z and for murder of Y

d) None of the above

9. A instigates B to burn Z’s house; B sets fire to the house and at the same time commits theft for property there.

Here:

a) A is guilty of abetting burning the house and fro theft

b) A, though guilty of abetting the burning of the house, is not guilty of abetting the theft; for the theft was a distinct act, and not a probable consequence of the burning

c) A is not liable for any offence

d) None for the above

10. A instigates B and C to break into an inhabited house at midnight for the purpose for robbery, and provides then with arms for that purpose. B and C break into the house, and being resisted by Z, one for the inmates, murder Z,

a) A is liable for murder

b) If that murder was the probable consequence of the abetment. A is liable to the punishment provided for murder.

c) A is not liable for murder

d) None for the above.

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY

ATTEMPT

Mains Questions

1. “Attempt is a direct movement towards completion of an offence but it need not to be the penultimate Act”. Discuss

2. Discuss in detail the four stages of crime?

3. Difference between preparation and attempt.

4. What is an attempt to commit a crime? What is the law relating to impossible attempts?

5. ‘A’ wants to kill ‘B’ with arsenic poison and with that purpose he administers sugar in his food, believing sugar to be arsenic. Discuss liability of ‘A’.

Attempt

LECTURE NOTES

• There are four stages of crime vis a vis intention, preparation, Attempt, actual commission of crime.
• 1^st two stages are punishable as there is always a possibility that accused may give up the act
• But there few exception i.e cases where preparation is punishable e.g S.399(preparation from dacoity), S.122(preparation for waging war against government of India.
• Attempt as such has not been defined in the IPC.

It means any act towards the commission of the offence which failed due to some circumstances which are beyond the control of the doer.

• Distinction between Attempt and Preparation[ No where provides in IPC]

Courts have laid down various test to determine whether an act falls within the stage of preparation or attempt.

• Following are:-

1. Proximity Rule

• Leading Cases:-

1. State of Maharashtra V. Mhd. Yakud[1980]SC
2. Abhayanand Mishra v. State of Bihar
3. Locus Poenitentiae Test

• Leading Case:- Malkiat Singh v. St of Punjab [1970] SC

3. Equivocality Test

• Law related to Attempt to do an Impossible Act

Not conclusively provided u/s 511 but the Illustration appended to the section throws light upon it.

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY

Attempt

Pre-Questions

1. Chapter XXII of the Indian Penal Code deals with ………………….

(a) Attempt to commit offences

(b) Offences relating to defamation

(c) Offences relating to marriages

(d) Offences relating to criminal intimidation, insult and annoyance

2. A makes an attempt to steal some jewels by breaking) open a box, and finds after so opening the box, that there is no jewel in it,

(a) A is guilty of offence under section 511 of the Indian Penal Code

(b) A is not guilty of offence under section 511 of the Indian Penal Code

(c) A is guilty of no offence

(d) None of the above

3. A makes an attempt to pick the pocket of Z by thrusting his hand into Z’s pocket. A fails in the attempt in consequence of Z’s having nothing in his pocket.

(a) A is guilty under section 511 of the Indian Penal Code

(b) A is guilty not guilty under section 511 of the Indian Penal Code

(c)  is guilty of no offence

(d) None of the ‘above

4. Whoever attempts to commit an offence punishable under the Indian Penal Code with imprisonment for life or imprisonment, or to cause such an offence to be committed, and in such attempt does any act towards the commission of the offence, shall, where no express provision is made by this Code for the punishment of such attempt, be punished with

(a) Same sentence of the offence

(b) One-half of the longest term of imprisonment provided for that offence

(c) Minimum sentence of the offence

(d) None of the above

5. Which of the following section as it stands original impose mandatory death penalty?

(a) Section 302

(b) Section 303

(c) Section 27 (3) of arms Act

(d) Both (b) and (c)

6. To the charge of defamation under section 500 of the Indian Penal Code if the acused invoked the aid of tenth exception to section 499 of Indian Penal Code ‘good faith’ and ‘public good’ have both to be established by

(a)Procesution

(b)Accused

(c)Either (a) or (b)

(d)None of the above

7. In which of the following cases, the supreme court held that mere membership of a person unless be is proved to have resorted to act of violence or incited people vs. to imminent voilance?

(a)Bhagwan Dass vs. NCT of Delhi

(b) Prakash Kadam vs. R.V. Gupta

(c)Raneef vs. state fo kevala

(d) None of the above.

8. The woman with whom second marriage is contracted by suppressing the fact of former marriage would be entitled to maintain complaint against her husband under section 494 and 495 of the Indian Penal Code. the statement is

(a)True

(b)False

(c)Partly correct

(d)None of the above

9. In which of the following cases, the supreme court declared that the woman with whom. Second marriage is contracted by suppressing the fact of former marriage would be entitled to maintain complanint against her husband under section 494 and 495 of the Indian Penal Code?

(a)Subash Babu vs. state of AP

(b)Revathy vs. state

(c)Lilly Thomas vs. Dalbir Singh

(d)None of the above

10. In which of the following cases , the supreme court held that a serious relook of the entire provision of section 498A of the Indian Penal Code is warranted by Legislation?

(a)Preeti gupta vs. state of Jharkhand

(b)Revathy vs. state

(c)Lilly Thomas vs. Dalbir Singh

(d)None of the above

OFFENCES RELATING TO MARRIAGE

Mains Questions

1. ‘A’ (husband) already married to ‘W’ converts to Islam, in order to get married to ‘Z’ during the lifetime of W. Discuss the legality of such marriage in the light of judicial pronouncement.

2. Discuss the Constitutional validity of section 497 of IPC in the light of case law.

3. What are the offences relating to marriages?

4. Explain the difference between Rape and Adultery? Can the offence fo Adultery be tried on a police report?

5. ‘W’ the wife, being dissatisfied with her husband ‘H’ his house and protection voluntarily and of her free will. She went to ‘P’ who allowed her to stay in his house as ‘mistresses. What offence if any committed by ‘P’ and ‘W’.

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY (PLA)

LECTURE NOTES

Topic- Offences relating to marriage

Following are the offences relating to marriage

1. Invalid Marriage (s. 493 & 496)
2. Bigamy (s. 494 & 495)
3. Adultery (s. 497)
4. Criminal elopement (s. 498)
5. Cruelty by husband or relatives of husband (s. 498A)
6. 493– As per S.493, cohabitation is caused by practicing deception on a woman under a belief of a lawful marriage.
7. 494- Under this section also, woman is cheated by a man into believing that she is legally wedded to him.

Cohabitation is not required for this section.

1. 494- It means marrying again during the lifetime of a 1^st spouse.

Requirements-

1. Existence of 1^st marriage- 1^st marriage must be a valid one and 1^st spouse should be alive at the time of 2^nd marriage.
2. 2^nd marriage to be valid- Otherwise it will not be a case of bigamy.

There are 2 exceptions to this section-

1. 1. 1^st marriage has been declared to be void.
2. 2. Where 1^st spouse has been missing for over a period of seven years & this fact is known to the spouse of 2^nd

This has to be read along with S. 108 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

Effect of conversion in order to get 2^nd marriage valid.

Landmark case- Sarla Mudgal v UOI (1995) SC

Also Lily Thomas v UOI (2000) SC

Sec 497 

Whosoever takes or entices any married woman (with the knowledge of same) from the control of Husband or person having case of her on behalf of her husband with intention to have illicit intercourse or conceals or detain with such intention shall be punished.

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY (PLA)

Pre. Questions

1. Chapter XX of the Indian Penal Code deals with the offences relating to

(a) Breach of contract

(b) Defamation

(c) Marriages

(d) None of the above

2. Cohabitation caused by a man deceitfully inducing a belief of lawful marriage is an offence punishable under ……………. of Indian Penal Code?

(a) Section 492

(b) Section 493

(c) Section 495

(d) Section 496

3. Which of the following sections of the Indian Penal Code I deals with mock or invalid marriages?

(a) Section 492 & 493

(b) Section 493 & 496

(c) Section 495 & 497

(d) Section 497 & 498

4. A and B go through the marriage ceremonies under bona fide impression that it constituted a valid marriage, although the marriage in reality was invalid and they cohabited thereafter. A has committed an offence under which of the following sections of the Indian Penal Code?

(a) Section 492

(b) Section 493

(c) Section 496

(d) No offence

5. Bigamy under the Indian Penal Code means

(a) Husband marrying again during the life time of wife

(b) Wife marrying again during the life time of husband

(c) Marrying again during life time of husband or wife

(d) None of the above

6. Section 494 is not extend to any person who H contracts a marriage during the life of a former husband or wife if such husband or wife, at the time of the subsequent marriage, shall have been continually absent from such person for the space of …….. years, and shall not have been heard of by such person as being alive within that time.

(a) Five

(b) Seven

(c) Ten

(d) Fourteen

7. In order to attract the provisions of section 494 of the Indian Penal Code

(a) First marriage should be a valid one

(b) Second marriage should be a valid one

(c) Both marriages should be valid

(d) None of the above

8. Whether a Hindu husband, married under Hindu Law, by embracing Islam, can solemnize second marriage?

(a) Yes

(b) No

(c) Depends

(d) None of the above

9. Adultery is sexual intercourse of a man with

(a) Any woman other than the wife of the accused

(b) Wife of another man

(c) Any unmarried woman

(d) None of the above

10. In a prosecution under section 497 of the Indian Penal Code, the consent of

(a) Adulteress is material

(b) Husband of adulteress is material

(c) Adulterer is material

(d) None of the above

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY

SECTION 498-A

Mains Questions

1. Section 498 & 304 B are not mutually exclusive. Comment.

2. Discuss the constitutional validity of section 498 A in the light of judicial pronouncements.

3. Garima Rathore was married to Randhir Rathore for five years. At the time of marriage both the families were aware that Garima had a borderline personality disorder, which was not insanity of any degree, but rendered her personality extremely sensitive. She was being treated for the same although except her ultra-sensitive nature, she was perfectly normal. One evening Garima was chatting with her friends over the phone when her mother-in-law shouted very loudly in a harsh voice and ordered her to report at the kitchen immediately. That night, her mother-in-law also told Garima that she was no match to her son, Randhir. Garima was very upset and when she told the same to Randhir, he told her that she should not spend a lot of time chatting over the phone. The next day, Randhir’s mother told Garima to go back to her house as she found her unbearable. She spoke ill of her parents and even told Garima that her parents should have gifted their ancestral home in jaipur to Randhir. Unable to tolerate this, Garima went to her room and consumed some poison. Currently, she is battling for her life in the ICU of a reputed hospital.

