THE INDIAN PENAL CODE IS A MODEL PIECE OF LEGISLATION AND IS A

STANDING TRIBUTE TO THE GENIUS AND LEARNING OF LORD MACUALAY

WHO WAS ITS MAIN ARCHITECT.

Submitted by

Akshat Kumar(Id no. –SM0113005)

Faculty in Charge

Nikita Barooah

NATIONAL LAW UNIVERISTY, ASSAM

GUWAHATI

27 APRIL, 2015
 TABLE OF CASES

Lee Kun Hee & others v. State of U.P. & others……………………………... AIR 2012 SC 1007

Kastya Rama’s case…………………………………………………….. (1871) 8 BHC (Cr. C) 63

Sheikh Haider v. Syed Issa…………………………………………………… AIR 1939 Nag. 241

Queen Empress v. Aruna Bewa………………………………………...... (1873) 19 WR (Cr) 230

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CONTENTS PAGE NO.

1. Introduction 01
1.1. Research Problem
03
1.2. Literature Review
03
1.3. Research Methodology
03
2. Historical Context of IPC 04
2.1. Introduction
04
2.2. Codification of Criminal Law
06
3. Farsightedness of Macaulay 08
3.1. Classification of Crimes
08
3.2. General Explanations
09
3.3. Extent of IPC
10
3.4. Miscarriage
12
3.5. General Overview
14
4. Conclusion 15

Bibliography 16
 CHAPTER-1

INTRODUCTION

Law in India has developed from religious prescription to the current protected and legitimate
framework we have today, navigating through mainstream lawful frameworks and the basic law.

India has a recorded legal history beginning from the Vedic ages and a common law framework
may have been set up amid the Bronze Age and the Indus Valley development. Law as an issue
of religious solutions and philosophical talk has a celebrated history in India. Exuding from the
Vedas, the Upanishads and different religious writings, it was a ripe field enhanced by experts
from diverse Hindu philosophical schools and later by Jains and Buddhists.

Secular law in India differed generally from region to region and from ruler to ruler 1. Court
frameworks for common and criminal matters were key highlights of numerous decision lines of
antiquated India. Astounding mainstream court frameworks existed under the Mauryas (321-185
BCE) and the Mughals (16th – 19th hundreds of years) with the recent offering route to the
current common law framework.

During the Mughal Period there was Mohammedan Law enforce and it had many defects such as
that it did not differentiated between public and private offences, it neglected mens rea as an
essential ingredient of an offence. The nature of offence depended upon the weapon used rather
than the intention of the offender. The Mohammedan law crime has been criticized as being
haphazard, barbarous, irrational and contrary to the principles of civil society. The law of
evidence was highly prejudicial to infidels.

Thus with these many defects in the Criminal Justice System, there were attempts to reform it by
the British rulers. Changes were made by Warren Hastings by the Judicial Plan of 1772 and then
again by the Regulation of 1790, changes were made to the judicial set up. The changes were
made all long the period.

1
http://www.barcouncilofindia.org/about/about-the-legal-profession/legal-education-in-the-united-kingdom/

1
The codification of criminal law began with the Charter of 1833 as multiplicity of laws
prevailing in India caused considerable hardship to the inhabitants residing in different provinces
and therefore, a code of criminal law which could be uniformly applicable all over India was the
need of the time.

The draft of the Indian Penal Code was prepared by the First Law Commission, chaired by
Thomas Babington Macaulay2 in 1834 and was submitted to Governor-General of India Council
in 1837. Its basis is the law of England freed from superfluities, technicalities and local
peculiarities.3 Elements were also derived from the Napoleonic Code and from Edward
Livingston's Louisiana Civil Code of 1825.4 The first final draft of the Indian Penal Code was
submitted to the Governor-General of India in Council in 1837, but the draft was again revised.
The drafting was completed in 1850 and the Code was presented to the Legislative Council in
1856, but it did not take its place on the statute book of British India until a generation later,
following the Indian Rebellion of 1857. The draft then underwent a very careful revision at the
hands of Barnes Peacock, who later became the first Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court,
and the future puisne judges of the Calcutta High Court, who were members of the Legislative
Council, and was passed into law on 6 October 1860 5.The Code came into operation on 1
January 1862. Unfortunately, Macaulay did not survive to see his masterpiece come into force,
having died near the end of 1859.

