Law of Crime IPC

Notes Law of Crimes (IPC) – I, LL. B. I, Sem.
, I
Paper No. IV
LAW OF CRIMES I- (Indian Penal Code)
Index
Sr. No. Question Page no.
1. Index 1
2. Syllabus 2
3. Short Note 4
Crime and Stages of Crime
4. Short Note 6
Elements of Crime
5. Question 8
What are the Different Kinds of Punishment Practiced in
India? – Explain.
6. Question 10
Explain in detail General Exceptions under Indian Penal Code.
Right of Private Defence (There may be separate question)
7. Short note 17
Distinction / Difference between Kidnapping and Abduction
8. Short note - Forgery 18
9. Short Note - Making a false document 19
10. Question 20
Explain in detail when Culpable Homicide is not Murder.
11. Short note 23
What is Culpable Homicide- explain in detail.
12. Short note - Inchoate offences 24
13. Short note - Hurt & Grievous Hurt 25
14. Question 28
What is the difference between "Wrongful Restraint" and
"Wrongful Confinement"?
15. Question 30
Define and Discuss offence of robbery under IPC.
16. Question 33
Explain in detail ‘Extortion’.
17. Short Note – Dacoity 34
18. Question 35
What is the Meaning of Cheating under Section 415 of IPC?
19. Short Note - House-trespass 36
20. Short note 37
Lurking house-trespass or house-breaking
21. Question 38
Explain - Difference between ‘giving false evidence’ and
‘fabricating false evidence’.
22. Question 40
Explain in detail offence of Defamation.
23. Short Note - Public Nuisance 43
24. Short Note - Offences against Public Decency and Morals in 44
India
Edited & Prepared by Mahendra Subhash Khairnar, Asst. Prof., BV’s Y C Law College, Karad Page 1
Notes Law of Crimes (IPC) – I, LL. B. I, Sem., I
Paper No. IV-
LAW OF CRIMES I- (Indian Penal Code)

SYLLABUS
Unit- 1 – Concept of crime.
1.1 Concept of crime & distinction between Crime, Ethical wrongs, sin & Moral
wrongs.
1.2 Applicability of Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Territorial applicability- Extra Territorial & Intra- Territorial.
- Personal applicability.
1.3 Salient features of Indian Penal Code, 1860
1.4 General Concepts under IPC 1860.
Person, Public servant, Movable Property, Document, Injury, Valuable
security, Judge.
Unit- 2 - Foundation of Criminal Liability.

2.1 -Stages of Crime-Intention, Preparation, Attempt & commission.
2.2 –Elements of Crimes Liability.
-Actus Reus
-Mens Rea.
-Various concepts depicting Mens Rea under I.P.C. Dishonestly,
fraudulently, voluntarily, Good faith, Knowingly, Negligently,
2.3 Recent trends in fixing criminal liability without mens rea
2.4 & Group liability in crimes- common intention & common Factors Negativating
quilly Intention.
2.5 Need for providing defenses /exception.
Unit- 3 -General exceptions under sec. 76 to 106
Unit- 4 - Of Punishment.
4.1 Concept & object of Punishment.
4.2 Various types of punishment under IPC.
4.3 Discretion in awarding punishments.
Unit- 5 – Inchoate Offences.

5.1 Concept of Inchoate offences.
5.2 Various types of inchoate
offences.-Attempt, Abetment &
Conspiracy.
5.3 Group liability offences- Unlawful Assembly, Rioting.
Unit- 6- Offences affecting Life.

6.1 Culpable homicide. Murder
6.2 Hurt & Grievous Hurt.
6.3 Wrongful Restraint & wrongful Confinement.
6.4 Criminal force & assault.
6.5 Kidnapping & Abduction.
Unit- 7- Offences against Property.

7.1 Theft.
7.2 Extortion.
7.3 Robbery & Dacoity.
7.4 Criminal misappropriation of property.
7.5 Criminal Breach of Trust.
7.6 Receiving stolen property.
7.7 Cheating & Mischief.
7.8 Criminal Trespass
7.8.1 House Trespass & lurking house trespass.
7.8.2 House breaking & housebreaking by night.
Unit- 8- Offences of False Evidence & Offences Relating To Documents.