Are Randhir and his mother guilty of any offence under the IPC? Substantiate your answer with adequate reason(s).

4. For the purpose of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, what does “cruelty” mean?

5. Can 498A be filed after 7 year of Marriage?

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY (PLA)

Topic – Sec 498 A

• Chapter was inserted with a view to prevent torture of married woman

• Similar section 304 B r/w 113 B was also added along with this section.

• Chapter was added in 1983

• Offence under this section is restricted to husband & his relatives

• This section provides punishments for cruelty upon married woman by her husband or his relatives.

• Who are relatives?
• Anil Kumar v. St. of Punjab (1997) P & H HC
• Reema Aggarwal v. Anupam (2004) SC

• Concept of cruelty
• Explanation to the section clarifies what amounts to cruelty for the purposes of this section.
• It is a continuing offence

• Specific limitations in case of offence under this chapter

This has be read under S. 198A Cr. PC

• Constitutional validity of S. 498A
• Sushil Kumar Sharma v. UOI (2005) SC

• Difference between 498A & 304B IPC

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY (PLA)

SEC – 498A

PRE QUESTIONS

1. Cruelty under section 498A means

(a) Any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman

(b) Any wilful conduct to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman

(c) Harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand

(d) All of the above

2. Complainant alleged cruelty against her husband and his relatives. He admitted that she married him during the subsistence of his first marriage. It is argued that section 498A pre-supposes a valid marriage of the complainant with the accused. Here

(a) Section 498A is attracted

(b) Section 498A is not attracted since the wife in the section means the legally wedded wife.

(c) Depends

(d) None of the above

3. In which of the following cases, the Supreme Court held that legal and valid marriage is not a necessary ingredient to attract section 498A of the Indian Penal Code?

(a) Reema Aggarwal v Anupam and others

(b) Sushil Kumar Sharma v Union of India and others

(c) Arun Vyas v Anita Vyas

(d) None ‘of the above

4. Complainant the legally wedded wife of the accused alleged cruel against her husband and his second wife. It was contended that second wife is not a relative of husband. Here

(a) Section 498A is attracted

(b) Section 498A is not attracted against the second wife

(c) The second wife is an accomplice

(d) None of the above

5. In which of the following eases, the Supreme Court held that the High Court can quash/compound the offence under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code invoking its inherent powers under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure?

(a) B S Joshi v State of Haryana

(b) Sushil Kumar Sharma v Union of India and others

(c) Arun Vyas v Anita Vyas

(d) None of the above

6. Section 498A came into force from

(a) 25 December 1983

(b) 26 December 1986

(c) 25. December 1987

(d) 25 December 1988

7. In which of the following cases the supreme court held that section 498A is a continuing offence and hence very act of cruelty would be a new starting point of limitation under section 472 of the code of criminal procedure?

(a) Reema Aggarwal vs. Anupamand others

(b) Sushil Kumar Sharma vs. UOI other

(c) Arun Vyas vs. Anita Vyas

(d) None of the above

8. Constitutional validity of section 498a of the Indian Penal Code was upheld by the supreme court in the case of

(a)Reema Aggarwal vs. Anupam & others

(b)Sushil Kumar Sharma vs. UOI and others

(c)Arun Vyas vs. Anita Vyas

(d) None of the above.

9. In which of the following cases the Supreme Court held that a concubine or mistress is not a relatine of husband within the meaning of section 498A of the Indian Penal Code?

(a)Suvetha vs. state

(b)Sushil Kumar Sharm vs. UOI other

(c)Arun Vyas vs. Anita Vyas

(d)None of the above

10. In a prosecution under section 497 of the IPC, though a man and woman were participated together in the commission of the offence only man can be punished.

(a)It is invalid since it is discrimination on the ground of sex which violates Article 15

(b)It is valid since Article 15(4) enables the government to make special provision for women

(c) It is invalid since it is violates Article 14.

(d) None of the above

Mains Questions

1. Discuss, “attempt to commit suicide”, referring to the decision of the Supreme Court on the constitutional validity of S.309 of the IPC.

2. A Woman, with the intention of taking her life by throwing herself into a well, ran towards it, but was prevented from doing so at the edge of the well by her brother.

3. C, mother of two infant children, quarreled with her husband, got much excited and declared that she would kill herself by jumping into the village well. Saying so, she ran towards the well declaring what she intended all the way but was stopped within a distance of two yards by some persons who happened to be at the well.

4. Smt. Dhirajia is a young woman, married to Jhagga. They have a six month old baby. Smt. Dhirajia was not well treated by her husband. There was a quarrel between them on the day of incident and husband uttered threats that he would beat her. Late that night Jhagga woke up and found his wife and baby missing. He went out in pursuit of her. She turned round in panic, ran a little distance with baby in her arms and then jumped into an open well which was at some little distance from the path. Baby died while Dhirajia was rescued. She is charged with murder of her baby under section 302 and with attempt to commit suicide under section 309 I.P.C. It is contended on her behalf that there was no mens-rea on her part. Decide objection and offence, if any, of which she should be convicted.

5. How attempt to commit suicide is decriminalized?

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY (PLA)

Attempt to Suicide (Sec. 309)

• Suicide as such is no crime but attempt of such suicide is punishable.

• Intention is very important for this section

• Constitutional validity of this section
• P. Rathinam v. Nagbhushan Patnaik [1994] SC
• S.C struck down this provision in this case and upheld that right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution includes ‘Right to Die’.

But this judgment was over-ruled by 5 judge bench of the S.C in the case of

Gyan Kaur v. State of Punjab[1996]

Where it upheld the validity of S.309 as well as S.306

This has to be read along with section 51 of Mental Healthcare Act.

 

Pahuja Law Academy

Attempt to Suicide (Sec. 309)

Pre-Questions

 

1. Constitutional validity of section 309 is upheld by the Supreme Court in which of the following cases?

(a) Rathinam v Union of India

(b) Gian Kaur v Union of India

(c) Thomas Master v Union of India

(d) None of the above

 

2. Attempt to commit suicide is

(a) Not an offence

(b) Punishable under section 309 of Indian Penal Code

(c) Punishable under section 306 of Indian Penal Code

(d) None of the above

3. Which of the following reports of the Law Commission of India recommended to delete section 309 of the Indian Penal Code from the statute book?

(a) 41^st report

(b) 42^nd report

(c) 43^rd report

(d) 45^th report

4. In which of the following cases the Supreme Court struck down section309 of the Indian Penal Code holding that right to life include right to die?

(a) Rathinam v. Union of India

(b) Gian Kaur v. Union of India

(c) Thomas Master v. Union of India

(d) None of the above

5. “Encouraging a widow to commit sati is abetment to commit suicide’. The statement is

(a) True

(b) False

(c) Partly correct

(d) None of the above

6. In which of the following cases, the Supreme Court approved the doctrine of Parens Patriae?

(a) Rathinam v. Union of India

(b) Aruna Shaunbag v. Union of India

(c) Gyan Kaur v. Union of India

(d) None of the above

7. In which of the following cases, the Supreme Court has held that passive euthanasia is permissible in exceptional circumstances and in the case of an incompetent person who is unable to take a decision whether to withdraw life support or not, it is the court alone, as parens patriae, which ultimately must take this decision, though, no doubt, the views of the near relatives, next friend and doctors must be given due weight’?

(a) Rathinam v. Union of India.

(b) Aruna Shaunbag v. Union of India

(c) Gyan Kaur v. Union of India

(d) None of the above

8. A lady after quarrel with her husband ran to a well stating that she would jump in to it and she was caught by some persons before she reached the well. Which of the following offence, if an, had she committed?

(a) Offence under section 306

(b) Offence under section 309

(c) Offence under section 307

(d) No offence

Mains Questions

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY

1. “Offence of kidnapping from lawful guardian is complete, the moment a minor or person of unsound mind is taken outside the custody of lawful guardian”. Discuss the law relating to kidnapping in the light of this statement.

2. Difference between kidnapping and abduction.

3. A girl below 18 years of age was in the keeping of her mother. Her father B lived separately. B by deceitful means took A and kept her with him. Is B guilty of kidnapping?

4. M, an unmarried daughter of A, was born at midday on 20.8.1980. She agrees to go with her paramous B without her parent’s consent or knowledge between 20th august and 21st August 1998 at 3 a.m. B has sexual intercourse with her after a fortnight with her consent. What offences, if any, have M and B committed? Discuss.

5. A and B exchange secret letters as to how best they can kidnap a minor girl and later give tip the ideas as impossible. Have they committed an offence? If either of them wrote a note to the girl persuading her to meet them at a specified place, what offences, if any, will both or either of them have committed?

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY (PLA)

Kidnapping & Abduction

Section 359-

It does not define kidnapping but only classify the types of kidnapping.

Section 360-

Kidnapping from India

Offence is complete, the moment a person is taken outside the geographical territory of India. It is not necessary that the person should reach their destination in some other foreign territory. Though in common parlance, it means reaching at the destination as well. But if we interpret the words “beyond the territory of India”

Conveying — Transfer

Section 361- Kidnapping from lawful guardians:

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY

So, out of the keeping means out of direct custody or constructive custody

But where child abandons the guardianship with no intention to return, then it cannot be said to be out of the keeping of lawful guardian.

Lawful Guardian:

The term lawful guardian is used, which is more wider than the term legal guardian. So lawful guardian not only include legal guardian, but also any person, who are lawfully entrusted with the care and custody of a minor. [Held in Sajjan Kapor v. State of Bihar] 2005

Example: Teachers, Relatives, Servants etc. (temporary guardians)

It includes natural guardians (father, mother and husband), testamentary guardians (will), certified guardian and persons lawfully entrusted with care and custody of a minor (temporary guardians).

Offences against body

1. The accused made a promise of marriage to a minor girl pursuant to which the girl had left the house of her lawful guardian and went to the accused. Whether the accused is guilty of section 361 of the Indian Penal Code?