Further in the project report I will be discussing about the features of IPC that has made it a
model piece of legislation. IPC has given both the substantive and procedural law which before
the enactment of the Criminal Procedure Code it was the only procedural law. In the very
beginning of the IPC it gives the jurisdiction of IPC i.e. Intra-Territorial Jurisdiction, that is
within the extent of India and the other Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction which empowers
Government of India to hold any Indian committing crime outside India. It gives a specific list of
crimes with their definitions and punishment and there is a specific division of crime which was
enacted in 1860, and is still relevant in the modern era. It also defines the liability of the crimes

2
Lal Kalla, Krishan. The Literary Heritage of Kashmir. Jammu and Kashmir: Mittal Publications. p. 75.
Retrieved 19 September 2014.
3
"Law Commission of India - Early Beginnings". Law Commission of India. Retrieved19 September 2014
4
Id
5
Ibid supra note 2

2
where it will be joint and where it will strict and parts on intention has been defined which hold
its relevance till date.

1.1. Research Questions

 What were the conditions which led to the development of IPC?

 How Lord Macaulay was farsighted with his approach in development of IPC?
 How far IPC have been a successful enactment and hold its relevance till date?

1.2. Literature Review

 PSA PILLAI’S Criminal Law

It has systematically and clearly provided an in-depth analysis of all categories of
offences incorporated in the Code. It also offers a critical analysis of reforms that
have been incorporated by the Law Commission and other bodies from time to
time. It is supported by rich authorities.
 KD GAUR CRIMINAL LAW Cases and Materials (7th ed. 2013).
A classic work in the field of criminal law, has been quoted with the approval in
the judgments of various courts in India and abroad. It not only gives a complete
insight into the text of applicable statutes but also provides a succinct analysis of
black letter. The book also traces the history of some of the sections and that was
very helpful in making of this project report.
.

1.3. Research Methodology

The data presented here have been collected from various secondary sources and the doctrinal
method of research has been adopted which has been showed in the chapterisation. Analytical
method of research has been used to analyze the case laws and different sections of IPC to see
the relevance of IPC till date.

3
 CHAPTER 2

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

The dwindling powers of the Hindu rulers their inner battles and contention gave chance to
Muslim intruders to attack and vanquish an extensive piece of Indian Territory and force their
own laws for the organization of criminal equity. The old Hindu law of wrongdoing in this way
slowly offered route to the introduction of Mohammedan law of wrongdoing in Mughal ruled
Indian states. The Mughal rule extended to most part of India except Bombay which remained
out of reach of Mughal invaders and was governed by Hindu Law of crimes until it was annexed
to the British company in 16726.

The Mohammedan law of crime was taken into account the precepts of blessed Quran, be that as
it may it neglected to meet the necessity of such a colossal group and subsequently alterations
were made by method for Sunna i.e. principles of behavior. The Muslim law of crimes
introduced by the Mughal rulers, however, failed to provide impartial and fair justice on account
of certain inherent defects in it7.