8.1 Giving false evidence & fabricating false evidence.(sec.493)
8.2 Forgery & making false document
8.3 Forged document.
Unit- 9 – Of Defamation.
-Defamation under sections 499 to 502.
Unit- 10 - Offences affecting the public Health, Safety, Convenience, Decency and
Morals (Sec 268-294A)
10.1 Offences affecting the Public Health (Section 268-278)

(i) Public Nuisance (S.268)
(ii) Acts likely to spread infection (section 269-271)
(iii) Pollution of food or drink (section 272-273)
(iv) Adullualia of drugs (section 274-276)
(v) Fouling water and relating atmosphere (section 277-278)
10.2. Offences affecting the public safety and Convenience (Section 277-
278)
(i) Rash Driving or riding on a public way. (Section 279)
(ii) Rash or negligent navigation. (Section 280)
(iii) Exposing false light, mark or being mislead navigator
(iv) Conveying any person for hire by water in an unsafe and overloaded waste
Vessel(Section 282)
(v) Causing danger or obstruction to any person in public way. (Section 283)
(vi) Negligent conduct with respect to poisonous substance.(Section 284)
(vii) Negligent conduct with respect to fire, combustible substances. (section
285-289)
(viii) Continuance of Nuisance. (Section 291)
10.3. Public Decency and Morals (ss 292-294A)

A. Prevention of obscenity (ss 292-294)
B. Keeping Lottery Office (S 294A)
C. Cases related to spreading of infectious diseases
Short Note
Crime and Stages of Crime
The word crime is difficult to define, but an attempt at definition essentially must
precede study of crime. Crime may be viewed from various perspectives with the
definitions put forth by various jurists or criminologists or sociologists from time to
time.
AS A PUBLIC WRONG Sir William Blackstone defines crimes in two ways, in his
work, first as, “An Act committed or omitted in violation of a ‘Public Law’ forbidding
or commanding it”.
AS A MORAL WRONG The word crime owes its genesis to the Greek expression
‘Krimos’, which is synonymous with the Sanskrit word ‘Krama’, meaning social
order. Thus the word crime is applied to those acts that go against social order and are
worthy of serious condemnation
There are four stages in commission of a Crime.
1. Intention
2. Preparation
3. Implementation
4. Accomplishment
1. Intention to Commit a Crime
This is the first stage in commission of a crime. Intention to commit a crime is not
punishable unless it is made known to others either by words or conduct.
E.g.: Waging a War against the Government is punishable. In this case, mere intention
to commit is punishable. Similarly, mere assembly of persons to commit a dacoity is
punishable even though there is no preparation to it.
2. Preparation
It is difficult for the prosecution to prove that necessary preparation has been made for
the commission of the offence. Eg: In case a person purchases a pistol and loads it
with bullets, it is not possible to prove that the person is carrying the pistol to kill
some other person.
In the Indian Law, Mere Preparation to commit an offense is punishable in the

following offenses.
1. Waging War
2. Preparation to commit a dacoity
3. Preparation for counterfeiting coins and Government stamps
4. Possessing counterfeit coins, false weight or measurement and forged

documents.
3. Attempt
It is also known as the 'Preliminary Crime'.
Section XXIII of the IPC, 1860 deals with 'of Attempt to Commit Offences' and
provides the punishment for attempt.
Essentials of Attempt
1. Guilty intention to commit an offence
2. Some act done towards committing the offence
3. The act must fall short of the completed offence
Prescribed Punishments in the Indian Penal Code
1. Completed offences and attempts have been dealt in the same Section and same
punishment is prescribed. Eg: Waging War and Attempting to Wage War (Sec.
121)
2. In certain cases, punishments for attempt to offences and completed offences