(a) Yes. A promise of marriage made to the girl which amounts to enticement of a minor because of which she had left the house of her lawful guardian

(b) No, accused did not take her out of lawful guardianship

(c) Depends

(d) None of the above

2. If the minor voluntarily left the guardian and joined the accused and he only helped her in her design not to return to her guardian’s house by taking her along with him he cannot be said to have taken or enticed her even though the part played by him could be regarded as helping fulfilment of her intention. But that falls short of inducement and cannot amount to taking. The statement is

(a) True

(b) False

(c) Partly correct

(d) None of the above

3. By virtue of Amending Act of 1949, the age of minors in section 16 has been fixed at 16 years for a male child and 18 years for a female child. Prior to the amendment the age was

(a) 14 years (male) and 16 years (female)

(b) 14 years (male) and 15 years (female)

(c) 15 years (male) and 18 years (female)

(d) 15 years (male) and 16 years (female)

4. To attract the provisions of section 361 of the Indian Penal Code, immediate act of inducement is necessary. The statement is

(a) True

(b) False

(c) Partly Correct

(d) None of the above

5. Consent of the kidnapped a minor is no defence to a charge under section 361 of the Indian Penal Code. The statement is

(a) True

(b) False

(c) Partly correct

(d) None of the above

6. Which of the following type of kidnapping is not mentioned in section 359 of the Indian Penal Code?

(b) Kidnapping from India

(c) Kidnapping from lawful guardianship

(d) Both (b) and (c)

7. Kidnapping from lawful guardianship is defined under……. of the Indian Penal Code?

(b) Section 361

(c) Section 362

(d) Section 363

8. Whoever takes or entices any minor male child under the age of ….., without the consent of such guardian, is said to kidnap person from lawful guardianship.

(b) 15 years

(c) 16 years

(d) 18 years

9. Section 361 does not extend to the act of any person who in good faith believes himself to be the father of an illegitimate child,, or who in good faith believes himself to be entitled to the lawful custody of such child, unless such act is committed for an immoral or unlawful purpose. The statement is.

(b) False

(c) Partly correct

(d) None of the above

Mains Questions

1. Examine as to whether a person who causes death of a pregnant woman is guilty of committing one homicide or two?

2. “Every murder is a culpable homicide but every culpable homicide is not murder”. Explain.

3. ‘A’ intentionally attacks ‘B’. while doing so ‘A’ does not know that ‘B’ is suffering from enlarged appendix. The blow falls on the appendix as a result of which the appendix burst & ‘B’ dies. Discuss A’s liability.

4. A, on grave and sudden provocation, fires a pistol at Z, under such circumstances that if he thereby causes death he would be guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. What offence does A commit?

5. When culpable homicide does not amount to murder? Illustrate your answer.

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY (PLA)

Offences against body

Culpable homicide and murder

Culpable homicide and murder

• Homicide means the killing of a human being by a human being. However, every case of killing is not culpable. Eg. Killing by reason of mistake of fact or in private defence etc. In these cases, homicide is justified or lawful.

• An unlawful homicide may be classified into different categories according to the nature and gravity following are:-

1. Culpable homicide
2. Murder
3. Culpable homicide not amounting to murder
4. Death by negligence
5. Dowry death

The difference between these categories is of the degree of intention, knowledge or recklessness with which or particular homicide is committed.

• Culpable homicide is a genus, of which murder is a species.
• Culpable homicide is termed as manslaughter under English law.

Explanation-1:- As per this explanation, a person who caused the injury cannot escape criminal liability by stating that if the person injured did not suffer from the said disease, or disorder, he would not have died.

Explanation-2:- As per this explanation, even if death is caused by interference of some independent act, then also the person initially killing is liable independently, if his act is sufficient to make him liable for culpable homicide.

Explanation-3:- Killing of child in mother’s womb is not homicide but miscarriage.

• Vineet Chauhan v. state of UP [2008] SC
• Rewa Ram v. state of MP [1978] MP HC

Section 300 (Murder)

This section defines murder, which is also a culpable homicide with some special characteristics, which are set out in clause (1-4) of the section. Ie. if any culpable homicide falls within any of the four clauses in S. 300, then it will amount to murder.

• Distinction between S. 299 & 300.
• v. Govinda (Leading)
• Leading case:- Virsa Singh v. state of Punjab [1958] SC

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY (PLA)

Offences against body

PRE-QUESTIONS

1. Culpable homicide has been defined

(a) under section 299 of IPC

(b) under sectio0n 300 of IPC

(c) under section 302 of IPC

(d) under section 304 of IPC

2. Murder has been defined

(a) under section 299 of IPC

(b) under section 300 of IPC

(c) under section 302 of IPC

(d) under section 301 of IPC

3. Culpable homicide is not murder, if it is committed under

(a) grave & sudden provocation

(b) self-intoxication

(c) irresistible impulse

(d) all the above.

4. Culpable homicide is not murder, if it is committed under

(a) exercise of right of private being in good faith

(b) without premeditation in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel

(c)  grave & sudden provocation

(d) all the above.

5. Murder is defined as

(a) an act by which the death is caused, must have been done with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death

(b) an act by which the death is caused, is done with the knowledge that he is likely to cause death by his act

(c)an act by which the death is caused, with the intention of causing of such bodily injury as the offender knows which is likely to cause death of the person to whom the injury is caused

(d) all the above.

6. Grave & sudden provocation is

(a) question of fact

(b) question of law

(c) mixed question of fact & law

(d) a presumption under the law.

7. ‘A’ knows that ‘B’ is suffering from a disease in his head and also knows that if a fist blow is given to ‘B’ on his head, it is likely to cause his death. Knowing it ‘A’ gives a fist blow to B on his head and caused death of ‘B’. ‘A’ is

(a) guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder sine he does not think that his act isd likely to cause death

(b) guilty of murder since he had knowledge that in all probability it is likely to cause death of ‘B’

(c) guilty of no offence since the blow is not sufficient to cause the death of a person of normal health

(d) guilty of causing hurt only.

8. A person who causes bodily injury to another who is infirmity and thereby accelerates the death of that other, shall be deemed to have caused his death, by virtue of

(a) explanation 1 to section 299

(b)  explanation 1 to section 230

(c) explanation 2 to section  299

(d) explanation 3 to section 299.

9. Causing of the death of child in the mother’s womb is not homicide as provided under

(a)  explanation 1  to section 299

(b)  explanation 2 to section 299

(c) ) explanation 3 to section 299

(d) explanation 5 to section 300.

10. In the context of the exception of grave & sudden provocation, which of the following is correct

(a)  provocation should not be voluntarily provoked by the offender

(b) lawful exercise of the right to private defence does not give provocation

(c) lawful exercise of powers by a public servant to obedience to the law does not amount to provocation

(d) all the above.

pahuja law academy

 

Mains Question

 

Q.1 “culpable homicide is not murder, if it done under grave & sudden provocation.” Explain in the light of leading case laws

Q.2 “culpable homicide is not murder. If it is committed without premeditation in a sudden fight in the heat of passion” discuss

Q.3 explain the principle of transfer of malice

Q.4 A Intending to kill his enemy B leaves poison for him which is accidentally taken by C, a friend of A. It was not usual for C to go to this place, where the poison had been left. C dies in consequence and A is put on trial for the murder of C. Can A successfully take up th defence that he is immune from punishment as C’s death was pure accidental never intended by him?

Q.5 What are the conditions enumerated in provison to Exception-I of section 300 of the Indian Penal Code 1860, subject to which defence can be set up by accused that he lost power of self-control due to grave and sudden provocation given by victim?

 

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY

Exception to section 300 and Section 301

• Exception to s/300 are in addition to general exception
• Burden of proof upon accused to prove that his case falls under any of the exception
• If case falls u/ any of the exception to s.300, then it is a case of culpable homicide not amounting to murder
• These exception does not offer complete defence but only reduce the gravity of the officer.
• Exception no.1 grave & sudden provocation

• Leading case :- KM Nanavati v. st of mah. (1962) sc

also aktar v. state

This exception also has 3 exception

1. Accused himself  gives provocation
2. Act done by public servant in the exercise of public rights
3. Act done in the exercise  of right of private defence

Exception no. 2 exceeding the right of private defense this exception covers those cases where accused exceeds his private defense & causes the death of person & that death is not covered u/s 100 & 103 of IPC provided he caused such death-

1. Without premeditation
2. No intention to use more harm
3. In good faith.

Exception no.3 public servant exceeding his powers

Exception no. 5  death by consent

Section- 301   transfer of malice

• Also known as transmigrate on of motive
• Whenever accused intentionally does an act towards another person an in the same transaction without any external interference cause death of another person – he will be liable to the same extent
• His malice towards intended victim gets transferred to unintended victim.

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY

Pre-Question

1. Which of the following section of the Indian Penal Code defines ‘Culpable homicide’?

(a) Section 299

(b) Section 300

(c) Section 301

(d) Section 302

2. Which of the following word/s/is/are used in section 300 of the Indian Penal Code to denote the mental element?

(a) Intention

(b) Knowledge

(c) Both (a) and (b)

(d) None of the above

3. Which of the following is murder as per Section 300 secondly of Penal Code?

(a) If the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death.

(b) If it is done with the intention of causing such bodily injury as the offender knows to be likely to cause the death of the person to whom the harm is caused.

(c) If it is done with the intention of causing bodily injury to any person and the bodily injury intended to be inflicted is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death.

(d) If the person committing the act knows that it is so imminently dangerous that it must, in all probability, cause death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, and commits such act without any excuse for incurring the risk of causing death or such injury as aforesaid.

4. A shoots Z with the intention of killing him. Z dies in consequence. A commits

(a) Murder

(b) Homicide by rash and negligent act

(c) Culpable homicide not amounting to murder

(d) None of the above

5. A, knowing that Z is laboring under such a disease that a blow is likely to cause his death, strikes him with the intention of causing bodily injury. Z dies in consequence of the blow. A is guilty of …………… although the blow might not have been sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause the death of a person in a sound state of health.

(a) Murder

(b) Homicide by rash and negligent act

(c) Culpable homicide not amounting to murder

(d) None of the above

6. Which of the following sections of the Indian Penal Code contains the doctrine of transfer of malice?

(a)Section 300

(b) Section 302

(c) Section 301

(d)Section 303

7. If the common intention was to kill A and if one of the accused X kills B to out his private vengeance. In such a case……

(a) All are liable for B’s murder

(b)Only X is liable for B’s murder

(c) X is liable for murder, and others are liable under section 34

(d) None of the above

8. A intended to kill B, but killed C mistaking for B, A would be guilty of

(a) Death by rash and negligent act

(b) No offence

(c) Murder

(d) None of the above

9. What is the minimum punishment for murder?

(a) Imprisonment for 10 years

(b) Life imprisonment

(c) Imprisonment for 14 years

(d) None of the above

10. What is the normal punishment for murder?

(a) Imprisonment for 10 years

(b) Life imprisonment

(c) Imprisonment for 14 years

(d) None of the above

section -304-A

Mains question

Q.1 In orders to the plucking of fruits by neighbours children’s ‘a’  guarded his orchard with a live wire and put up a warning about it at the front gate.  ‘b’ a child  (5 years), unaware of electric wise or the warming, was killed by shock while trying to scale the wall of the orchards. Discuss the liability of ‘A’.