Few of the defects of the Mohammedan Law are as follows, that it failed to recognize distinction
between public and private offences, thus the gravest of offence like murder could be initiated on
a private complaint only. The laws of homicide provided that in case of murder, the heirs of the
deceased could be pardon the killer in exchange of pecuniary compensation8. This led to a
tendency to compromise with the murderer and value of human life to exchange of few coins and
promote this kind of offences. The Mohammedan law of crimes has been criticized as being
haphazard, barbarous, irrational and contrary to the principles of civil society which pre-
supposes the State requires an interest in every member of the society and therefore imposes and
obligation upon it to ensure safety and security of its subjects 9. The law of evidence under the
Mohammedan justice system was highly prejudicial to infidels 10. The doctrine of Tazir which

6
The Island of Bombay was transferred by Portuguese to the English Company in 1672.
7
Mittal J.K : Indian Legal History (7th ed.) p.20
8
Harrington’s analysis of Mohammaedan Law of Crimes, Vol. I, Part II, Section 1, p. 284
9
Quoted from Warran Hastings letter dated July 10, 1773
10
Ibid supra note 8.

4
provided for discretionary punishment rendered the penal law uncertain and arbitrary, that apart,
punishments like stoning, flogging, maiming etc. were opposed to the principles of humanity and
justice11.

The British rulers who succeeded Mughals retained the existing Mohammedan criminal law in
priniciple but modified it through frequent amendments and repeals so as to make it more
agreeable to the notions of justice and fair play. While doing so, they were cautious to make sure
that the changes introduced by them in the law do not antagonize the native inhabitants 12. The
process of gradual reformation of the Muslim criminal law was continued until the enactment of
the IPC in 1860.

The changes introduced in the Mohammedan law of crimes by the British East India Company
through various stages may be summarized as follows: changes by Warren Hastings by his
Judicial Plan of 1772 where he established Sadar Nizamat Adalat in Calcutta13, and by which he
assumed complete authority to modify irrational punishments awarded under the provisions of
Mohammedan criminal law so as to be just, fair and reasonable. Similarly there was Criminal
Reform by Lord Cornwallis by the Regulation of 1790. Changes were made in the homicide law
by Regulation XIV of 1797 introduced by Sir John Shore. The contribution of Lord William
Bentinck is no less important in rationalizing the then existing criminal law of India. He imposed
a ban the custom of Sati14which meant burning alive Hindu widow on the pyres of her deceased
husband’s dead body. There was Elphinstone Code15 of 1827 which was applicable in the
presidency of Bombay from 1827 till the penal code came into force in 1860.

In the ultimate analysis it would be seen that the process of gradual reformation of the traditional
Muslim criminal law which was commenced in 1772 was continued until it was completely
abolished as a compulsory system of law applicable to all persons in 1832. It provided great
relief to non-muslims who could now claim exemption from being judged by the Mohammedan
law of crimes. The British rulers justified the changes and modification in Muslim Law of crimes
on the ground that it was contrary to the principles of equity, justice and good conscience.

11
Rankin G.C.: Background to Indian Law, p.166
12
Dr. Pranajape, N.V. : Indian Penal Code, (2nd Ed. 2013) p.6
13
Ibid supra note 8 p. 239
14
Regulation VI of 1832.
15
Dr. N.V. Pranajape: Indian Legal and Constitutional History (6th ed., 2006) p.219

5
Codification of Criminal Law

The process of codification of criminal law began with the Charter of 1833 as multiplicity of
laws prevailing in India caused considerable hardship to the inhabitants residing in different
provinces and, therefore a code of criminal law which could be uniformly applicable all over
India was the need of the time. Considering the urgency of such a law, the First Law
Commission took up codification of criminal law which finally led to the enactment of Indian
Penal Code16 in 1860. Thus, it may be said that the Charter of 1833 marked the commencement
of a new era in the development of law of crimes in India17.

First Law Commission constituted under the chairmanship of Lord Macaulay in 1833 along with
4 members18 more, started the work of codifying the penal law. In 1837 the First Law
Commission submitted its report/draft of penal code to the government. It was also known as
“Macaulay Code”. Though the Draft Penal Code was submitted to the government by the Law
Commission on May 2, 1837 but it could not be enacted immediately. The Governor General-in-
Council directed the Law Commission to prepare law relating to the pleading and procedure. As
a result the First Law Commission prepared the format, forms of pleading and procedure, which
was submitted to the government on Feb 1, 1848. Law Commission became a mere skeleton
after the departure of Lord Macaulay19.

