• CRIME .

ANS.
Synposis -
1. Introduction
2. Definition
3. Nature
4. Essentials Elements
5. Stages of Crime
6. Case Law
7. Conclusion

INTRODUCTION —
Crime is an action that is against the law or rule written by a government
body. Crime is an action or omission which constitutes an offence and is punishable by law. Act
that causes physical or psychological harm, damage or loss of property and is against the law.
Violation of any rule of administration or laws of the state is also a crime. Practicing any
wrong-doing and harmful to self or against constitutes crime. To commit a crime there should be
a guilty mind and physical act. Without these two elements crime is not possible. There are
some exceptions to it like strict liability etc. Crime is something that is set by social codes of the
country we live in , and if broken then a penalty should be paid.

DEFINITION —

Crime defines that an act harmful not only to an individual or individuals, but also to the society
or the state. Such act are punishable by law.

Many jurists have defined crime in their own ways sum of which are as under :
a. “Blackstone” - define crime as an act committed or omitted in violation of public law
either for beating of commanding it. (Crime as public wrong)
b. “Stephen” – observed a crime is an act not only punishable by law but also revolting or
a hurt to the moral sentiments of society. (Crime as moral wrong).

NATURE OF CRIME —

The nature of crime is changing due to the changes in the society and the environment. Today
one cannot view crime with a single perspective alone. This is because of the changing notions
about crime from time to time and place to place. Two of the common views that explain the
nature of crime are its condition as being a social construct and being an individual criminality.
Any act which is a crime today may not be a crime tomorrow if the legislature so decides. For
instance polygamy, dowry, untouchability are now crimes that were not so a few years ago.

ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF CRIME —

 1. Human Being - Human being must commit wrongful Act to fulfill first element of a crime
that means any non-living thing or animals are not considered in this category. He/She
must not be an infanoned or incent person and must be a normal adult human being to
obey the law.

2. Mens Rea or Guilty Intention - The second element is derived from the famous maxim
Actus Non-Facit Reum Nisi Mens Sit Rea, which means that the guilty intention and
guilty act together constitute a crime. In criminal proceedings, no one can be punished
unless it can be proven that he or she has a guilty mind. Mens rea which can be
explained in various forms a guilty mind; a guilty or wrongful purpose; a criminal intent,
guilty knowledge and willfulness all constitute the same thing that mens rea. Therefore,
there can be no crime of any nature without mens rea or evil mind.

3. Actus Reus or Guilty Act - Actus Reus is the physical aspect of a crime. The accused
needs to have to do something, resulting in injury to the plaintiff, or the victim. There can
be no offense and no lawsuit for damages without a criminal act. An act will only be
called a crime if both the elements are present. The guilty intention of person leads them
to act in accordance to it and hence it turns into crime.

4. Injury or Harm - According to Section 44 of IPC, 1860 the injury or denotes any harm
whatever illegally caused to any person in body, mind, reputation or property. For a
particular crime to take place it necessary for the injury to occur. After having guilty mind
and doing the guilty act if the injury does not occur then that crime is not considered as
committed.

STAGES OF CRIME —

1. Intention - The Intention is first intial stage in the commission of crime and this stage
has not been punishable under the IPC. Actus Reus is the physical act which a person
does and mens rea is the 'guilty mind' with which a crime is committed. The element of
Mens rea is indicated by use of words such as intention, malice, fraudulent, recklessness
etc. Therefore, Intention is not punishable until it is converted into act.

2. Preparation – Preparation is the second stage amongst the stages of crime. It means to
arrange the necessary resources for the execution of the crime. Intention and
preparation alone are not enough to constitute a crime. Preparation of a crime shall not
be punishable. The reason behind this general rule is that it is nearly impossible to prove
that the accused made the preparation to execute the crime. But there are also some
exceptions :
a. Preparation to wage war against the Government (u/s.122)
b. Intent to commit dacoit (u/s. 399) and etc.

3. Attempt - Attempt is the Third stage amongst the stages of crime. Once all essential
preparations have been done, an attempt can be defined as "the direct step toward
 committing a crime." A single section has been established for both completed offences
and attempted offences, with the same sentence being applied to both.
Following Sections Are Punishable under attempts to :
a. Attempt to commit Murder (Section 307)
b. Attempt to commit Culpable Homicide (Section 308)
c. Attempt to commit Sucide (Section 309)
d. Attempt to commit Robbery (Section 393)
e. Attempt to commit Robbery or Dacoity when armed with deadly weapons.
And etc. Are given in Indian Penal Code of 1860.

4. Commission - It is the last stage of the commission of a crime. This is the stage where the
offender has crossed all the three initial stages i.e., intention, preparation, and attempt. At this
stage, the person completes the actus reus. The act would also include omission. If the accused
becomes successful in his attempt to commit the crime, he will be guilty of the complete offense.
Moreover, if his attempt is unsuccessful he will be guilty of his attempt.