are dealt separately. Eg: Punishment for murder is dealt in Section 302, while
attempt to murder is dealt in Sec. 307.
3. In other cases, of attempt, are covered under Section 511 which prescribes the
longest term of imprisonment or with fine or both.
4. Accomplishment / Commission
This is the last stage in the commission of a crime. The accused is guilty of the
offence only if he succeeds in his act. Otherwise, he is guilty of attempt only.
Short Note
Elements of Crime
Answer
It is expressed in the Latin Maxim ‘actus non facit reum nisi mens sit Rea’ as a
fundamental principle for penal liability.
It means, intent and act both must concur to constitute a crime. In other words and act
itself is no crime, unless it is coupled with an evil intent. For a person to be held guilty
of the crime it is necessary that he had an intention to do it. For a person to be held
guilty of theft, it should be established that he had an intention to steal.
No man should be a convicted of a crime unless the two requirements of mental

element are satisfied in every crime that requirements are as follows-
A fundamental principle of criminal law is that a crime consists of both a mental and
a physical element. Mens rea, aperson's awareness of the fact that his or her conduct is
criminal, is the mental element, and actus reus, the act itself, is thephysical element.
Mens Rea (Mental Element)
Actus Reus (Physical Element)
Meaning of Mens rea

It is a cardinal principle of law. It means "Mental element or Evil intent or
Guilty mind". It may be defined as the mental element is necessary to constitute a
criminal liability. Mens rea is not defined in the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Mens Rea (Mental Element) - Mens rea is a technical term, generally taken to mean
some blameworthy mental condition whether constituted by intention or knowledge or
otherwise the absence of which on any particular occasion negatives and intentions of
a crime.
Actus Reus (Physical Element) -

Actus Reus
An actual action that is a fundamental component of a crime, as compared with the

perpetrator’s state of mind or intent.
The terms actus reus and mens rea developed in English Law are derived from the
principle stated by Edward Coke, namely, actus non facit reum nisi mens sit
rea which means: "an act does not make a person guilty unless (their) mind is also
guilty"; hence, the general test of guilt is one that requires proof of fault, culpability or
blameworthiness both in thought and action.
omission involves a failure to engage in a necessary bodily movement resulting in

injury. As with commission acts, omission acts can be reasoned casually using the but
forapproach.
To constitute a crime at common law there must always be result brought by human
conduct, a physical event, which the law prohibits, for example, Killing of a man
Raping a woman etc. It has long been the custom to employ the term Actus Reus to
denote a deed so prohibited. A result of human conduct is an event which, for the
present for purposes must be carefully distinguished from the line of conduct which
produced that event.
No man can pursue a line of conduct without producing containing series of events,
any one of which may, or may not constitute an event Forbidden by law. Thus a man
who intends to murder another may lawfully purchase a revolver for the purpose, or
he may secretly take and carry away the revolver without the consent of the owner,
thus performing the actus reus of theft. He may then break and enter victims dwelling
house during the night thereby performing the acts reus of another crime, viz.,
burglary.
Question
What are the Different Kinds of Punishment Practiced in India? – Explain.
Six kinds of punishment were described in the original Indian Penal Code. In the year
1949 the third punishment “Penal Servitude” was removed. Now there are five kinds
of punishment under I.P.C.
They are described hereunder.
1. Death:
The Courts have a high range of discretionary powers in passing death sentences. The
death punishment is also called “Capital Punishment”. The word “capital” means “the
head or top of the column”. Thus the capital punishment means “removal of head”,
“death penalty” or “beheading”.
It is the maximum punishment possible to be imposed on a criminal. This punishment