Q.2 A is at work with a hatchet; the head flies off and kills a man who is standing-by. What offence has been committed by A?

Q.3 Write a judgment by developing imaginary facts convicting and sentencing an accused for an offence punishable under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code.

Q.4 Distinguish between criminal rashness and criminal negligence. Illustrate Your answer.

Q.5 A was driving a bus on a kacha road at5 high speed. There were iron sheets placed on the top of the bus. On way some of the iron sheets fell down on the head of B and also injured some other persons walking on the road. B was carried to the hospital by A. B died after a month. Has A committed any offence? Any offence? If so what?

Pahuja law academy

Topic: – S. 304 A

DEATH BY NEGLIGENCE 

• this section punished where death is caused due to rash & negligent act of accused , which is not culpable homicide.
• Meaning of rash & negligent act
• To improve the liability under this clause, act must be the immediate or operating cause of death
• Leading case :- 1. Cherubin Gregory v. st of Bihar (1965) sc

2. S.N. Hussain v. st of A.P. (1972) SC

• medical negligence

professional negligence by act or omission by a health case provider

landmark case :- Jacob Mathew v st of punj (2005) sc

also Suresh gupta  v. nct delhi (2004) sc

   PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY

pahuja law academy

Pre-Question

1. Causing death by negligence is punishable under section ………………….. of the Indian Penal Code?

(a) 304

(b) 304A

(c) 304B

(d) 304 Part-II

2. An offence under which of the following sections is a bailable?

(a) Section 302

(b) Section 304A

(c) Section 304B

(d) Section 307

3. A, without indicating any warning, sets a live electric naked wire in the passage of the latrine, so that no trespasser should come and use the latrine. B, a trespasser tried to enter the latrine without touching the wire, but her hand touched the wire and she died as a result of the shock. A is liable under

(a) Section 302

(b) Section 304A

(c) Section 304B

(d) Section 307

4. Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code requires

(a) Intention

(b) Knowledge

(c) either (a) or (b)

(d) None of the above

5. An assistant station master gave a ‘clear line signal to a passenger train with the knowledge that a goods train was standing at a particular point where the train might collide, hoping to remove the goods train before the arrival of the passenger train. The goods train was not removed in time and a collision occurred which was attended with loss of life. The station master is guilty of ……………… .

(a) Death by rash and negligent act

(b) Murder

(c) Culpable homicide not amounting to murder

(d) None of the above

6. The accused is found to have committed the offence on the ac that he drove a bus rashly and gently with 41 passengers the while crossing a bridge the into the nearby canal and passengers died. The accused to be punished under….

(a) Section 302

(b) Section 304A

(c) Section 304B

(d) Section 307

7. In which of the following cases Supreme Court held that the Probation of Offenders Act can invoked in cases involving negligent driving of the buses in death of human beings?

(a) Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab

(b) Dalbir Single State of Haryana

(c) Mithu v State of Punjab

(d) None of the above

8. The patient, a young man,history of any heart ailment subjected to an operation perfon by accused for nasal deformity operation was neither complicated serious. The patient died. Oni gation, the cause of death was to be “not introducing endotracheal tube of proper size prevent aspiration of blood from wound in the respiratory The Bench formed an opinio this act attributed to the doctor if accepted to be true, could be cribed as an act of negligence as was lack of due care and process But, the court categorically hold for his act of seelige he may be liable infort, his car wank of due Mentine and will cannot be des sribed to hereckles ce grossly nelaget stoke him criminally Lable. The facts red to the case of

(a) Jacob Mathew Sule of Punjab

b) Dalbir Singh State of Ilara

(c) Suresh Cup V NCT Delhi

(d) None of the above

9. Simple lack of care such will constitute civil liability is not enough . For purposes of the criminal law there ar degrees of negligence and very high degree of negligence is required established. The statement is attributed to in

(a) Lord Alkin

(b) Lord Denning

(c) Land Man

(d) None of the above

10. A duty qualified medical practitioner gave to his patient the injection of Sobita which consisted of sodium bismuth tartrate as given in the British pharmacopoeia. However, what was administered was an overdose of Sobita . The patient died. The doctor is guilty of

(a) Death by rash and negligent act

(b) Murder

(c) Culpable homicide not amounting to murder

(d) None of the above

Mains Questions

Q.1. Bring out the essential ingredients of offence under section 304 B. IPC

[10 Marks]

Q.2. Offence s./304 B s./498A are not mutually exclussive. Comment.

Q.3. ‘A’ Lock ‘B’ in a room so as to prevent him from proceeding anywhere with Discuss what offence, if any has been committed by ‘A’. against ‘B’.

Q.4.Discuss the essentials of wrongful confinement and distinguish it with wrongful restraint

Q.5. A finds a valuable ring, not knowing to whom it belongs. A sells it immediately without attempting to discover the owner. What offence is committed?

 

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY (PLA)

Topic- 304 B & 339, 340

Sec. 304 B

• Requirment

1. unatural death
2. within 7 years of mariagge
3. soon before her death
4. subjected to crcelly or harrasment
5. by husband or relative
6. in connection with dowry

• This section has to be read along with s/113B of the Indian evidence Act, 1872.

As per 113B if prosecuction is able to prove certain facts, the shall prssume that husband or his relative, has caused her dowry death

• It is necessary that death should be under circumstances mentioned s/304 B, also it should be a consequence of demand for dowry.
• meaning of
• Cruelty under this section must relate to dowry.
• meaning of “soon before her death”

There should be a reasonable if not direct, nexus between her death and the dowry related cruelty or harassment.

• Leading case

State (Delhi Admistration v. Laxman Kumar [1986] s.

• In case of dowry death, charge can also be framed under section 302
• If she commits suicide, change can also be framed s/306.
• Diffence between 498A and 304B.

Topic: Section 326-A & 326-B

Section 326A- Voluntarily causing grievous hurt by use of acid, etc.,

Description

Whoever causes permanent or partial damage or deformity to, or bums or maims or disfigures or disables, any part or parts of the body of a person or causes grievous hurt by throwing acid1 on or by administering acid to that person, or by using any other means with the intention of causing or with the knowledge that he is likely to cause such injury or hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and with fine;

Provided that such fine shall be just and reasonable to meet the medical expenses of the treatment of the victim;

Provided further that any fine imposed under this section shall be paid to the victim.

Classification under schedule 1 Cr PC

Section 326B- Voluntarily throwing or attempting to throw acid, etc.,

Description

Whoever throws or attempts to throw acid1 on any person or attempts to administer acid to any person, or attempts to use any other means, with the intention of causing permanent or partial damage or deformity or bums or maiming or disfigurement or disability or grievous hurt to that person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than five years but which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Explanations

1. For the purposes of section 326A and this section, “acid” includes any substance which has acidic or corrosive character or burning nature, that is capable of causing bodily injury leading to scars or disfigurement or temporary or permanent disability.

2. For the purposes of section 326A and this section, permanent or partial damage or deformity shall not be required to be irreversible.

Classification under schedule 1 Cr PC

In Laxmi v UOI, the Apex Court issued the direction for the regulation of acid to the state and Union territories. The Court also gave the solution to the problem related with the compensation of acid victims.

The Court held that Section 357A provides for the preparation of a scheme for providing funds for the purpose of compensation to the victims of acid attack or his dependents who have suffered loss or injury as a result of crime and who require rehabilitation. The Court also direct that acid attack victims shall be paid compensation of at least Rs 3,00,000 by the concerned State Government or Union Territories.

Section 339 / 340

• The constitution of India guarantees the right of freedom of movement to every citizen under article 19 s. also personal liberty under article 21. But these guarantees are available against states action and inaction.

The remedy against individual s act of abridgement of another’s right to movement lies s/339 and 340.

has a right to go there is one execption to this section:-

obstruction in good faith is not an offence.

• For wrongful confinement , a person is wrongfully restrained and prevented from proceeding beyond certain cirmscribed limit.
• It impues total Restraint

Topic: Section 339 & 340

Section 339 and 340

The remedy against individual s act of abridgement of another’s right to movement lies section/339 and 340.

Wrongful Restraint

Topic: Section 354-A to 354-D

Section 354A- Sexual harassment and punishment for sexual harassment

Description

1. A man committing any of the following acts—

2. Any man who commits the offence specified in clause (i) or clause (ii) or clause (iii) of sub-section (1) shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.

3. Any man who commits the offence specified in clause (iv) of sub-section (1) shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.

Classification under schedule 1 Cr PC

Section 354B- Assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to disrobe

Description

Any man who assaults or uses criminal force to any woman or abets such act with the intention of disrobing1 or compelling her to be naked, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Classification under schedule 1 CrPC

Section 354C- Voyeurism

Any man who watches, or captures the image of a woman engaging in a private act in circumstances where she would usually have the expectation of not being observed either by the perpetrator or by any other person at the behest of the perpetrator or disseminates such image1 shall be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than one year, but which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine, and be punished on a second or subsequent conviction, with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than three years, but which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Explanations

1. For the purpose of this section, “private act” includes an act of watching carried out in a place which, in the circumstances, would reasonably be expected to provide privacy and where the victim’s genitals, posterior or breasts are exposed or covered only in underwear; or the victim is using a lavatory; or the victim is doing a sexual act that is not of a kind ordinarily done in public.

2. Where the victim consents to the capture of the images or any act, but not to their dissemination to third persons and where such image or act is disseminated, such dissemination shall be considered an offence under this section.

Classification under schedule 1 CrPC

Section 354D- Stalking

Description

(1) Any man who—

1. follows a woman and contacts, or attempts to contact such woman to foster personal interaction repeatedly despite a clear indication of disinterest by such woman; or

2. monitors the use by a woman of the internet, email or any other form of electronic communication, commits the offence of stalking.

Provided that such conduct shall not amount to stalking if the man who pursued it proves that—

1. it was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime and the man accused of stalking had been entrusted with the responsibility of prevention and detection of crime by the State; or

2. it was pursued under any law or to comply with any condition or requirement imposed by any person under any law; or

3. in the particular circumstances such conduct was reasonable and justified.