CASE LAWS (stages of crime) —

i. State of Maharashtra V. Mohd. Yakub, AIR 1980 SC 1111 :
Case states that mere intention cannot be sufficient grounds to prove a person guilty. To convict
a person, the completion of an attempt must be done. Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872
states the difference between oral and documentary evidence and other types of evidence.

ii. Madan Lal v. State of Rajasthan (1986) :

In this case, the convict was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years when found
guilty of attempting to commit rape of the victim under Section 376 read with Section 511 of the
Code

CONCLUSION — A crime is thus an act in violation of a criminal law for which a punishment is
prescribed; the person committing it must have intended to do so and must have done so
without legally acceptable defense or justification. Crime is a deliberate act that causes physical
or psychological harm, damage to or loss of property, and is against the law.
______________x_________________x_______x___________

Q.Principles of Criminal Liability.

Ans.
INTRODUCTION -
A person is liable or responsible for a crime when he or she has acted with criminal
intent, as opposed to acting accidentally or lacking the ability to act deliberately. In Simple
words, Responsibility for any illegal behaviour that causes harm or damage to someone or
something. A person can be found liable for a crime if the prosecution proves that the person
committed the criminal act (such as stealing) and had the required intent to hold the person
accountable (such as intent to deprive the owner of the property).
 It is generally agreed that the essential ingredients of any crime are (1) a voluntary act or
omission (actus reus), accompanied by (2) a certain state of mind (mens rea). An act may be
any kind of voluntary human behaviour.

GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY —

1. Actus Reus — The Latin term ‘actus reus’ implies ‘guilty act.’ The physical component
of a crime is known as actus reus.There can be no offense and no lawsuit for damages
without a criminal act. Actus Reus is made of three constituent parts namely -
a. Human Being – the first essential part of crime is that the offender or accused
must be a human being.
b. Result of Conduct – An act done by human being which brought into result by a
physical event which law prohibits. For example, In case of murder the death is
caused by the conduct of the accused, which is actus reus.
c. Acts Prohibited by law – Only those acts are crimes which are prohibited by law.
Thus no act is a crime unless prohibited by law. For example, no crime is
committed when a soldier in a battlefield shoots an enemy because the act is
authorised by law.

● Mens Rea – Mens rea is a Latin word that translates to “guilty mind.” The famous
maxim “Actus Non-Facit Reum Nisi Mens Sit Rea”, which means that the guilty intention
and guilty act together constitute a crime.To appreciate the meaning of Mens Rea it is
necessary to have a clear conception of words like intention, motive, knowledge,
recklessness and negligence, etc,
a. Intention : There is always the presence of knowledge with the presence of
Intention.
b. Knowledge - Knowledge attracts lesser culpability if there is absence of Intention.
c. Recklessness - Recklessness signifies a state of being mentally indifferent to
obvious risk. Higher degree than negligence because there is a certain risk for
which the individual decides to remain indifferent.
d. Negligence - When there is required a certain degree of due care or caution and
the individual lacks in the aspect of care and precaution is termed to be behaving
negligently.

CASE LAWS On “Mens Rea” —

1. B. Nathulal vs. State of M.P. (AIR 1966 SC 43):

In this case, the accused/a food grain dealer applied for a licence and deposited the
requisite licence fee. He, without knowledge of rejection of his application, purchased
food grains and sent returns to the Licencing Authority, who on checking, found that it
was in excess of the quantity permitted by Section 7 of MP Food Grains Dealers
Licensing Order, 1958. The accused was prosecuted. However he was acquitted on the
ground that he had no guilty mind.
 2. C. Malhan K.A. vs. Kora Bibi Kutti (1996 SCC 281):
The accused was a financier. He seized a vehicle for which he financed but did not
receive the instalments. The person from whom the vehicle was seized complained to
Police alleging that the accused had stolen his vehicle. The Supreme Court held that the
element of mens rea is totally wanting in this case and the accused cannot be convicted
for the offence of theft under Section 379.

CONCLUSION — Each and every offence under IPC has its ingredients mentioned not only in
regard to what the accused must have done but also the state of his mind. The act becomes a
crime when the actor does it with a guilty mind. The concept of a guilty mind is very wide. It
includes intention, motive, knowledge, recklessness and negligence etc. Guilty mind is an
intention to do that act which he knows to be wrongful or prohibited by law.
__________________X__________________X______________

Q. Intra- Territorial and Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction. / Jurisdiction under IPC 1860.

Ans.
INTRODUCTION —
Indian Penal Code is to provide a general penal code for India. Section 1 of the Indian Penal
Code explains the extent and application of the act. According to it, IPC extends to whole of
India including the union territory of Jammu and Kashmir. Indian penal code is a substantive law
which prescribe rights and liabilities of parties. When a crime is committed within the territory of
India, IPC shall apply and court can punish that the person who had committed the crime is an
Indian national or foreigner.

MEANING OF JURISDICTION — Jurisdiction means an official power to make legal decisions

and judgements. It is an aspect of state sovereignty and it refers to judicial, legislative and
administrative competence. Jurisdiction may be defined as power or authority of a court to hear
and determine a case, to adjudicate and exercise any judicial power in relation to it by taking
cognizance of matters presented before the court.