occupies topmost position among the grades of punishments. This punishment can be
imposed in extreme cases and rarely that too in extremely grave crimes.
The punishment of death may be imposed on the following offences:—
Waging or attempting to wage war or abetting the waging of war against the
Government of India -Section 121 I.PC Murder – Section 302,
Punishment for murder by a life-convict – Sec. 303
Dacoity with murder – Sec. 396 I.P.C.
2. Imprisonment for Life:
Before 1955, the words “transportation for life” was used. The Code of Criminal
Procedure Amendment Act, 1955 (Act No. 26 of 1955) substituted the words
“Imprisonment for life” in place of “transportation for life”.
The general public thinks that imprisonment for life means only 14 years
imprisonment, and the convict shall be released as soon as the 14 years period is
lapsed. It is wrong presumption.
3. Imprisonment:
The Fourth kind of punishment is “Imprisonment”. It is of two descriptions, viz.—
(i) Rigorous, i.e., with hard labour; and
(ii) Simple.
(i) Rigorous Imprisonment i.e. with Hard Labour:
There are certain offences defined in the Indian Penal Code, for which rigorous
imprisonment may be imposed by the Courts. Examples: House- trespass under
Section 449 of IPC; fabricating false evidence with intent to procure conviction of an
offence which is capital by the Code (Sec. 194); etc.
(ii) Simple imprisonment:
This punishment is imposed for the lighter offences. For e.g. wrongful restraint (Sec.
341); defamation (Sec. 500) etc.
4. Solitary Confinement:
Section 73 of the Code empowers the Courts to impose solitary confinement to certain
persons and in relation to certain offences. This punishment is also part of the
imprisonment.
5. Forfeiture of Property:
“Forfeiture” is the divestiture of specific property without compensation in

consequence of some default or act of forbidden by law. The Courts may order for
forfeiture of property of the accused in certain occasions.
6. Fine:
The Courts may impose fine along with or without imprisonment. The Indian Penal
Code mentions the punishment of fine for several offences, generally with or without
imprisonment.
Question
Explain in detail General Exceptions under Indian Penal Code.
Answer
Introduction
The criminal law outlines different punishments for various crimes. But a person may
not always be punished for a crime that he/she has committed. The Indian Penal Code,
1860 recognizes defenses in chapter four under the heading ‘General Exceptions.’
Sections 76 to 106 of the IPC cover these defenses. The law offers certain defenses
that exculpate criminal liability.
The defenses are generally classified under two heads- justifiable and
excusable. Thus, for committing a wrong, a person must be responsible for doing a
wrongful act without having any justification or excuse for it.
Classification of general exceptions
Excusable Act – Excusable General Exceptions
 Mistake of fact (Section 76 and79)
 Accident (Section 80)
 Infancy (Section 82, 83)
 Insanity (Section 84)
 Intoxication
Justified Act
 Judicial Act (Section 77 and 78)
 Necessity (Section 81)
 Consent (Section 87 – 89 and 92)
 Duress (Section 94)
 Communication (Section 93)
 Trifles (Section 95)
 Private Defense (Section 96-106)
Introduction:
Self help is the first rule of criminal law. The Indian Penal Code, 1860 has given the
right of private defence of body and property to every Individual. Section 96 to 106 of
Indian Penal Code states the law relating to the right of Private Defence of person and
property.
It is primary duty of the State to protect life and property of citizens. But the fact is
that State cannot watch each and every activity of the citizens. There may be
situations in which the State cannot help person immediately when his life or property
is in danger. In view of this Indian Penal Code has given the right of private defence
of body and property of every individual.
Right of Private Defence (There may be separate question)
In the words of Bentham, "The Right of Private Defence is absolutely necessary for
the protection of one’s life, liberty and property."
Section 96 to 106 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 states the law relating to the right of
Private Defence of person and property. These provisions under the Indian Penal Code
gives authority to a man to use necessary force against wrong doer for the purpose of
protecting one’s own body and property and also another's body and property when
immediate aid from the state machinery is not readily available and in so doing he is
not answerable in law for his deeds.
The law of private defence is based on two main principles -

(a) Everyone has right to defend his own body and property and another’s body and
property.
(b) The Right of Private Defence is not applicable in those cases where accused
himself is an aggressive party.
1) Things done in private defence (Section 96):
Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence.
2) Right of private defence of the body and of property (Section 97):