A number of Europeans settled in India and they were even authorized to buy and sell land, but
the applicability of law remained uncertain to them. In other words, there was no lex loci i.e. law
of land for them. The Law Commission was directed to suggest measures to remove this
obscurity of law. Consequently, the commission, in its lex loci report of October 31, 1840
suggested that substantive law of England should be declared as ‘law of the land’, i.e., lex loci
applicable to persons excepting Hindus and Muslims residing in mofussil areas. The Report was
considered to be a unique contribution of the Law Commission in the unification of criminal law
in India as it brought to an end the diversities in laws applicable to non-Hindu and non-Muslims,
but being a sensitive issue the report was criticized and not implemented. But the report served a

16
The Indian Penal Code came into force w.e.f. January 1,1862
17
Ibid supra note 12, p.12
18
Other Members were J.M. Macleod, G.W. Anderson and C.H. Cameron who represented the Presidencies of
Calcutta, Madras and Bombay respectively. F. Millet also joined the commission later on.
19
Keith A.B. : Constitutional History of India, p.13

6
useful purpose in necessary modification in English law and then being implemented in India
and to draw attention of legal experts and the Government towards the difficulties involved in
the process of codification of laws particularly the criminal law in India20.

Second Law Commission was appointed with effect from November, 1853 consisting of seven
members21 for 3 years, with Sir John Romily as its chairman. It submitted four reports with
fourth report in 1856. The Commission underlined the grounds on which the substantive criminal
law was to be codified, and suggested that portion of English law to be adopted which do not
hurt the tradition of the native inhabitants. The Commission was however, opposed to the
codification of personal laws of Hindus and Muslims.

The Penal Code drafted by the First Law Commission under chairmanship of Lord Macaulay
was thoroughly reviewed and revised by Sir Barnes Peacock who was one of the members of the
Second Law Commission and finally enacted as law of crimes in India in 1860.

20
Ibid supra note 12.
21
All seven member were Englishmen

7
 CHAPTER 3

FARSIGHTEDNESS OF MACAULAY

The Indian Penal Code, a comprehensive piece of legislation, originally, had 23 chapters and 511
sections. However, in the course of time, three chapters- V-A (Criminal Conspiracy), IX-A
(Offences Relating to Elections) and XXA (Cruelty by Husband or Relatives of Husband) and a
number of sections have been added numbering to 550, and a few sections have been deleted.
The IPC embodies the general penal law of the country, and it is the sole authority on the general
conditions of liability, the definition of specific offences in the IPC, and the conditions of
exemptions from criminal liability. The Indian Penal Code is an admirable compilation of
substantive criminal law and it is discussed below.

1. Classification of Crimes
With the criminological developments and emergence of correctional techniques for the
treatment of offenders it became necessary to work out an acceptable classification of crimes
and criminals for providing a rational basis of punishment for various categories of offenders.
The classification of offenders is all the more necessary for individualization of punishment
which forms the genesis of correctional and treatment methods for the reformation and
rehabilitation of the offenders in modern penology22. As mentioned in the last line it is about
the modern times but Lord Macaualy in 1837 was a person of long visionary and classified
the crimes into many parts, may not for the rehabilitation of the criminals but may be for the
easy identification and classification of the crimes. In 1837 a code made by him is still
classified and used in the same way is something of great caliber. Crime under IPC is broadly
classified into 2 categories which are further classified.
The provisions under the IPC can broadly be classified into two categories 23, viz, general
principles, and specific offences. General principle relate to the basic principles of criminal
law, criminal liability and provisions relating to general exception from criminal liability and
punishment. These are:

22
Pranajape, supra note 12. p.21
23
Prof. K.D. Gaur, Criminal Law Cases and Materials 4, (7th Ed., Lexis Nexis, 2013).

8
 General Principles: 1) Introduction (ss 1-5), 2) General explanations (ss 6-52A), 3)
Punishments (ss 253-75), 4) General Exceptions (ss 76-106), 5) Abetment (ss 107-120),
Criminal conspiracy (ss 120A-120B) and; 7) Attempts to commit offences (s 511)