TYPES OF JURISDICTION UNDER INDIAN PENAL CODE —

1. Intra-Territorial Jurisdiction (Section 2) –

Section 2 of the Indian penal Code provides that, Every Person shall be liable to
punishment under this code and not otherwise for any act or omission committed
contrary to the provision of this code for which he shall be guilty within India. It also
provides that an offence must be committed by a person; it doesn’t provide that it is
necessary for that person to be a citizen of India. If a person is within the territory of the
Indian subcontinent then he shall be made liable under Indian Penal Code.
The only essential required under this section is that the person committing the
crime should commit any act or omission within the territory of India.

Exceptions under the intra-territorial jurisdiction -

 Some classes of people are considered as exception from the liability under jurisdiction
of Indian Penal Code these exceptions are as follow :
a. The President and the Governor of the State :- Under Article 361of
Constitution of India, the President and the Governor of States are exempted
from civil and criminal proceedings.
b. Foreign Sovereigns :- A foreign Sovereign cannot be punished under the code
according to the rules of international law.
c. Officers of the UNO and its institutions :- UN is an intergovernmental
organisation. Above organisation and its institution are not liable for the
jurisdiction of criminal courts because,It has its branches and affiliated institutions
in each and every country.
d. Ambassadors :- An ambassador cannot be punished under the code according
to the rules of international law. They enjoy the same immunity as the Sovereign
or the State, which they represent.
e. Alien Enemies :- The military persons of alien enemies cannot be tried by
Criminal Courts of India in respect of their acts of war. For acts of war, they shall
be dealt under martial law.
f. Foreign Army :- When by consent of one State the armies of other State are on
the soil they are not liable to the jurisdiction of the State.
g. Warships :- Warships of one State, when in foreign waters, are not liable to the
jurisdiction of the State within whose territorial jurisdiction they are. This is
according to the rules of international law.

● Case Law –
i. Mobarak Ali vs. State of Bombay AIR 1957 SC 857 :
In this case, the issue before the honourable supreme court was whether physical
presence of accused within India is essential or not. The Supreme court held that for
application of Indian Penal Code, offence must be committed within the territory of India.
Physical presence of accused within the territory of India is not necessary.

2. Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction (Section 3&4) —

Section 3 and 4 of IPC deals with extra territorial jurisdiction. Extraterritorial jurisdiction is the
situation when a state extends its legal power beyond its territorial boundaries.
Example : A, who is a citizen of India, commits a murder in Uganda. He can be tried and
convicted of murder in any place in India, would be punishable under the Indian Penal Code.

In exercise of their extraterritorial jurisdiction, Indian courts are empowered to try offences
committed outside India:
a. On Land :- Indian courts can take action against offences committed outside the territory
of India. Provisions given under Criminal procedure Code which lays down that if the
offence is committed by -
i. Any citizen of India in any place behind India.
 ii. Any person on any ship or aircraft registered in India, wherever it may be.
iii. Any person targeting computer resources in India.
b. On High Seas :- The jurisdiction to try offences committed on high seas is known as
Admiralty Jurisdiction. Presumed that ship on the high seas is a floating island belonging
to the nation whose flag is flying.
c. On Aircraft :- The provision of the IPC also applies to any offence committed by any
person on any aircraft registered in India, wherever it may be.

● Case Laws –
i.Remia v. Sub-Inspector of Police : An Indian citizen, murdered another Indian citizen
in Sharjah, UAE. After the Police refused to file an FIR as they believed to not have
jurisdiction over the case. Later, the Court directed the Police to file an FIR.
ii.Mohamed Sajeed v. State of Kerala : The division bench ruled that Police could
investigate into a foreign country however the prior sanction of the Central Government
for purposes of investigation is not necessary.

CONCLUSION — Jurisdiction refers to the practical authority or the dominion which is conferred
upon a legal body so that it can administer justice within that defined field of authority.
Jurisdiction with respect to a judicial authority is the limit or the extent of judicial authority it has
over dealing with the cases, appeals and other legal proceedings.
_____________X_______________X_____________X________.

Q. Right Of Private Defence Of Body & Property.

Ans.
● INTRODUCTION —
The right of private defence is one of the most important rights recognized by all civilized
communities. This right is one of the most important foundations of a person life and therefore,
the same must be provided and maintained in every country. Accordingly, the right of private
defence of both the person and the property has been recognized and granted under the I.P.C.
The laws relating to private defence deals under section 96 to 106 of the Indian Penal Code.

● PROVISIONS FOR RIGHT OF PRIVATE DEFENCE —

Section 96 : Things done in private defence –

Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence.

Section 97 : Right of private defence of body and property –

Each individual has a right to defend himself, i.e., his body or the body of any other person.
Similarly, he has the right to protect his property or else’s property, whether movable or
immovable against an act which amounts to an offense of theft, robbery, mischief, or criminal
trespass.
Section 98 : Right of private defence against the act of person of unsound mind,etc –
The right of private defense also exists in cases that would not result in an offense due to the
want of maturity of understanding, the unsoundness of mind or the intoxication of the person
doing that act, or by reason of any misconception on behalf of the person.

● LIMITATIONS / RESTRICTIONS ON RIGHT OF PRIVATE DEFENCE (Section 99) —

1. No Plea of Private Defence against Private Defence –

This right is available against an offence and, therefore, where an act is done in exercise of the
right of private defence such act cannot give rise to any right of private defence in favour of the
aggressor in return.