(2) Whoever commits the offence of stalking shall be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine; and be punished on a second or subsequent conviction, with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Classification under schedule 1 CrPC

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY (PLA)

Topic – S. 304 B 339 & 340

1. Wrongful restraint has been defined under

A. Section 339 of IPC

B. section 340 of IPC

C. Section 341 of IPC

D. Section 342 of IPC

2. Wrongful confinement has been defined under

A. Section 342 of IPC

B. Section 341 of IPC

C. Section 340 of IPC

D. Section 339 of IPC

3. A, an officer of a court of justice, being ordered by that court to arrest Y and, after due enquiry believing Z to be Y, arrests Z. A has committed

A. Wrongful confinement

B. Wrongful restraint

C. No offence

D. None of the above

4. A person charged and acquitted under section 304B cannot be convicted under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. The statement is

A. True

B. False

C. Partly correct

D. None of the above

5. The obstruction of a private way over land or water which a person in good faith believes himself to have a lawful right to obstruct, is not an offence within the meaning of section 339 of the Indian Penal Code. The statement is

(a) True

(b) False

(c) Partly correct

(d) None of the above

6. A obstructs a path along which Z has a right to pass. A not believing in good faith that he has a right to stop the path. Z is thereby prevented from passing.

(a) A wrongfully restrains Z

(b) No wrongful restraint

(c) Depends

(d) None of the above

7. Verbal prohibition also constitutes ‘wrongful restraint. The statement is

(a) True

(b) False

(c) Partly correct

(d) None of the above

8. A and his wife B occupied a house. During their temporary absence Y put a lock on the outer gate from getting into the house. Here

(a) Y is guilty of wrongful restraint

(b) Y is not guilty of wrongful restraint

(c) Depends

(d) None of the above

9. A women and her 13 year old son were summoned to a police station and were interrogated at the police station. The inspector was convicted for an offence under section 341 of the Indian Penal Code. The conviction is

(a) Legal

(b) Illegal

(c) Proper

(d) Irregular

10. For an action to amount to ‘wrong restraint’, the person concerned need not have right to proceed’, in the direction in question. The statement is

(a) True

(b) False

(c) Partly correct

(d) None of the above

Mains Questions

Q.1 Discuss the Constitutional validity of section 124 A of IPC.

Q.2 Discuss the Constitutional validity of section 377 in the light of recent judgments.

Q.3 What do you understand by defamation? Is publication of defamation is necessary. Explain with the help of cases.

Q.4. Discuss India’s Sedition Law section 124A of IPC as one of the biggest threats to the freedom of speech and expression in India.

Q.5. Critically comment on the way the courts have interpreted the section 124A of the Indian Penal Code. Comment on what do you think the future of sedition law on Indian should be ?

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY (PLA)

SEDITION [S/124 A]

• “Brings or attempt to bring” suggest both successful and unsuccessful acts are on same footing.
• The Rational of this provision is that every state whatever its form of government, has to armed with the power to punish those who by their conduct jeopardize the safety and stability of state.
• It includes all those activities, whether by words, or deeds or writings, which are calculated to disturb the tranquility of the state and lead people to subvert the Government establish by law.

Explanation:  disaffection includes disloyality and all feeling of enimity. Section 124 A is based on the common Law of sedition but is much narrower that English Law.

Merely exciting or attempting to excite feeling of disaffection, hatred or contempt, irrespective of whether or not disorder follows or is likely to follow therefore, towards the government established by law is made punishable in India.

Bilal Ahmed kaloo v. st of A.P [1997] SC . The S.C also holds the view that merely doing of certain acts that would bring the Govt established by law into hatred or contempt is the decisive ingredient of sedition.

Essentials:

(1) Words, Signs, visible representation or otherwise words can be spoken or written.

Visible representation -means any form of communication which is visible to eyes. It includes pictures on dramatic performance in a mime show where no words are spoken.

Distribution or circulation of seditions material  will also constitute an offence.

(2) Brings  or attempt to bring into hatred or contempt what is contemplated under this section is

not the actual causing of hatred or contempt, but even an attempt to do so. Whether he actually

fails or succeeds is not material.

(3) Excite Disaffection:

As per explanation ‘disaffection’ includes disloyality and all feeling of enmity.

This word Disaffection was 1^st explained in the case Queen empress V. Jogendra chander Bose

[1891] cal H.C. Disaffection means a feeling contrary to affection. If a person uses either spoken

or written words calculated to create in the minds of the persons to whom they are addressed,

a disposition not to obey the lawful authority of the government, or the subvert or resist

that  authority, if and when occasion should arise and if he does so  with the intention of creating

such a disposition, he will be guilty, though no disturbance is brought about by his words or

any feeling of disaffection, in fact product by them.

However, the federal court of India, in Niharender Dutt Majumdar V. king emperor [1942] FC took a different view and held that the gist of the offence of sedition is  incitement to violence, more abusive words are not enough. The act or words complained of must incite public disorder or must cause reasonable anticipation or likelihood of public disorder in order to constitute ‘disaffection’ i.e. the words or acts complained of must either incite to disorder or must be such as to satisfy reasonable men that is their intention or tendency.

The S.C of India in kedar Nath v.st of Bihar [1962] opened that the interpretation given by the Federal court is what would be in harmony with Art 19 of the constitution.

(4) Government established by Law.

Explanation (2) and (3)

Disapprobation means disapproval. Disapproval of the acts of the govt. in order to bring about

change by lawful means or disapproving the administration does not constitute an offence.

The purpose of the explanations is to give adequate protection from penal action to freedom

of speech and expression.

Constitutional validity of Section 124 A

Constitutional validity of section 124 A was for the 1^st time put to judicial scrutiny in case of Tara Singh Gopichand V. state (East Punjab) 1951, on the ground that it goes against the freedom of Speech and expression v / 19(1) (a).

The East Punjab High Court declared the section ultra virus as it curtailed the freedom of speech and expression.

Subsequently, the constitution first (Amendment) Act, 1951 added two words, namely ‘in the interest of’ and ‘public order’ in art 19(2) dealing with restriction that can be put through law on the freedom of speech and expression.

Despite the above amendment in Art 19(2), the Act, High Court in case of Ram Nandan V. St. of U.P. [1959] held the S/124 A is ultra-virus as it cannot be saved by the expression in the interest of public order.

However, this controversy was set at rest by the S.C. in the case of kedar Nath v. St. of Bihar 1962.

The S.C. quoted with approval that judgment of the federal court and said that if the interpretation of the offence of sedition is held in consonance with the view expressed in Niharender Duttt case then the law of sedition U/124 A will be within permissible limits laid down U/Art 19(2).

But if, on the other hand, we were to hold that ever without any tendency to disorder or intention to create disturbance of law and order, by use of the words written or spoken, which merely creates disaffection or feeling of enmity against the Govt., the offence of sedition is complete, then such an interpretation of the section would make it unconstitutional in view of Art 19(1) (a) read with 19(2).

It certain provision of law constructed in one way would make then consistent with the constitution, and another interpretation would render then unconstitutional, the court has to lean in favour of former construction. Referring to above, the court ruled.

The provision of the sections read as a whole, along with explanations, make it reasonable clear that the section aims at rendering penal only such activities as would be intended, or have a tendency, to create disorder or disturbance of public peace by resort to violence.

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY (PLA)

Pre. Questions

1. In answer to the charge of defamation, which of the following is/ are good defence(s)?

(a) Imputation which is true and published for the public good.

(b) Opinion respecting the conduct of a public servant concerning discharge of duties of office expressed  in good faith.

(c) Both (a) and (b)

(d) None of these

2.  The essence of sedition is

(a) Intention

(b) Benefits or gains of the accused

(c) Result

(d) Both intention and result.

3.  Which of the following is defamation:

(a) X says. “Y is an honest man, he never stole Z’s watch.” intending to cause it to be believed that Y did steal Z‘s watch.

(b) X is asked. who stole Z’s watch? X points to Y,

(c) X draws a picture of Y running away with Z’s watch.

(d) All of the above.

4.  Anal Sex

(a) Sodomy

(b) Blasphenny

(c) Beastiality

(d) None

5.  Defamation by writting is called

(a) Libel

(b) Slander

(c) Both

(d) All

(e) Both intention and result.

6.  An imputation in the form of alternative or expressed ironically, may:

(A) amount to defamation

(B) not amount to defamation

(C) amount to outrage the modesty if intended to woman

(D) neither defamation nor outrage the modesty

7. Which of the following is not an offence against the State, under the Indian Penal Code, 1860?

(A) Spreading infection of disease dangerous to life

(B) Waging war against the Government of India

(C) Sedition

(D) Assaulting Governor of a State with intent to compel to exercise of any lawful power

8.  ‘A’ in good faith says of a book published by ‘Z’. 2’s books is indecent, ‘Z’ must be a man of impure mind, is this defamation punishable under section 500 of P.C.

(A) Yes, because the opinion respects Z’s character

(B) No, because it falls within one of the exceptions of Section 499

(C) No, Because it is slander

(D) No. Because it has not been repeated

9.  A is magistrate is making report to superior officer about B’s character imputation made in good faith and for public good. A commits:

(A) Offence under section 500 IPC

(B) Offence under section 501 IPC

(C) No offence as it is within exception under section 499

(D) Under section 504 IPC

10.  Which of the following is sufficient to prove the offence of sedition?

(A) Comments expressing disapproval of the government with a view to obtain a change in policies by lawful means

(B) proof of disloyalty or ill feelings

(C) comments expressing disapproval of the administrative action even though these do not excite hatred or disloyalty

(D) Exciting disaffection towards the government

I.P.C

Mains

Q.1. How far the amendments made in the law relating to rape, helps in curbing this growing offence? Discuss.

Q.2. Define theft. What is the maximum sentence for an offence of theft

Q.3. can be evidence, obtained by committing offence of theft, be admitted in a case of criminal nature? Give reason.

Q.4. A lady intending to buy a ticket, finding a crowed at t he ticket window, asked A, who was near the widow, to purchases a ticket for her and husband a t5en- rupee note. A took the note, intending to steal it, and instead of buying a ticket with money, ran away with t. What offence, if any, has A committed?

Q.5. What are ingredients of the offence theft’? explain and illustrate

 Rape

• Sec- 375 defines rape as an unlawful sexual intercourse between a man and a woman with her consent
• Two major amendments made in s/375, is in year 1983 and 2013
• S- 375
• The essence of the guilt lies in the penetration nowsoever slight, of peris, any object a part of body, or manipulation of any part of the body of the women for panetration.
• Essentials-

1. Sexual intercourse by a man with a woman.

2. The sexual intercourse must be under the circumstances falling under any of the seven clauses of section 375.

(a) Against her will

(b) Without her consent

(c) Consent procured by putting the woman under fear of death or hurt is no consent in law

(d) Consent accorded under a misconception that the person is the husband of the woman is not a valid consent

(e) Consent procured by a woman of unsound mind or under the influence of intoxication etc.