Specific Offences: The specific offences under the IPC broadly be classified into six
categories as stated here. 1) Offences affecting the State (ss 121-130), 2) Offences affecting
common well being, 3) Offences affecting Human Body (ch XVI), 4) Offences affecting the
Property (ss 378-462), 5) Offences Relating to Marriage (ss 493-498-A), 6) Offences
affecting Reputation (ss 499-502)

2. General Explanations
The Chapter-II of Indian Penal Code of General Explanation is one of the most important
part of the penal code. The Chapter comprising of Sections 6 to 52-A primarily deals with the
interpretation of terms and words used in IPC. They are defined and explained with a view to
removing any doubt or ambiguity in interpreting different provisions of the Code.
The section 724 of the Code states that the every expression which is explained in any part of
this Code, is used in every part of this Code in conformity with the explanation.
There are many sections in this part which can be said that they are master stroke by Lord
Macaulay but I will be discussing only few here.
Sec. 1025 and Sec. 1126 explains definition of Man, Woman and Person. Where the word
“man” denotes a male human being of any age; the word “woman” denotes a female human
being of any age, while the word “person” includes any company or association, or body of
persons, whether incorporated or not. And this word person still has been the part of the
Constitution of India in the very same meaning.

24
Every expression, which is explained in any part of this Code, is used in every part of this Code in conformity
with the explanation.
25
The word “man” denotes a male human being of any age; the word “woman” denotes a female human being of
any age
26
The word “person” includes any Company or Association or body of persons, whether incorporated or not

9
 In Sec. 1927 and Sec. 2028 the definition of Judge and Court of Justice has been defined and
clearly distinguished which helps in the clear interpretation of the Code.
These are the few General Explanations and is not only used in the code but also used in
other statutes and codes as well and that’s where the greatness of Lord Macaualy lies.

3. Extent of IPC
The Preamble of the Indian Penal Code states to provide a general Penal Code for India 29.
Extent of the IPC has been clearly defined in the Section 2- Section 5. Section 2 30 makes it
clear that the Code i.e., IPC will be uniformly applicable to all persons living in any part of
India and includes acts as well as omissions for which prosecution may be launched against a
person. The words ‘every person’ used in the section implies that even a foreigner who
commits an offence in India will be liable to punishment and it will be no defence for him to
say that he did not know that his act or omission, as the case may be, was an offence in India
because it is not an offence in his own country. However, foreign Sovereigns,
Ambassadors31, alien enemies, foreign warships, etc. are exempted from the jurisdiction of
criminal courts of India like any other country. The President of India and the Governor of
States are exempted from the jurisdiction of the criminal courts under Article 361 of the
Constitution of India.
For the purpose of territorial jurisdiction in case of offences committed on sea, it extends to a
distance of twelve nautical miles measured from the base line, that is 3 miles from the sea-
coast of India. Thus, the Bombay High Court in Kastya Rama’s case32 held the villagers who
sailed out in boats and destroyed the fishing stakes which were lawfully fixed in the sea

27
“Judge”.–The word “Judge” denotes not only every person who is officially designated as a Judge, but also every
person who is empowered by law to give, in any legal proceeding, civil or criminal, a definitive judgment, or a
judgment which, if not appealed against, would be definitive, or a judgment which, if confirmed by some other
authority, would be definitive, orwho is one of a body of persons, which body of persons is empowered by law to
give such a judgment.

28
The words “Court of Justice” denote a judge 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 judge or body of judges is acting judicially
29
The words “British India” have successively been subs. by the A.O. 1948, the A.O. 1950 and Act 3 of 1951, sec. 3
and Sch., to read as above.
30
Every person shall be liable punishment under this Code and not otherwise for every act or omission contrary to
the provisions thereof, of which, he shall be guilty within [India]
31
The United Nations and its representatives and the representatives of other international organizations are
conferred privileges and immunities under the U.N. (Privileges and Immunities) Act, 1947).
32
(1871) 8 BHC (Cr. C) 63.