2. Cannot exceed the right of private Defence –

This would seem to be so even if the person exercising the right of private defence has the
better of his aggressor provided of course he does not exceed his right because the moment he
exceeds it; he commits an offence.

3. No Right of PrivateDefence if there was time to contact police –

There is also no right of private defence in cases where there is time to have recourse to the
protection of public authorities. The right of private defence is essentially a defensive right
circumscribed by the statute, available only when the circumstances clearly justify it.

● RIGHT OF PRIVATE DEFENCE OF BODY (Section 100 to 103) —

Every person has a right of private defence of own body and the body of any other person
against any offence affecting the human body. Right of private defence of body divided into two
parts -
a. Right of private defence of body extent to causing death
b. Right of private defence of body extent to causing any harm other than death.

Section 100 : when the right of private defence of the body extent to causing death –
Right of private defence of body extent to causing death if assault is of such a nature that it
causes -
a. Reasonable apprehension of death.
b. Reasonable apprehension of a grievous heart.
c. If the assault is with the intention to commit rape.
d. If the assault is with the intention to gratifying unnatural lust.
e. If the assault is with the intention to commit kidnapping or abduction.
f. If the assault is with the intention to commit wrongful confinement under such
circumstances, Recourse to the public authority cannot be obtained for his release.
g. Acid attack which causes apprehension of a grievous heart.
Section 101 : when the right of private defence of body extends to cause any harm other
than death –
If assault is of such a nature that which is not innumerated under section 100 then the right of
private defence of the body extends to cause any harm other than death.

Section 102 : commencement and continuance of the right of private defence of the body
–
→When reasonable apprehension to the body commenced, Right of private defence of the body
commenced.
→When reasonable apprehension to the body continues, the right of private defence of the
body continues.
→when reasonable apprehension of the body comes to an end, the right of private defence of
the body comes to end.

● RIGHT OF PRIVATE DEFENCE OF PROPERTY —

Every person has right of private defence of own property and property of another person. Right
of private defence of property is divided into two parts :
a. When the right of private defence of property extends causing death.
b. When the right of private defence of property extends to causing any harm other than
death.

Section 103 : When the right of private defence of property extend to causing death –
Right of private defence of property in case of causing death in case of :
a. Robbery
b. House-breaking by night
c. Mischief by fire to any property or Building.
d. Theft under such circumstances that causes reasonable apprehension of death.

Section 104 : When right of private defence of property extends to causing any harm
other than death –
When right of private defence of property extend to cause any harm other than death if offenses
against property is of such nature that which is not innmurated. Under section 103 the right or
private difference of property extend to cause any harm other than death.

Section 105 : commencement and continuance of the right of private defence of the
property –
When reasonable apprehension to the property commenced, Right of private difference of
property commenced.
Right of private defence of property continues until –
a. Property has been recovered.
b. Offender effected restrict with the Property.
c. When there is time to have recourse to public authority.
Section 106 : right of private defence against a deadly assault when there is risk of harm
to innocent person –
If in the exercise of right of private defence against an assault which causes reasonable
apprehension of death, the defender is so situated that he cannot perform his right of private
defence by risk or harm to an innocent.
Example : a is attacked by mob who attempted to murder him he cannot effectually exercise is
right of private defence without firing on the mob and he cannot fire without risk of harming
young children who are mingled with the mob a commits no offence by so firing he harms any of
the children.

CASE LAWS —
i. Hukum Singh vs. State of UP, 1962 :
where the accused were forcibly taking their carts loaded with sugarcane through the field of
one H and which there where standing crops, it was held that H had the right to prevent the
accused from committing criminal trespass howsoever short the distance was and the right of
private defence did not come to an end until the accused left the field.

ii. Madan Mohan Pandey vs. State of UP, AIR 1991 S.C. 769 :
The appellant Madan Mohan Pandey along with his father Laxmi Shankar Pandey and brother
Hirdaya Narain Pandey were tried for offences under Sections 302, 304 and 307 read with
Section 34, I.P.C. The trial Court convicted all the three of them under Section 304 I read with
Section 4, I.P.C. and sentenced the appellant to undergo six years imprisonment and the rest to
two years imprisonment.

CONCLUSION —
The right of private defence of body and property enumerated from section 96 to 106 of IPC are
wider than English law. Under Indian law even stranger may defend the person or property of
another the right of private defence is not absolute but there are certain restrictions on it. The
burden of proof is on the accused to bring his case under the preview of right or private defence.

______________X________________X______________

Q. Abetment.
Ans.

INTRODUCTION — section 107 2120 of IPC deals with the provisions of abetment. Abatement
of a thing which constitutes an offence is an offence.

