Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1.
2.
3.
4.
2.
boy does not get the benefit of section 83, he has not done
any crime and should be acquitted.
Q. How far is mistake of fact, accident, act of child,
insanity, and intoxication are valid and good defences
under IPC? In IPC, mistake of law is no defence but
mistake of fact is a good defence. How? What exemptions
have been given by IPC to minors for an offence under
General Exceptions? What has to be proved by a person
claiming immunity from criminal liability on the ground of
Insanity?
The general rule is that it is the duty of the prosecution to prove
the prisoner's guilt beyond doubt and if there is any reasonable
doubt then the benefit of doubt is given to the accused. The
prosecution must prove beyond doubt that the accused
performed the act with intention and with full knowledge of the
consequences of the act. This is based on the maxim, "actus non
facit reum, nisi mens sit rea", which means that mere doing of an
act will not constitute guilt unless there be a guilty intent'.
IPC defines certain circumstances in which it is considered that
the accused had no evil intention. These circumstances are
nothing but exceptional situations that negate mens rea. They
create a reasonable doubt in the case of the prosecution that the
act was done by the accused with evil intention. However, it is
the burden of the accused to prove that such circumstances
existed at the time of crime and the presumption of such
circumstances is against the accused. If the accused proves that
such circumstances indeed existed, then his act is not considered
a crime. In K M Nanavati vs State of Maharashtra AIR 1962,
it was held that it is the duty of the prosecution to prove the guilt
of the accused or the accused is presumed to be innocent until his
guilt is established by the prosecution beyond doubt.
Chapter IV (Sec 76 to 106) of IPC defines such circumstances.
Upon close examination of these sections, it can be seen that
they define two types of circumstances - one that make the act
excusable (Sec 76 to 95), which means that the act itself is not
Good faith
Another condition that must be satisfied to take a defence of
mistake of fact is that the act must be done in good faith.
Section 52 says that nothing is said to be done or believed in
good faith which is done or believed without due care and
attention. Thus, if one shoots an arrow in the dark without
ascertaining no one is there, he cannot be excused because he
failed to exercise due care.
If a person of average prudence in that situation can ascertain
the facts with average deligence, a person taking the defence of
mistake of those facts cannot be said to have taken due care and
thus, is not excusable.
Accident
Accidents happen despite of nobody wanting them. There is no
intention on the part of anybody to cause accident and so a loss
caused due to an accident should not be considered a crime. This
is acknowledged in Section 80 of IPC, which states thus Section 80 - Nothing is an offence which is done by accident or
misfortune, and without any criminal intention or knowledge in
doing of a lawful act, in a lawful manner by lawful means with
proper care and caution.
Illustration - A works with a hatchet; the head flys off and kills
a person standing nearby. Here, if there was no want of
proper caution on the part of A, his act is excusable and is not an
offence.
From section 80, it can be seen that there are four essential
conditions when a person can take the defence of an accident 1. The act is done by accident or misfortune - Stephen in
his digest of criminal law explains that an effect is said to be
accidental if the act that caused it was not done with an intention
to cause it and if the occurance of this effect due to that act is not
so probable that a person of average prudence could take
1.
2.
3.
2.
3.
Murder
A person commits
Culpable Homicide if
A person commits Murder if the act
the act by which death by which death is caused is done is caused is done 1. with the intention of
causing death.
2. with an intention to
cause such bodily injury
as is likely to cause
death.
Murder
A person commits
Culpable Homicide if
the act by which death
is caused is done -
INTENTION
(a) with the intention of
causing death; or
KNOWLEDGE
draw a line between hurt and grievous hurt but it was important
to draw a line even if it is not perfect so as to punish the cases
which are clearly more than hurt. Thus, section 320 of IPC
defines Grievous Hurt as Section 320 - The following kinds of hurt only are designated as
"Grievous" 1. Emasculation
2. Permanent privation of the sight of either eye.
3. Permanent privation of the hearing of either ear.
4. Privation of any member or a joint.
5. Destruction or permanent impairing of powers of any
member or joint.
6. Permanent disfiguration of the head or face.
7. Fracture or dislocation of a bone or tooth.
8. Any hurt which endangers life or which causes the sufferer
to be, during the space of twenty days, in severe body pain
or unable to follow his ordinary pursuits.
Thus, it can be seen that grievous hurt is a more serious kind of
hurt. Since it is not possible to precisely define what is a serious
hurt and what is not, to simplify the matter, only hurts described
in section 320 are considered serious enough to be called
Grievous Hurt. The words "any hurt which endangers life" means
that the life is only endangered and not taken away. Stabbing on
any vital part, squeezing the testicles, thursting lathi into rectum
so that bleeding is caused, have all been held as Hurts that
endanger life and thus Grievous Hurts.
As with Hurt, in Grievous Hurt, it is not a physical contact is not
necessary.
Difference between Hurt and Grievous Hurt
Only hurts that are defined in section 320 are called Grievous
Hurt.
1.
2.
3.
Kidnapping from
lawful guardian
(Section 361)
Abduction (Section
362)
A person is compelled
A person is taken
A person is taken away by force or induced by
out of the limits
from the lawful guardian. deception to go from
of India.
any place.
The person must be less
than 16 yrs of age if
Age of the person
Age of the person is
male, less than 18 if
is immaterial.
immaterial.
female, or of unsound
mind.
It is not a
continuing
offence.
It is not a continuing
offence.
It is a continuing
offence.
It is always done by
It can be done without
the use of force or
use of force or deception.
deception.
offence?
Theft
In general, theft is committed when a person's property is taken
without his consent by someone. For example, A enters the house
of B and takes B's watch without B seeing and puts it in his
pocket with an intention to take it for himself. A commits theft.
However, besides the ordinary meaning conveyed by the word
theft, the scope of theft is quite wide. Section 378 of IPC defines
theft as follows Section 378 - Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any
movable property out of the possession of any person without
that person's consent, moves that property in order to such
taking, is said to commit theft.
Based on this definition, the following are the essential
constituents of Theft 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
There is no element of
threat.
Robbery