10
 within three miles from India’s sea-shore criminally liable and they were punished for the
offence of mischief under the IPC.
The Supreme Court in Lee Kun Hee & others v. State of U.P. & others33, observed that
Section 2 of the IPC makes it abundantly clear that the plea of the accused person that they
have foreign nationality, their residence are outside India, and the fact that they were not
present in India when the offence(s) was/were allegedly committed are of no consequence.
Thus, the use of the word ‘every person’ in Section 2 also includes a foreigner who might not
be residing in India or present at the time the offence was committed, but still he may be held
criminally liable under the Penal Code.
Under Section 334 and the succeeding section 435 provide for extra-territorial operation of the
Indian Penal Code. It empowers the Indian Courts to exercise extra-territorial jurisdiction to
try offences committed outside India-on land, high seas and air space.

33
AIR 2012 SC 1007
34
Any person liable, by any 1(Indian law) to be tried for an offence committed beyond 2(India) shall be dealt with
according to the provisions of this Code for any act committed beyond 2(India) in the same manner as if such act had
been committed within 3[India].
1. Subs. by the A.O. 1937 for “law passed by the Governor General of India in Council”.
2. The original words “the limits of the said territories” have successively been amended by the A.O. 1937, the A.O.
1948, the A.O. 1950 and Act 3 of 1951, sec. 3 and Sch., to read as above.
3. The original words “the said territories” have successively been amended by the A.O. 1937, the A.O. 1948, the
A.O. 1950 and Act 3 of 1951, sec. 3 and Sch., to read as above.

35
Extension of Code to extra-territorial offences
1
[4. Extension of Code to extra-territorial offences.
The provisions of this Code apply also to any offence committed by:- 2[(1) Any citizen of India in any place without
and beyond India;(2) Any person on any ship or aircraft registered in India wherever it may be.] Explanation. -In
this section the word “offence” includes every act committed outside 3[India] which, If committed in 3[India], would
be punishable under this code.

4
[Illustration]
5
[*** A, 6[who is 7[a citizen of India]], commits a murder in Uganda. He can be tried and convicted of murder in any
place in 3[India] in which he may be found.
8
[* * *]
1 Subs. by Act 4 of 1898, sec. 2, for the original section.
2 Subs. by the A.O. 1950, for clauses (1) to (4).
3 The words “British India” have been successively amended by the A.O. 1948, the A.O. 1950 and Act 3 of 1951,
sec. 3 and Sch. to read as above.
4 Subs. by Act 36 of 1957, sec. 3 and Sch. II, for “Illustrations” (w.e.f. 17-9-1957).
5 The brackets and letter “(a)” omitted by Act 36 of 1957, sec. 3 and Sch. II (w.e.f. 17-9-1957).
6 Subs. by the A.O. 1948, for “a coolie, who is a Native Indian subject”.
7 Subs. by the A.O. 1950, for “a British subject of Indian domicile”.
8 Illustrations (b), (c) and (d) omitted by the A.O. 1950.