MEANING OF ABETMENT —

Section 107 - defines the meaning of abetment, in general to abet means to instigate, to help,
to encourage to put in execution his criminal intension. Abetment consist of three act which is
laid down in section 107:
1.Abetment by instigation :
In common it is said that one can motivate other in two possible ways which is motivating one
for good cause and motivating other for bad cause which is abetment by instigation and hence,
held liable for such instigation irrespective of the act abetted be committed or not.
2.Abetment by conspiracy :
Abetment by conspiracy involves engaging with one or more person in any conspiracy for
the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes in pursuance of that conspiracy.
Example : Servant of a house conspired with thieves and didn't lock the main gate of the
house.
3.Abetment by Aid :
Abetment may take place is by intentionally aiding the offender in committing that offence.
This generally happens when the abettor facilitates the crime or helps in committing it. The
intention to aid the offender is very important.
Example : merely/simply giving food or clothing to an alleged offender may not be
punishable. But giving him food, clothing and shelter to help him hide from the police or commit
a crime is punishable.

ABETMENT AND ITS PROVISIONS —

Abettor (Section 108) - A person abets an offence, which either encourages the commission of
an offence, or an act which would constitute an offence, if committed by a person legally
competent to commit the offence, with the same intention or with the same knowledge as the
abettor.

Provisions / Explanation :
1. Illegal omission -
A spectator is not an abettor. But an act of illegal omission may qualify as an offence.
(For ex. Police not taking action while crime is in process).
2. To constitute the offence of abetment it is not necessary that the act abetted should be
committed. Result is not necessary for holding Abettor Liable. (For ex. A instigates be to
murder C. B refused to do so. A is guilty of abetting B to commit Murder).
3. Abettor is still liable if the abetted is incompetent to commit a crime.(For ex. A with a
guilty intention, abets a child or a lunatic by handing a gun to commit crime against C).
4. Abetment of an Abetment is also a crime.(For ex. A instigates B to instigates C to murder
Z).
5. Not necessary that conspiracy is with the person who commits the crime. Only necessity
is that the abettor has engaged in the conspiracy.

Section 108A : if abetment is done in India but the act has committed outside India it is also
Punishable.
PUNISHMENT FOR ABETMENT —
Section 109 to 120 of .P.C. deals with the provisions of punishment for various acts of abetment.

Punishment for abetment of an offence punishable with death sentence or imprisonment

of life –
If Act is committed - Abettor shall be punished with 14 years of imprisonment.
If act is not committed - " for 7 yrs

Punishment of an offence punishable with other than death sentence or life

imprisonment -
If act is committed - Abettor shall be punished with ½ .
If act is not committed - " ¼.

CASE LAW —
i. Brij Lal & State of punjab v/s Prem Chand : The Supreme Court held that if any person
commit suicide who ever abets the commission of such suicide shall be punishable for term ten
years and fine.

ii. Emp v/s Umi : in this case even though priest was knowing that this is bigamous marriage
intentionally aided such marriage he was criminally liable for commission of act or abetment by
aid.

CONCLUSION — Abetment of an offense is an offense. Abetment means to instigate

encourage the commission of an offense.
____________________X________________X_______________

Q.Offences against Public Tranquility.

Ans.
INTRODUCTION — Section 141 to 160 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the offences
against Public Tranquility that the offences against Public peace. Section 141 of the act defines
the term ‘Unlawful Assembly’. Section 146 defines the term ‘Rioting’. Section 159 defines the
term ‘Affray’. Vicarious Liability is provided u/s. 141 of the IPC, in case of common object.

DEFINITION OF UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY —

Section 141 : Unlawful Assembly — an assembly of 5 or more persons is designated as
unlawful assembly if the common object of the persons composing that assembly is :
a. to intimidate to show of criminal force to parliament, state & central government, state
legislature or public servant.
b. To resist the execution of any law, or of any legal process; or
c. To commit any mischief or criminal trespass, or other offence; or
d. To obtain possession of any property or to dispose of any person from any property
unlawfully.
e. To compel any person to do an act which he is not legally bound to do or not to do an act
which he is legally bound to do.
Explanation - An assembly which was not unlawful when it was assembled subsequently
became an unlawful assembly.

MEMBER OF UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY —

Section 142 : Being a member of Unlawful Assembly -
whoever, being aware of facts which render any assembly an unlawful assembly intentionally
joins that assembly is said to be a member of an unlawful assembly.

PUNISHMENT —
Section 143 : whoever is a member of an unlocal assembly shall be punished with
imprisonment which may extend to 6 months or with fine or with both.

Difference between common intention and common object -

1.Common Intention -
a. It is provided under section 34 based on common intention.
b. There must be two or more people.
c. Prior meeting of mind is necessary.
d. It is not a substantive offence. It is the rule of evidence.
e. All the persons involved in committing the crime are equally liable.
2.Common Object -
a. It is provided under section 149 based on common object.
b. There must be five or more people.
c. Pre-planned or prior meeting of mind is not necessary.
d. It is a substantive offence.
e. All the persons involved in committing the crime may or may not be equally liable.

DEFINITION OF RIOT —
Section 146 : whenever force or violence is used by any member of an unlawful assembly in
prosecution of the common object of such assembly every member of such assembly is guilty of
the offence of rioting.

PUNISHMENT FOR RIOTING —

Section 147 : whoever is guilty of rioting shall be punished with 2 years imprisonment or with
fine or with both.

DEFINITION OF AFFRAY —
Section 159 : When two or more persons, by fighting in a public place, disturb the public peace,
they are said to commit an affray.