Every person has a right, subject to the restrictions contained in Section 99, to
defend -
First - His own body, and the body of any other person, against any offence
affecting the human body;
Secondly - The property, whether movable or immovable, of himself or of any other
person, against any act which is an offence falling under the definition of theft,
robbery, mischief or criminal trespass, or which is an attempt to commit theft,
robbery, mischief or criminal trespass.
Section 97 of Indian Penal Code divides the right of private defence into two parts.
first part deals with the right of private defence of person and second part with the
right of private defence of property. The rights of defends is not only to the defence of
own body or property but also extend to defending the body and property of any other
person. Even a stranger can also defend the person or property of another person and
vice versa.
3) Right of private defence against the act of a person of unsound mind,

etc.(Section 98)
When an act which would otherwise be a certain offence, is not that offence, by
reason of the youth, 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
the part of that person, every person has the same right of private defence against that
act which he would have if the act were that offence.
Illustrations
(a) Z, under the influence of madness, attempts to kill A; Z is guilty of no offence. But
A has the same right of private defence which he would have if Z were sane.
(b) A enters by night a house which he is legally entitled to enter. Z, in good faith,
taking A for a house-breaker, attacks A. Here Z, by attacking A under this
misconception, commits no offence. But A has the same right of private defence
against Z, which he would have if Z were not acting under that misconception.
Scope : Section 98 of Indian Penal Code assumes that the right to private defence
from its very nature admits of no exception since it is the right of preservation of one's
life and property as also another's life and property against the world at large. The
right of defence of the body exists against all attackers, whether with or without mens
rea.
Right of private defence is available against -
(i) Minor;
(ii) Person of unsound Mind;
(iii) Intoxicated Person
(iv) Person having no maturity of understanding
(v) Person acting under misconception.
4) Acts against which there is no right of private defence (Section 99):

There is no right of private defence against an act which does not reasonably cause the
apprehension of death or of grievous hurt, if done, or attempted to be done, by a
public servant acting in good faith under colour of his office, though that act may not
be strictly justifiable by law.
There is no right of private defence against an act which does not reasonably cause the
apprehension of death or of grievous hurt, if done, or attempted to be done, by the
direction of a public servant acting in good faith under colour of his office though that
direction may not be strictly justifiable by law.
There is no right of private defence in cases in which there is time to have recourse to
protection of the public authorities.
Extent to which the right may be exercised -
The right of private defence in no case extends to the inflicting of more harm than it is
necessary to inflict for the purpose of defence.
Explanation 1 -
A person is not deprived of the right of private defence against an act done, or
attempted to be done, by a public servant, as such, unless he knows or has reason to
believe, that the person doing the act is such public servant. According to Section 99
of Indian Penal Code there is no right of Private defence -
i) against the acts of a public servant acting in good faith and;

ii) against the acts of the those acting under the authority or direction of a public
servant.
iii) where there is sufficient time for recourse to public authorities; and
iv) The quantum of harm of that may be caused shall in no case be in excesses.
5) When the right of private defence of the body extends to causing death
(Section100) :
The right of private defence of the body extends, under the restrictions mentioned in
the last preceding section, to the voluntary causing of death or of any other harm to
the assailant, if the offence which occasions the exercise of the right be of any of the
descriptions hereinafter enumerated, namely :
First - Such an assault as may reasonably cause the apprehension that death will
otherwise be the consequence of such assault;
Secondly - Such an assault as may reasonably cause the apprehension that grievous
hurt will otherwise be the consequence of such assault;
Thirdly - An assault with the intention of committing rape;

Fourthly - An assault with the intention of gratifying unnatural lust;
Fifthly - An assault with the intention of kidnapping or abducting;
Sixthly - An assault with the intention of wrongfully confining a person, under
circumstances which may reasonably cause him to apprehend that he will be unable to
have recourse to the public authorities for his release.
Seventhly - An act of throwing or administering acid or an attempt to throw or
administer acid which may reasonably cause the apprehension that grievous hurt will
otherwise be the consequence of such act. [Inserted by Section 2 of ‘The Criminal
Law (Amendment) Act, 2013.]
Ingredients
To invoke Section 100 of Indian Penal Code following four conditions must exist.
(1) The person exercising the right of private defence must be free from fault in
bringing about encounter.
(2) There must be present an impending peril to life or of great bodily harm, rape,
unnatural lust, kidnapping or abduction, wrongful confinement etc.