(f) Consent of a girl under 18 not valid in law

(g) Exception to section 375:

“Exception 2.- Sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under sixteen years of age, is not sexual assault.”

Since child marriage in India is not yet void and is only voidable, such a check was necessary to restrain men from taking advantage of their marital rights prematurely. No man can be guilty of rape on his own wife when she is over 15 years of age on account of the matrimonial consent that she has given.

Independent Thought vs. Union of India in this case the Court observed that the provision is arbitrary and violative of child rights and Art 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution. It was also found to be in contravention to the provisions of POSCO Act, which will prevail over the other laws. Then the Court brought a harmonious interpretation of the two provisions and held that “Sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under 18 years of age, is not rape”.

 

Punishment for rape

Section 376 to Section 376-DB

Description

1. Whoever, except in the cases provided for in sub-section (2), commits rape, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than ten years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.
2. Whoever—

1. being a police officer, commits rape,

• within the limits of the police station to which such police officer is appointed; or
• in the premises of any station house; or
• on a woman in such police officer’s custody or in the custody of a police officer subordinate to such police officer; or
• being a public servant, commits rape on a woman in such public servant’s custody or in the custody of a public servant subordinate to such public servant; or
• being a member of the armed forces deployed in an area by the Central or a State Government commits rape in such area; or
• being on the management or on the staff of a jail, remand home or other place of custody established by or under any law for the time being in force or of a women’s or children’s institution, commits rape on any inmate of such jail, remand home, place or institution; or
• being on the management or on the staff of a hospital, commits rape on a woman in that hospital; or
• being a relative, guardian or teacher of, or a person in a position of trust or authority towards the woman, commits rape on such woman; or
• commits rape during communal or sectarian violence; or
• commits rape on a woman knowing her to be pregnant; or
• commits rape, on a woman incapable of giving consent; or
• being in a position of control or dominance over a woman, commits rape on such woman; or
• commits rape on a woman suffering from mental or physical disability; or
• while committing rape causes grievous bodily harm or maims or disfigures or endangers the life of a woman; or
• commits rape repeatedly on the same woman,

shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life, which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person’s natural life, and shall also be liable to fine.

3. Whoever, commits rape on a woman under sixteen years of age shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than twenty years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life, which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person’s natural life, and shall also be liable to fine:

Provided that such fine shall be just and reasonable to meet the medical expenses and rehabilitation of the victim:

Provided further that any fine imposed under this sub-section shall be paid to the victim.

Explanations

1. For the purposes of sub-section 2

1. “armed forces” means the naval, military and air forces and includes any member of the Armed Forces constituted under any Law for the time being in force, including the paramilitary forces and any auxiliary forces that are under the control of the Central Government, or the State Government;

2. “hospital” means the precincts of the hospital and includes the precincts of any institution for the reception and treatment of persons during convalescence or of persons requiring medical attention or rehabilitation;

3. “police officer” shall have the same meaning as assigned to the expression “police” under the Police Act, 1861;

4. “women’s or children’s institution” means an institution, whether called an orphanage or a home for neglected women or children or a widow’s home or an institution called by any other name, which is established and maintained for the reception and care of women or children.

Classification under schedule 1 CrPC



Section 376A- Punishment for causing death or resulting in persistent vegetative state of victim

Description

Whoever, commits an offence punishable under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 376 and in the course of such commission inflicts an injury which causes the death1 of the woman or causes the woman to be in a persistent vegetative state, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than twenty years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life, which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person’s natural life, or with death.

Classification under schedule 1 CrPC



Section 376B- Sexual intercourse by husband upon his wife during separation

Description

Whoever has sexual intercourse with his own wife, who is living separately, whether under a decree of separation or otherwise, without her consent, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than two years but which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Explanations

1. In this section, “sexual intercourse” shall mean any of the acts mentioned in clauses (a) to (d) of section 375

Classification under schedule 1 CrPC



Section 376C- Sexual intercourse by person in authority

Description

Whoever, being—

1. in a position of authority1 or in a fiduciary relationship; or
2. a public servant; or
3. superintendent or manager of a jail, remand home or other place of custody established by or under any law for the time being in force, or a women’s or children’s institution; or
4. 4. on the management of a hospital or being on the staff of a hospital, abuses such position or fiduciary relationship to induce or seduce any woman either in his custody or under his charge or present in the premises to have sexual intercourse with him, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than 5 years, but which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Explanations

1. In this section, “sexual intercourse” shall mean any of the acts mentioned in clauses (a) to (d) of section 375.
2. For the purposes of this section, Explanation 1 to section 375 shall also be applicable.
3. “Superintendent”, in relation to a jail, remand home or other place of custody or a women’s or children’s institution, includes a person holding any other office in such jail, remand home, place or institution by virtue of which such person can exercise any authority or control over its inmates.
4. The expressions “hospital” and “women’s or children’s institution” shall respectively have the same meaning as in Explanation to sub-section (2) of section 376.

Classification under schedule 1 Cr PC



Section 376D- Gang Rape

Description

Where a woman is raped by one or more persons constituting a group or acting in furtherance of a common intention, each of those persons shall be deemed to have committed the offence of rape and shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than twenty years, but which may extend to life which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person’s natural life, and with fine;

Provided that such fine shall be just and reasonable to meet the medical expenses and rehabilitation of the victim;

Provided further that any fine imposed under this section shall be paid to the victim.

Classification under schedule 1 Cr PC



Section 376E- Punishment for repeat offenders

Description

Whoever has been previously convicted of an offence punishable under section 376 or section 376A or section 376AB or section 376D or section 376DA or section 376DB and is subsequently convicted of an offence punishable under any of the said sections shall be punished with imprisonment for life which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person’s natural life, or with death.

Classification under schedule 1 Cr PC



Section 376AB- Punishment for rape on woman under twelve years of age

Description

Whoever, commits rape on a woman under twelve years of age shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than twenty years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life, which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person’s natural life, and with fine or with death.

Provided that such fine shall be just and reasonable to meet the medical expenses and rehabilitation of the victim:

Classification under schedule 1 Cr PC



Section 376DB- Punishment for gang rape on woman under twelve years of age

Section 376DA- Punishment for gang rape on woman under sixteen years of age

Description

Where a woman under sixteen years of age is raped by one or more persons constituting a group or acting in furtherance of a common intention, each of those persons shall be deemed to have committed the offence of rape and shall be punished with imprisonment for life, which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person’s natural life, and with fine:

Provided that such fine shall be just and reasonable to meet the medical expenses and rehabilitation of the victim:

Provided further that any fine imposed under this section shall be paid to the victim.

Classification under schedule 1 Cr PC



Description

Where a woman under twelve years of age is raped by one or more persons constituting a group or acting in furtherance of a common intention, each of those persons shall be deemed to have committed the offence of rape and shall be punished with imprisonment for life, which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person’s natural life, and with fine, or with death:

Provided that such fine shall be just and reasonable to meet the medical expenses and rehabilitation of the victim:

Provided further that any fine imposed under this section shall be paid to the victim.

Classification under schedule 1 Cr PC



PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY

I.P.C

Preliminary Questions

 

1. Sexual Harrasment case was

(a) Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan

(b) Keshvananda Bharti v. State of Kerala

(c) Apperal Promotian Council

(d) Pull v. UOl

2. Sexual intercourse with the consent of a girl amounts to rape if she is under

(a) 15 years

(b) 16 years

(c) 17 years

(d) 18 years

3. Under section 376 of the IPCA public servant committing rape on a woman in his custody shall be punishable with

(a) Rigorous imprisonment up to 7 years

(b) Rigorous imprisonment of at least 8 years

(c) Rigorous imprisonment up to 10 years

(d) None of the above

4. Sexual intercourse with the consent of a girl amounts to rape if she is under

(a) 15 years

(b) 16 years

(c) 17 years

(d) 18 years

 

5. Assertion (A): Rape is a stigma on a woman, hence it is a punishable offence.

      Reason (R): Sexual intercourse by a man with his wife is not rape.

(a) Both (A) and (R) are true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A)

(b) Both (A) and (R) are true and (R) is not the correct explanation of (A)

(c) (A) is correct, (R) is false

(d) (A) is false, (R) is correct

 

6. Under Section 375, a man is said to commit ‘rape’ who has sexual intercourse with a woman

I. Against her will.

II.Without her consent.

III. With her consent by putting her in fear of death or of hurt.

IV. With her consent, when the man knows that he is not her husband and that her consent is given because she believes that he is another man to whom she is lawfully married.

V. With her consent, when, at the time of such consent, by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication or the administration by him personally or through another of any stupefying or unwholesome substance she is unable to understand the nature and consequences of that to which she gives consent.

VI.With or without her consent when she is under 16 years of age.

VII. In which of the following cases, the offence of ‘statutory rape’ is said to be committed?

(a) All of the above.

(b) I and II only.

(c) V only.

(d) VI only.

7. Rape is an offence against –

(a) Property

(b)Human body

(c) Political body

(d) Social body

8. Sex with a girl with fraudulent consent amounts to

(a) Simply physical assault

(b) Molestation

(c) Attempt to rape

(d) Or Rape

9. Sexual intercourse with a Widow is an offence of

(a) Adultery

(b) Rape

(c) Molestation

(d) None of the above

10. To constitute an offence of gang rape. How many persons are required

(a) 1

(b) 2

(c) 3

(d) 4

(d)10

” connect=”586″]

UNNATURAL OFFENCES [S/377]

S/377 Punishes unnatural carnal intercourse [sodomy and bestiality under English Law]

• Under this section consent is wholly irrelevant. Party consenting would be equally liable as an abettor.
• Penetration, how so ever minimal is sufficient.
• Penile and, Penile and or Penile animal penetration, howsoever slight it be, constitutes the carnal intercourse

1. Where male organ of the accused is held tightly by the hands of the victim- held to be an unnatural carnal intercourse.

• Sudesh Jhaku Case [1948] Delhi high court held that penile mouth penetration amounts to an unnatural act

Constitutional validity of S/377

In NAZ Foundation VS  NCT of Delhi [2010], the constitutional validity of S/377 was challenged in the Delhi High Court by NAZ foundation, a NGO. It contended that S/377, on account of covering consensual sexual intercourse between two adults in private is violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 14, 15, 19 and 21 of  the constitution.