PUNISHMENT FOR AFFRAY —

Section 160 :
Whoever commits an affray shall be punished with one month imprisonment or with fine which
may extend to one hundred rupees or both.

CASE LAW —
i. State of Maharashtra v/s Joseph Mingel Koli, 1997 : In this case Bombay High Court held
that, every member of an unlawful assembly is vicariously liable for the act done by the others
either in the prosecution of the common object of the unlawful assembly or such which the
members of unlawful assembly knew were likely to be committed.
ii. Bishambhar Bhagat v/s State : In this case Supreme Court held that the expression
common object denotes a mental purpose. Mere presence does not amount to membership of
unlawful assembly, if there is no mental participation.

CONCLUSION —
Chapter eighth of the Indian Penal Code deals with the offences against public tranquillity.
These are offences which are committed against the whole society and disturbs the peace and
tranquillity of the society. Any offence committed against an individual, but still could derange
the public peace would come under the ambit of a public offence. Moreover, it is not necessary
that actual offence is committed, but even if there is a possibility of causing public disorder, then
it is a punishable offence
__________________X___________________X_____________
Q. Every Culpable Homicide is not a murder.
Ans.
INTRODUCTION —
The word homicide comes from the Latin word ‘Homa’ means human being and ‘cide’ means
killing hence homicide means killing of a human being by a human being. Homicide can be both
lawful and unlawful.
Lawful homicides are those which are covered by the general exceptions under section
762 106 in IPC. All such homicides are not regarded as wrongs and hence they are not
subjected to punishment for example when death is caused by accident under section 80 or in
exercise of right of private defence of body under section 100 etc.

DEFINITION —
Section 299 : “Whoever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death , or
with the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death, commits the offence of Culpable
Homicide.”

ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS —
The following are the essential elements of culpable homicide :
(a) the intention of causing death; or
(b) the intention of causing bodily injury likely to cause death; or
(c) with the knowledge that such an act is likely to cause death.

EXPLANATIONS —
Explanation 1 : A person who causes bodily injury to another who is labouring under a disorder,
disease or bodily infirmity, and thereby accelerates the death of that other, shall be deemed to
have caused his death.
Explanation 2 : Where death is caused by bodily injury, the person who causes such bodily
injury shall be deemed to have caused the death, although by resorting to proper remedies and
skilful treatment the death might have been prevented.
Explanation 3 : The causing of the death of a child in the mother s womb is not homicide. But it
may amount to culpable homicide to cause the death of a living child, if any part of that child has
been brought forth, though the child may not have breathed or been completely born.

EXCEPTIONS —
S.300 lays down five different circumstances under which the offence of murder reduced to that
culpable homicide not amounting to murder. These are all the defences which the accused
person has to prove if he is charged for the offence of murder. Following are the exceptions
which reduce the offence of murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder :
1.Grave and Sudden Provocation : Culpable homicide is not murder if the offender, whilst
deprived of the power of self-control by grave and sudden provocation, causes the death of the
person who gave the provocation or causes the death of any other person by mistake or
accident.
The above exception is subject to the following provisions :
1. That the provocation is not sought or voluntarily provoked by the offender as an excuse
for killing or doing harm to any person.
2. That the provocation is not given by any thing done in obedience to the law, or by a
public servant in the lawful exercise of the powers of such public servant.
2. Exceeding right of private defence :
Cal table homicide is not murder if the offender in the exercise in good faith of the right of private
defence of persons or property exceed the power given to him by law and causes the death of
the person against whom he is exercising such right of private defence without premeditiation,
and without any intention of doing more harm than is necessary for the purpose of such
defence.
3.Public servant exceeding his power :
Is not murder if the offender being a public servant or adding a public servant acting for the
advancement of public justice exit the power given to him by law and causes death by doing an
act which he, in good faith believes to be lawful.
4. Sudden fight :
Culpable homicide is not murder if it is committed without premeditation in a sudden fight in the
heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel and without the offenders having taken undue advantage
or acted in a cruel or on usual manner.
5. Death caused with consent of the victim :
Culpable Homicide is not murder when the person who is that is caused being about the age of
18 years suffers death or takes the risk of death with his own consent.

CASE LAW —
i. K.M.Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1962, SC 605 :
The High Court agreed with the prosecution's argument that the murder was premeditated and
sentenced Nanavati to life imprisonment for culpable homicide amounting to murder. On 24
November 1961, the Supreme Court of India upheld the conviction.
ii. Hariba Ashruba Shelar v. State of Maharashtra, 2001 :
Supreme Court held that, when the appellant inflicted a solitary sickle blow on the neck of the
deceased at the highest he had the knowledge of his death, contemplated by clause three of
S.299 of I.P.C., the breach of which in punishable u/s 304 part II of I.P.C.

CONCLUSION —
In Culpable homicide not amounting to murder, there is no possibility of justification for causing
death in the court of law. Therefore punishment is obvious to the wrongdoer. There is intention
to cause death or knowledge that the accused is likely by such act to cause death. It is unlawful
homicide. But death is not certain.
__________________X__________________X________________

Q. Rape.
Ans.
Introduction – Rape is violative of the victim’s fundamental right under Article 21 of the Indian
Constitution. It is the most morally and physically abhorrent crime in society since it violates the
victim’s body, mind, and privacy.