11
 To illustrate, an Indian citizen who commits and offence outside India, which is not an
offence according to the law of the country, would still be liable to be tried in an Indian
Court if it is an offence under the Indian Law. The High Court of Nagpur in Sheikh Haider v.
Syed Issa36, held that an Indian citizen who participates in a child marriage (which is
prohibited by the Child Marriage Restraint Act in India) outside India can be prosecuted for
that offence in India if child marriage is permissible in that foreign country. The IPC also
empowers the Indian Criminal Courts to try offences committed on the high-seas exercising
their admiralty jurisdiction. The principle underlying admiralty jurisdiction is founded on the
assumption that a ship on the high seas is a floating Island belonging to the nation whose flag
she is flying. This jurisdiction extends over: (i) offences committed on Indian ship on the
high seas; (ii) offences committed by foreign ship in Indian territorial waters; and (iii) piracy.
Under section 5, the offences committed in violation of local and special laws are excluded
from the purview of the IPC. Special law may be defined as a law relating to a particular
subject whereas a local law is a law which applies only to particular part of India, example:
The Army Act, 1950, the Navy Act, 1957 and the Indian Air Force Act, 1950 are the special
laws.
Thus, to conclude it can be said that Lord Macaulay at that time while framing the code kept
in mind minute of details and future problems that were yet to arrive. The admiralty
jurisdiction of 3 nautical miles that was even accepted by the Supreme Court and the criminal
cases that will occur when the Indians will go to foreign nation even at the time when India
as a nation does not existed; citizenship was a far sighted idea. He tried to give a uniform
criminal code as foreigner will be governed by the same laws as the Indians and that was
genius of Lord Macaulay.

4. Miscarriage

Miscarriage, also known as spontaneous abortion and pregnancy loss, is the natural death of

an embryo or fetus before it is able to survive independently. Some use the cutoff of 20
weeks of gestation after which fetal death is known as a stillbirth.

36
AIR 1939 Nag. 241

12
 Under section 312 to 316 of the Code deal with the offences affecting human body which are
related to causing of miscarriage or injuries to unborn child.
According to Sec. 31237 causing miscarriage with the consent of woman is an offence
punishable under the Indian Penal Code, whereas the next Sec. 31338 provides punishment for
causing miscarriage without the consent of the pregnant woman. If the woman causes
miscarriage herself, she would also be guilty of an offence under Section 312. However, the
section provides the section provides that if the miscarriage of a woman is caused in a bona
fide in order to save her life, it will not be an offence, similarly is given in sec. 315.
In Queen Empress v. Aruna Bewa39, where the pregnancy was almost mature and attempt to
cause miscarriage resulted in the birth of the child, it was held that the conviction under
Section 312 was bad in law and the acussed should have been convicted under Section
312/511 for attempt to cause miscarriage. The High Court of Delhi has held that the
provisions of Section 312 are applicable to a pregnant woman herself who causes her own
miscarriage.
Under Section 31440, where a person has done an act with the intention to cause miscarriage
of a woman with child or quick with child and it results in death of that woman, he/she shall

37
Causing miscarriage
Whoever voluntarily causes a woman with child to miscarry, shall, if such miscarriage be not caused in good faith
for the purpose of saving the life of the woman, be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both, and, if the woman be quick with child, shall be punished
with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Explanation: A woman who causes herself to miscarry, is within the meaning of this section.

38
Causing miscarriage without woman’s consent
Whoever commits the offence defined in the last preceding section without the consent of the woman, whether the
woman is quick with child or not, shall be punished with [ imprisonment for life] or with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine

39
(1873) 19 WR (Cr) 230
40
Death caused by act done with intent to cause miscarriage-
Whoever, with intent to cause the miscarriage of woman with child, does any act which causes the death of such
woman, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term may extend to ten years, and shall also
be liable to fine. If act done without woman’s consent.— And if the act is done without the consent of the woman,
shall be punished either with 1[imprisonment for life] or with the punishment above mentioned.

Explanation : It is not essential to this offence that the offender should know that the act is likely to cause death.

13
 be guilty of an offence under this section. If the act of miscarriage was being done without
the consent of the pregnant woman and her death occurs while causing miscarriage, the
accused shall be punished.
Miscarriage and intentionally death which was hardly prevalent at that point of time but is a
major problem in this present era, was included in the IPC by Lord Macaulay shows his
farsightedness and genius mind. Even the Supreme Court, Delhi High Court and other
different court appreciate it and is still being enforced without a single change in the
provision except enhancing the punishment that too in 2006.