It stressed that S/377, in essence, goes against the spirit of the right of personal liberty [right to privacy, right to dignity] and to equality before law [irrational classification] guaranted under 21 and 14 of the constitution. It also argued that, it is violative of article 15 as it criminalize homosexual activity on the basis of mere social orientation.

S/377 by prohibiting homosexuality, infringes  the basic freedom article 19 (1) (a) (b) and (c) as individual’s ability to make personal statemnents about his sexual preferences,right to associate or assemble and right to move freely (with gays or lesbians), is restricted.

It urged, the High court to, through Judicial interpretation, decriminalize ‘unnatural’ sexual intercourse between two consentin adults in private and to limit it only to non consensual penile non vaginal sexual intercourse and penile non vaginal sexual intercourse involving minors.

After extensive examination, the Delhi High Court declared S/377 partly ultravirus to the constitution.

Against this decision of Delhi High Court, some public Spirited individuals and organization, have approached the Supreme Court.

In Suresh  kumar kaushal Vs NAZ Foundation[2014] SC the supreme court, over-ruled the NAZ Foundation  dictum and thereby upheld the constitutional validity of S/377. It ruled that S/377, does not offend either of article 14, 15 and 21 of the constitution.

It held that S/377 would apply irrespective of age and consent. It does not criminalize a particular people or identify or orientation. It merely identifies certain acts which if committed would constitutes an offence such a prohibition regulates sexual conduct regardless of gender identify and orientation.

Notwithstanding this verdict, the legislature shall be free to consider the desirability and propriety of deleting S/377 or amend the same.

Those who indulge in carnal intercourse in the ordinary course and those who indulge in car5nal intercourse and those who indulge in carnal intercourse against the order of the nature constitute different classes and the people falling in latter category cannot claim that this section suffers from the vice of arbitrariness and irrational classification not violative of article 14 and 15 of the constitution.

Just because it has been used to perpetrate harassment, torture on certain persons especially those belonging to Gay and Lesbian community by police authorities and others is not a reflection of the virus of the section, because this treatment is neither mandated nor condoned by the section. This might be a relevant factor for amendment of the section

The High Court a fact that a minisule fraction of the country’s population constitutes lesbians, Gays, bisexual or transgender and less than 200 persons have been prosecuted in last more than 150 years and this cannot be made sound basis for declaring it ultra virus.

In Navtej Singh Johar and Others vs. Union of India, (2018) 10 SCC 1.

Section 377 of IPC, which criminalises voluntary sexual act between consenting adults, held to be unconstitutional. Supreme Court struck down the law, which criminalises consensual homo sexual act between adults. It declared section 377 Indian Penal Code, 1860 unconstitution, in so far as it criminalises consensual sexual acts of adult in private.

Topic: – Criminal Misappropriation

mains

Q-1. Discuss criminal misappropriation.

Q-2. Discuss fully the essential elements of criminal misappropriation of property and distinguish between criminal misappropriation of property and criminal breach of trust.

Q-3. Differentiate between the offences of criminal misappropriation, criminal breach of trust, and cheating.

Q-4. What is criminal trespass? Whether the offence of criminal trespass can be committed with respect to a movable property? Explain with example.

Q-5. Explain in brief:

(a) House-breaking

(b) criminal trespass

Topic: – Criminal Misappropriation

Stolen Property

Mischief, Criminal Trespass

• Criminal mis-appropriation is an offence which is carved out from theft. In theft- property is removed from the possession of the person whereas in criminal mis-appropriation, the taking is upon finding or other coming across of the property.
• mis- appropriation means to take possession of property and putting it to unauthorized or wrongful use.
• The culpability under this section does not lie in the wrongful transfer of property rather it lies in wrongful retainment/ wrongful conversion.
• Criminal mis- appropriation takes place in those cases also where possession has come innocently, but is continued due to a subsequent change of intention.

3 essentials:-

• Property must be of the complainant
• The accused misappropriated the same or converted to his own use.
• He did so dishonestly.

• Explanation- 1

Mis- appropriation or conversion need not to be permanent, it may even be for a time.

• Explanation- 2

Makes it clear that the property must be owned/ possessed by somebody.

Section (410 – 411)

S/ 410 Defines:- Stolen property – A property will be designated a stolen for the purposes of this section, if possession of such property has been transfered by

• Theft
• Extortion
• Robbery
• Criminal misappropriation
• Criminal Breach of Trust

If this property goes back to the original owner, then it will not be termed as stolen property.

S/ 411 : The essence of the offence consists in or Reason to believe the receipts or retention with a knowledge that at the time of receipt the property was obtained in any of the ways above.

• The destruction of the property or change should be contrary to the natural or normal use or employment.
• To constitute the offence of mischief there must be destruction of property.

In cases where no one has any proprietaril right to the property such as in case of wild animals or bird, the killing of that animal does not come within the purview of this section.

A had certain rights of fishing in a particular stretch of river, and B diverted river’s water from A’s stretch of which large quantity of fish was destroyed. – held liable under this section.

• Property should be in possession of another.
• This section does not req. ownership.

(2) Lawful entered- but remaining there unlawfully.

• Trespass ordinarily is a civil wrong. But if it is committed with a criminal intentional – there is an offence under IPC.

• Property under this section can movable/ immovable. There can be a criminal trespass into a motor boat.

• Property does not include incorporeal property such as act to fishery it.

Where enters B’s house to have illicit inter course with B’s wife – liable as intention was to commit offence.

• The offence of criminal trespass is committed only when the intention in effecting the entry is to Cutting of fully grown crops – not a mischief.

Cutting of unripe crop – mischief.

• Property under this section means some tangible property which can be destroyed but does not include easement.

Is to cause annoyance/offence/insult/intimidation to the person in possession. For this offence it is not merely sufficient that the person trespassing had knowledge that his act would cause annoyance etc. Thus, annoyance/ insult etc was the aim of the entry.

A enter  B’s land

No intention

Though his act cause annoyance to B. But A’ is not liable under this section.

But A’ enters with an intention to cause annoyance than he will be liable under this section.

442 House trespass:

Entering of any part of the body us sufficient for house trespass

S/ 443 Lurking house trespass

House trespass # hiding yourself

In the process of house trespass

S/ 445 House Breaking.

It is a case of House trespass + additional six ways – in going inside or coming out of the house is house – breaking.

• Enters/ quit -> Abettor/ trespasser has opened the back door in such a way as it was not intended for human entrance by the owner of the house.
• Enters/ quits -> by pending any Lock
• Enters/quits -> by using criminal force or committing an assault or threatening any person with

assault.

• Enters/ quits -> by any passage which he knows to have been fastened against such entrance or

Departure.

• Climbing upon a tree and entering into house – house breaking.

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY

PRE-QUESTIONS

1. An employer deducting the employees’ contribution under Employees Provident Funds & Miscellaneous Provision Act, from the wages payable for credit to the fund, but does not deposit the same with the Fund, is guilty of committing

(a) criminal misappropriation under section 403 of IPC

(b) criminal breach of trust under section 405 of IPC

(c) theft under section 378 of IPC

(d) no offence.

2. A property is called stolen property under section 410 of IPC if its possession has been transferred by

(a) theft

(b) robbery

(c) criminal misappropriation

(d) all the above.

3. In cases of dishonest misappropriation the initial possession of the property

(a) is dishonest

(b) is fraudulent

(c) is innocent

(d) both (a)&b (b).

4. Z going on a journey, entrusts his plate to A, the keeper of a ware house, till Z shall return. A carries the plate to a goldsmith and sells it. Which of the following offences, if any, had A committed?

(a) Theft

(b) Criminal breach of trust

(c) Criminal misappropriation of property

(d) None of the above

5. While carrying away the stolen property the accused persons six in number exploded cracker to frighten the inmates of the house who wanted to pursue them. The accused were convicted for dacoity. The conviction is

(a) Legal

(b) Illegal

(c) Improper

(d) Irregular

6. Which of the following statements is true and correct regarding ‘mischief’?

(a) It is not essential to the offence of mischief that the offender should intend to cause loss or damage to the owner of the property injured or destroyed

(b) It is sufficient if he intends to cause, or knows that he is likely to cause, wrongful loss or damage to  any person by injuring any property, whether it belongs to that person or not

(c) Both (a) and (b)

(d) None of the above

7. A introduces water into an ice-house belonging to Z and thus causes the ice to meet, intending wrongful loss to Z. A has committed

(a) Nuisance

(b) Mischief

(c) Cheating

(d) None of the above

8. Whoever commits criminal trespass by entering into or remaining in any building, tent or vessel used as a human dwelling or any building, used as a place for worship, or as a place for the custody of property, is said to commit

(b) Lurking criminal trespass

(C) House trespass

(d) None of the above

9. The introduction of any part of the criminal trespasser’s body is entering sufficient to constitute house-trespass. The statement is

(b) False

(c) Partly correct

(d) None of the above

10. Whoever commits house-trespass having taken precautions to come such house-trespass from some per who has a right to exclude or eject trespasser from the building, tem vessel which is the subject of trespass, is said to commit

(b) Lurking criminal trespass Co

(c) Lurking house trespass

(d) None of the above BE

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY

I.P.C

Offence Against Property

MAINS

1. What Offence, if any, has been committed by A in the given case.“A and B a joint owner of a joint property and A dishonestly takes exclusive possession of that property without the consent of B.

2. What Offence, if any, has been committed by A in the given case. “A finds a ring lying on the high road, not in the possession of any person. He takes it and converts his own use.

3. What Offence, if any, has been committed by A in the given case. “A threatens to publish defamatory statement concerning Z unless Z given him money. He thus induces Z to give him money.

4. Distinguish between theft and extortion?

5. What factors are essential to constitute theft?

Offences against property

(Theft, Extortion and Robbery)

• Requirements :-
• Dishonest Intention
• Movable property
• Out of the possession
• Without consent
• Moves such property

• Dishonest Intention – It is essential that the Mens Rea should exist at the time of the doing of the Act.
• Movable property – Means corporeal property of every description except lads and things attached to earth or permanently fined to anything which is attached to earth.
• Out of the possession – Theft is an offence against possession and not against ownership. Possession can be constructive or active.
• Without consent – Consent under this section can be express or implied. Implied consent is highly circumstantial.
• Moves such property –theft is complete the moment thing is moved. Taking need not to be permanent or with the intention to appropriate.