Section 375 —
A man is said to commit "rape" if he –
a. penetrates his penis, to any extent, into the vagina, mouth, urethra or anus of a woman
or makes her to do so with him or any other person; or
b. inserts, to any extent, any object or a part of the body, not being the penis, into the
vagina, the urethra or anus of a woman or makes her to do so with him or any other
person; or
c. manipulates any part of the body of a woman so as to cause penetration into the vagina,
urethra, anus or any part of body of such woman or makes her to do so with him or any
other person; or
d. applies his mouth to the vagina, anus, urethra of a woman or makes her to do so with
him or any other person,
Acts falling under circumstances given below constitutes rape :
First – Against her will.
Secondly – Without her consent.
Thirdly – With her consent, when her consent has been obtained by putting her or any person in
whom she is interested, in fear of death or of hurt.
Fourthly – 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 or believes
herself to be lawfully married.
Fifthly – With her consent when, at the time of giving 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.
Sixthly –With or without her consent, when she is under eighteen years of age.
Seventhly – When she is unable to communicate consent.

EXPLANATIONS —
1. For the purposes of this section, "vagina" shall also include labia majora.
2. Consent means an unequivocal voluntary agreement when the woman by words,
gestures or any form of verbal or non-verbal communication, communicates willingness
to participate in the specific sexual act:
Provided that a woman who does not physically resist to the act of penetration shall not by the
reason only of that fact, be regarded as consenting to the sexual activity.

EXCEPTIONS —
1. A medical procedure or intervention shall not constitute rape.
2. Sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under
fifteen years of age, is not rape.

IMPORTANT AMENDMENTS IN RAPE LAWS —

i. 'Tukaram v. State of Maharashtra' (AIR 1979 SC 185) –

Also known as (Mathura Bai Rape Case'. This was a case in context of 'custodial rape'. The
result of this Judgement was the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1983
Major changes in this context of rape through this amendment were:
a. Burden of proof of proving that consent was present lies on the accused.
b. Custodial rape brought in purview of rape under 376 (2)
c. Section 376A-376D were added.
d. Disclosing identity of victim punishable (added Section 228A in IPC)
ii.. Nirbhaya Case/2012 Delhi Gang Rape Case : Resulted in Criminal law (Amendment)
Ordinance,2013. This case were also called the Nirbhaya Act, Anti-Rape Act. Based on the
recommendations of 'Justice Verma Committee'. Recommendations of the committee :
a. Increased punishments for rape (not death penalty though)
b. Increased punishments for other sexual offences like Voyeurism, acid attacks etc.
c. Stricter provisions for registering complaints of rape.
d. Bill of Rights for women which gives dignity and respect to women over their choices of
sexual relationships and for their sexual autonomy.
iii. Kathua Rape Case 2018 :
Resulted in Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance, 2018. The main objective of the amendment
was to give harsher punishment to perpetrators of rape, especially for the rape of minor girls
below 16 years and 12 years.Provisions for speedy investigations and trial and appeals (Cr.P.C)
:
a. Investigation - 2 months
b. Trial 2 months
c. Disposal of Appeal - 6 months
No provision for anticipatory bail for a person accused for rape or gang rape of a girl below 16
years of age.If different punishments in IPC and POCSO (The protection of children from
sexual offences act, 2012), then the punishment which is higher will be given.
CONCLUSION —
India is a country where women enjoy a high social status, but we still lack strict protections for
them. We have a number of laws in place to protect their lives, but they appear to have
numerous loopholes. Rape is considered the most horrific crime perpetrated against women,
and statistics show that rape is very common in India. There is a significant difference between
will and consent. There is a proper definition of consent under the Indian Penal Code.
_________________X__________________X_______________
Q. Offences Against Property and Person,etc.
Ans.
INTRODUCTION — Any offences committed related to the property whether movable or
immovable will be punishable under the provisions of Indian Penal Code, 1860. Provisions for
offences relating to the property have been enumerated under Section 378 to Section 460 of
this code.
DEFINITION OF THEFT —
SECTION 378 : Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any moveable 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.
Essential Elements —
A.Dishonest Intention : He, whoever does an act with intention to cause wrongful gain to one
and wrongful loss to another.
a. Wrongful gain - is again by a wrongful means of property to a person who is not legally
entitled to that property.
b. Wrongful loss - loss by unlawful means of property to a person who is entitled to that
property.
B. Movable Property : It is that property which is not immovable property. Immovable property
consist all those properties, things, -
a. which are rooted in earth- natural e.g. trees.
b. which are embedded in the earth-artificial- walls.
c. which are permanently fastened to the earth. i.e. ceiling fan, black board.
C. Without Consent : There is no consent of person possessing the things.
D. Moved out of possession - subject matter of property it should be in position of some person.
Such possession may be -
a. Meditate : through some one, eg. Friend
b. Immediate : directly of himself
This movable property should be possessed by any person so no kept in respect of those
property which is not in the position of anyone.
Punishment for Theft —
SECTION 379 : Whoever commits theft shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
Case Law –
i. Sukhchand Harijan V. State of Orissa, 1988, Cr. L.J. 1579 : It was held that crops, if
removed dishonestly, can be the subject matter of theft.