5. General Overview
The Indian Penal Code is an admirable compilation of substantive criminal law and has many
more features, such as chapter IV on General Expectations which saves the person from
being getting prosecuted on justified ground, with right of private defence being included in
it. Macaulay gave a great difference between Common Intention and Common Object under
Section 3441 and Section 14942 respectively. Detailed law on offences relating to Coin and
Government Stamp, though this was an important part of revenue collection of British but
this much detailed crimes even does not exist or were very rare in those days but genius of
Macaulay laid down in-depth laws for the same. The laws on Adultery were included in the
Code, which was rare in that Indian society was laid down with great precision.

41
Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention.- When a criminal act is done by several
persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner
as if it were done by him alone.
42
Every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in prosecution of common object
If an offence is committed by any member of an unlawful assembly in prosecution of the common object of that
assembly, or such as the members or that assembly knew to be likely to be committed in prosecution of that object,
every person who, at the time of the committing of that offence, is a member of the same assembly, is guilty of that
offence.

14
 CONCLUSION

The Indian Penal Code was intended by its principal drafter, Thomas Babington Macaulay, to
have the qualities of precision, comprehensibility and to be the product of active legislative
engagement rather than judicial law-making with associated features of comprehensiveness and
accessibility.43 The Code is universally acknowledged as a cogently drafted code, ahead of its
time. It has substantially survived for over 150 years in several jurisdictions without major
amendments. Nicholas Phillips, Justice of Supreme Court of United Kingdom applauded the
efficacy and relevance of IPC while commemorating 150 years of IPC. Modern crimes involving
technology unheard of during Macaulay's time fit easily within the Code mainly because of the
broadness of the Code's drafting. IPC has got appraisal from all corners of the legal fraternity as
a proof it is still in existence in a modern world country ‘India’ after so many years of its
commencement in a country which is independent and the code was made for ‘British India’. So
many of the crimes as mentioned in Chapter-3 of the Project were included in the draft of the
penal code of 1837 and from then it has been in existence till date this shows the broad and
farsightedness of Macaulay and thus I can justify the topic “The Indian Penal Code Is A Model
Piece Of Legislation And Is A Standing Tribute To The Genius And Learning Of Lord Macualay
Who Was Its Main Architect.”

43
T.B. Macaulay, J.M. Macleod, G.W. Anderson & F. Millet, A Penal Code prepared by the Indian Law
Commissioners (Pelham Richardson ed., 1838).

15
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Sources

 Indian Penal Code, 1860

Secondary Sources

Books

 Lal, Batuk, Indian Penal Code, 2nd Edition, Central Law Agency, Allahabad, 2012
 Mishra, S.N., Indian Penal Code, 19th Edition, Central Law Publications, Allahabad, 2013
 Saxena, R.N., Indian Penal Code, 19th Edition, Central Law Publications, Allahabad,
2013
 Vibhute, K.I., PSA Pillai’s Criminal Law, 11th Edition, Lexis Nexis, Butterworths
Wadhwa Nagpur, Gurgaon, 2012
 Ratanlal & Dhirajlal, The Indian Penal Code, 32nded., Lexisnexis Publications, India,
2013

Articles

 Cheong-Wing Chan, Barry Wright and Stanley Yeo eds., Codification, Macaulay and the
Indian Penal Code: The Legacies and Modern Challenges of Criminal Law Reform ,
Ashgate UK, 2011

16
  David Skuy, Macaulay and the Indian Penal Code of 1862: The Myth of the Inherent
Superiority and Modernity of the English Legal System Compared to India’s Legal
System in the Nineteenth Century, Vol. 32, Issue-03, Modern Asian Studies, 1998

Internet Sources

 http://www.ashgate.com/isbn/9781409424420
 http://www.barcouncilofindia.org/about/about-the-legal-profession/legal-education-in-
the-united-kingdom/
 http://www.law.uq.edu.au/documents/research-sem-series/Wright-IPC-UQSeminar-
5mar2010.pdf

17