Leading cases:-

1. pyare Lal Bhargava v. St. of Rajasthan [1963]Sc
2. K.N mehra V. St. of Rajasthan [1957]Sc

• When theft is Robbery s/390

Theft will amount to Robbery if:-

(1) Actual theft was committed

(2) Thereafter, if the requirement of s/390 are proved. It will amount to Robbery.

1. in order to the committing of the theft – ie just before the moving of the property, when the accused was moving towards the commission of theft. In this stage, Death, heart etc was caused for the purpose of enabling himself to commit theft.
2. In committing the theft ie. While the accused was actually moving the property, death etc. was caused voluntarily for the purpose of moving the property.
3. In carrying away ie once the property has been moved and now the accused is in the process of taking or carrying away the property and in order to carry away, death etc was caused and finally, the accused was able to carry away the property.
4. In attempting to carry away death etc was caused while carrying away the property and finally accused could not carry it away.

• Injury under this section includes physical as well as mental Injury.
• To constitute the offence of extortion – there must be a fear of injury coupled with delivery of property.
• Leading case:-

Jadunandan Singh v. Emperor

• Difference between theft and Extortion

• When Extortion is Robbery

1. Elements of extortion

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY

PRELIMINARY

1. ‘B’ and ‘C’ were on the railway platform. ‘B‘ had taken a ticket from Allahabad to Delhi. ‘B’, and illiterate woman handed over the ticket to ‘C’ in order to as certain whether she had a right ticket. ‘C’ under the pretence of returning the ticket to Delhi substituted it for the ticket of shorter journey and returned that as ‘B’s ticket. In this case ‘C’ is liable for

(a) cheating ‘B’

(b) criminal misappropriation

(c) theft

(d) criminal breach of trust.

2. ‘A’ handed over his watch to a watch-smith for repairing. In order not to pay the repairing charges ‘A’ picked up his watch from the shop, when the watch-smith was not looking. In this case

(a) ‘A’ is guilty of criminal breach of trust.

(b) ‘A’ is guilty of cheating.

(c)’ ‘A’ is guilty of theft.

(d) ‘A’ is not guilty of any offence because the watch, he picked up was his own. However, he should pay the repairing charges to watch-smith.

3. Match List-I with List-II and select the correct answer by using the codes given below the lists :

List-I                                                         List II

1. Delivery of Property                1. Criminal Breach of Trust
2. Taking of Property                   2. Criminal Misappropriation
3. Entrustment of Progerty        3. Theft
4. Convertibility of Property     4. Extortion

 innocently got to one’s

Codes:

A          B          C      D

(a)          3          4          1       2

(b)          4          3          1       2

(c )         4          2          3       1

(d)          3          1          2       4

4. A police officer has received a sum of Rs. 5000/-against fine from the persons violating traffic rules. lnstead of depositing the fine money with State Treasury, he utilized the same for his personal use. What offence under Indian Penal Code, the police Officer has committed?

(a) Criminal breach of trust

(b) Mischief

(c) Cheating the Government

(d) None of the above

5. Which one of the following correctly distinguishes theft from extortion?

(a) In theft movable property must be dishonestly taken whereas in extortion there is delivery of the thing extorted.

(b) In extortion there must be dishonest intention whereas in theft the same is not necessary.

(c) Theft requires dishonest intention whereas extortion requires fraudulent intention.

(d) Theft is as offence against movable property whereas extortion is an offence against immovable property.

6. A servant collected money from the debtor of his master as authorized by him. The servant retained the money in his hands because it was due to him as wages. He commits:

(a) criminal breach of trust

(b) theft

(c) no offence

(d) criminal misappropriation

7. In the Indian Penal Code, the offence of Criminal Breach of Trust has been dealt with in ___ Section:

(a) 405

(b) 402

(c) 404

(d) 401

8. For which of the following offences, mens rea is not a requisite?

(a) Kidnapping

(b) Robbery

(c) Trespass

(d) None of the above

9. If the offender is armed with deadly weapons at the time of attempting dacoity, he is liable to be punished with

(a) Rigorous imprisonment of at least 7 years

(b) Rigorous imprisonment up to 7 years

(c) Rigorous imprisonment not exceeding 5 years

(d) None of the above.

10. ‘A’ finds a watch on the floor of a State Transport bus while he was leaving it as the last passenger. He picked it up and put it in his pocket instead of returning it to the State Transport authorities. Next day he sold it. ‘A’ is liable for:

(a) theft

(b) extortion

(c) criminal misappropriation

(d) criminal breach of trust

PAHUJA LAW ACDEMY

Main Questions

Q.1. what offence, if any, has been committed in the given case: A, by pledging as diamonds articles which he knows are not diamonds, intentionally deceives z, and thereby dishonestly induces ‘z’ to lend money?

Q.2. What are the essentials of criminal breach of trust?

Q.3.What Offence, if any, has been committed by A in the given case. “A threatens to publish defamatory statement concerning Z unless Z given him money. He thus induces Z to give him money.

Q.4.Distinguish between theft and extortion?

Q.5.What factors are essential to constitute theft?

Topic- Criminal Beach of Trust, Cheating

• Essentials :-

1. Entrusted with the property or with dominion of the property.
2. Such entrustment must be in trust
3. The person so entrusted must

• Dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use that property.
• Disposed that property in violation of such trust.

The gist of the offence of this offence is dishonest misappropriation or conversion to his own use. The difference between this section and criminal misappropriation is, in this offence, the accused is entrusted with property or with dominion or control of the property.

• Entrustment:-

It means handing over of the possession of a thing for some purpose which may not imply the conferring of any proprietory right. It requires that the accused should receive the property and hold it on behalf of another.

The problem arises in cases where the property is given casually i.e. where there is no formal trust or trust like relationship appearing on the face of it.

Eg:- ‘A’ handover her ticket to ‘B’ in order to check whether she has correct ticket or not. (already

discussed)

In this e.g. there is only misappropriation and not criminal breach of trust as there was no entrustment because constructive possession was still with ‘A’

Dominion over property

It means controls over property.

In Velji Raghavji Patel v. State of Maharashtra [1965 SC]

Held:- in respect of partnership firms, though every partner has dominion over the property by virtue of being a partner, it is not a dominion which satisfies the requirement of section 405, as there is no entrustment of dominion unless it is proved that the dominion was by a special agreement between the partners.

As per Explanation 1 & 2 when an employer of an establishment deducts employee’s contribution from the wages payable towards his provident fund or family pension fund or employees state insurance fund, shall be deemed to be entrusted with the amount of the contribution deducted.

• Misappropriation of the property entrusted even for a time is sufficient.

In R. Venkat Krishanan v. CBI [(2009) SC] Bank Official, who contrary to statutory provisions and directives, made public money available to a proviate party, was held guilty under this section even though the money was quickly recovered.

• This offence consists in any of the four Acts:-
• Misappropriation
• Conversion
• User
• Disposal of property in violation of direction of law.

• Mere Retention of goods or mere Refusal to Return does not amount to Criminal Breach of trust.

• A man is deceived or cheated in two ways mentioned above.

In (1^st), the victim was induced to deliver property. It can be by fraudulent or dishonest means used by the accused.

In (2^nd), there is no delivery of property, but the victim is intentionally induced to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit to do. Here, the inducement need not to be fraudulent or dishonest.

• Deception means causing a person to believe what is false or to disbelieve what is true.

• Misrepresentation from the very beginning is a sin qua non of the offence of cheating.

• Does false promise of marriage amounts to cheating?

Yes, but it is necessary to prove that the promise to marry by the accused for inducing the complainant to have sexual connection with him was false when he made it. The promise must be made with a fraudulent intention of not honoring it.

• Mere deception is not sufficient for both the parts, the element of inducement leads either to

delivery of property or doing of an act or omission to do anything.

• Dishonest intention should be present at the time of making the promise.
• For (2^nd) part, the word “cause” suggest a direct and proximate connection between the act or

omission and the harm and damage to the victim.

• Section 415, defines offence of cheating, which is made punishable under section 417 & 420.
  • Section 417, provides punishment for a simple case of cheating (covering IInd part of section

415).

Whereas section 420 covers cases where property is actually delivered .

PAHUJA LAW ACADEMY

Criminal Beach of Trust, Cheating

PRE-QUESTIONS

1. Criminal Breach of trust is defined under ……………… of the Indian Penal Code.

(a) Section 403

(b) Section 404

(c) Section 405

(d) Section 406

2. A, residing in Calcutta, is agent for Z, residing at Delhi. There is an express or implied contract between A and Z, that a l sums remitted by Z to A shall be invested by A, according to Z’s direction. Z remits a lakh of rupees to A, with directions to A to invest the same in company’s paper. A dishonestly disobeys the directions and employs the money in his own business. A has committed

(a) Criminal breach of trust

(b) Criminal misappropriation

(c) Cheating

(d) None of the above

3. Which of the following offences under the Indian Penal Code is similar to ‘embezzlement’ under English law?

(a) Criminal breach of trust

(b) Criminal misappropriation

(c) Cheating

(d) None of the above

4. A, by putting a counterfeit mark on an article, intentionally deceives Z into a belief that this article was made by a certain celebrated manufacturer, and thus dishonestly induces Z to buy and pay for the article.

(a) A had committed cheating

(b) A had not committed cheating

(c) A has committed forgery

(d) None of the above

5. Moorga Chetty ’s case is related to

(a) Cheating

(b) Receiving stolen property

(c) Criminal breach of trust

(d) None of the above

6. A, by exhibiting to Z a false sample of an article, intentionally deceives Z into believing that the article corresponds with the sample, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to buy and pay for the article. Which of the following offence, if any had A committed?

(a) Cheating

(b) Breach of contract

(c) Criminal breach of trust

(d) None of the above

7. A, by tendering in payment for an article, a bill on a house with which A keeps no money, and by which A expects that the bill will be dishonoured, intentionally deceives Z, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to deliver the article, intending not to pay for it.

(a) A had committed cheating

(b) A had not committed cheating

(c) A had committed misappropriation

(d) None of the above

8. In every cheating there must be

(a) Deception

(b) Delivery of property

(c) Both (a) and (b)

(d) None of the above

9. A, by falsely pretending to be in the civil service, intentionally deceives Z, and thus dishonestly induces Z to let him have on credit goods for which he does not mean to pay. Which of the following offence, if any had A committed?

(a) Cheating

(b) Embezzlement

(c) Criminal breach of trust

(d) None of the above

10. A intentionally deceives Z into a belief that A means to repay any money that Z may lend to him and thereby, dishonestly induces Z to lend him money, A not intending to repay

(a) A had committed cheating

(b) A had not committed cheating

(c) A had committed criminal breach of trust

(d) None of the above