DEFINITION OF EXTORTION (खंडणी) —

SECTION 383 : Whoever intentionally puts any person in fear of any injury to that person, or to
any other, thereby dishonestly induces the person so put in fear to deliver to any person any
property or valuable security, or anything signed or sealed which may be converted into a
valuable security, commits extortion.
Essential Elements –
a. A person intentionally puts any person in fear of injury;
b. Such injury is to that person or to any other,
c. Thereby he induces the person so put in fear to deliver to any person;
d. Any property or, valuable security or, anything signed or sealed which may be converted
into a valuable security.
PUNISHMENT FOR EXTORTION –
SECTION 384 : Whoever commits extortion shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a
term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both. The offence u/s 384 is
cognizable, non-bailable, non-compoundable and triable by any Magistrate.
CASE LAW –
i. Chander Kala v. Ram Kishan Gaur, 1985 Cr. LJ 1490 : It was held that compulsion to a lady
teacher who signed blank papers under threat of outraging her modesty is extortion.

CONCLUSION — Offences against property consist of those kinds of offences in which a

person is deprived of his valuables illegally. The I.P.C. makes a distinction amongst these
offences, based on the manner in which a person is deprived of his belongings. Theft is
committed in respect of movable property. whereas extortion can be committed in respect of
moveable and immovable property. In theft no force is used whereas in extortion there are
elements of force and fear of injury.
_______________X________________X_____________.
Q.Robbery
Ans.
INTRODUCTION —
दरोडा हा चोरी आणि खंडणीचा वाढलेला प्रकार आहे . IPC च्या S. 390 मध्ये दिलेली दरोड्याची व्याख्या. यात
चोरी कधी दरोडा आहे आणि खंडणी कधी दरोडा आहे या दोन्ही पैलच ंू ा समावेश आहे . दरोडा हा गंभीर गन्
ु हा आहे ,
म्हणनू दरोड्याला कठोर शिक्षा आहे . OR Robbery is aggravated form of theft and extortion. The
definition of robbery given in S. 390 of I.P.C.. It includes both aspects, when theft is robbery and
when extortion is robbery. Robbery is serious offence, therefore robbery is severely punished.

DEFINITION —
In all Robbery there is either theft or extortion.
When theft is robbery - व्यक्तीचा मत्ृ यू किंवा दख
ु ापत किंवा चक
ु ीचा संयम, किंवा त्वरित मत्ृ यच
ू ी भीती
किंवा त्वरित दख
ु ापत, किंवा त्वरित चक
ु ीचा संयम. OR theft is robbery when it voluntarily causes or
attempts to cause any person death or hurt or wrongful restraint or fear of instant death or
instant hurt.
When extortion is robbery - जर गन् ु हे गार, खंडणीच्या वेळी, घाबरलेल्या व्यक्तीच्या उपस्थितीत असेल
आणि त्या व्यक्तीला त्वरित मत्ृ य,ू त्वरित दख ु ापत किंवा त्वरित चकु ीच्या पद्धतीने प्रतिबंधित करण्याच्या
भीतीने खंडणी वसल ू केली असेल तर खंडणी दरोडा आहे . OR extortion is robbery if the offender at the
time of committing the extortion puts the person in fear of instant death or instant hurt to that
person to deliver up the thing extorted.
PUNISHMENT FOR ROBBERY —
Section 392 : whoever commit robbery shall be punished with 10 years imprisonment and shall
also be liable to fine and if the robbery is committed on highway between sunset and sunrise the
imprisonment may extend to 14 years with fine.
CONCLUSION — robbery most consist either of theft or extrotion. The offence is serious hence
cognizable and non bailable. Attempt to commit a robbery is punishable and voluntarily causing
hurt in committing robbery is severely punished with imprisonment for life or rigorous
imprisonment for a term which may extend to 10 years.
___________________X_____________________X_____________
Q. Dacoity
Ans.
Introduction - Dacoity is aggravated(extended) form of robbery whereas robbery is aggravated
form of either theft or extortion. Dacoity is also called gang robbery. There are aggravated form
of offence of dacoity like dacoity with murder which is punishable with death sentence.
DEFINITION OF DACOITY
Section 391 : When five or more persons conjointly commit or attempt to commit a robbery, or
where the whole number of persons conjointly committing or attempting to commit a robbery,
and persons present and aiding such commission or attempt, amount to five or more, every
person so committing attempting or aiding, is said to commit dacoity.
ESSENTIAL INGREDIENTS —
i. There must be five or more people.
ii. They must conjointly commit or attempt to commit robbery.
iii. It is enough if the persons conjointly committing or attempting to commit and persons present
and aiding such commission amount to five or more persons.
PUNISHMENT FOR DACOITY
Section 395 : Whoever commits dacoity shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with
rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
CONCLUSION —
Dacoity is robbery committed by five or more persons, otherwise there is no difference between
dacoity and robbery. The gravity of the offence consists in the terror it causes by the presence of
a number of offenders.
________________X________________________X_______________