(3) There must be no safe or reasonable mode of escape by retreat, and
(4) There must have been a necessity for taking the life.
6) When such right extends to causing any harm other than death (Section 101) :
If the offence be not of any of the descriptions enumerated in the last preceding
section, the right of private defence of the body does not extend to the voluntary
causing of death to the assailant, but does extend, under the restrictions mentioned in
section 99, to the voluntary causing to the assailant of any harm other than death.
7) Commencement and continuance of the right of private defence of the body
(Section 102) :
The right of private defence of the body commences as soon as a reasonable
apprehension of danger to the body arises from an attempt or threat to commit the
offence though the offence may not have been committed; and it continues as long as
such apprehension of danger to the body continues.
8) When the right of private defence of property extends to causing death
(Section 103)
The right of private defence of property extends, under the restrictions mentioned in
section 99, to the voluntary causing of death or of any other harm to the wrong-doer, if
the offence, the committing of which, or the attempting to commit which, occasions
the exercise of the right, be an offence of any of the descriptions hereinafter
enumerated, namely -
First - Robbery ;
Secondly - House-breaking by night;
Thirdly - Mischief by fire committed on any building, tent or vessel, which building,
tent or vessel is used as a human dwelling, or as a place for the custody of property;
Fourthly -Theft, mischief, or house-trespass, under such circumstances as may
reasonably cause apprehension that death or grievous hurt will be the consequence, if
such right of private defence is not exercised.
9) When such right to causing any harm other than death (Section 104) :
If the offence, the committing of which, or the attempting to commit which occasions
the exercise of the right of private defence, be theft, mischief, or criminal trespass, not
of any of the descriptions enumerated in the last preceding section, that right does not
extend to the voluntary causing of death, but does extend, subject to the restrictions
mentioned in section 99, to the voluntary causing to the wrong-doer of any harm other
than death.
10) Commencement and continuance of the right of private defence of property

(Section 105)
The right of private defence of property commences when a reasonable apprehension
of danger to the property commences.
The right of private defence of property against theft continues till the offender has
affected his retreat with the property or either the assistance of the public authorities is
obtained, or the property has been recovered.
The right of private defence of property against robbery continues as long as the
offender causes or attempts to cause to any person death or hurt or wrongful restraint
or as long as the fear of instant death or of instant hurt or of instant personal restraint
continues.
The right of private defence of property against criminal trespass or mischief
continues as long as the offender continues in the commission of criminal trespass or
mischief.
The right of private defence of property against house-breaking by night continues as
long as the house-trespass which has been begun by such house-breaking continues.
11) Right of private defence against deadly assault when there is risk of harm to
innocent person (Section 106):
If in the exercise of the right of private defence against an assault which reasonably
causes the apprehension of death, the defender be so situated that he cannot effectually
exercise that right without risk of harm to an innocent person, his right of private
defence extends to the running of that risk.
Illustration :
A is attacked by a mob who attempt to murder him. He cannot effectually
exercise his 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 if by so firing he harms any of the children.
Short note
Distinction / Difference between Kidnapping and Abduction
No. Kidnapping Abduction
Section 359, I.P.C. : Section 362 of Indian Penal Code
1 Kidnapping is of two kinds: defines, Abduction: “Whoever by
1) kidnapping from India, and force compels, or by any deceitful
2) kidnapping from lawful means induces any person to go
guardianship. from any place, is said to abduct that
person.
There are two types of kidnapping It is only of one kind
2 1) kidnapping from India
2) kidnapping from lawful
guardianship
It is committed against minor Anybody can be abducted
3 (below 16 years of age if male and
below 18 years of age if female)
and person of unsound mind of any
age.
Intention of the accused is Intention of accused is very
4 immaterial important
In kidnapping consent of the person In case of abduction, consent of
5 is immaterial person abducted is very much
materialistic and is good evidence.
Kidnapping is not continuing Abduction is a continuing process in
6 offence. The offence is complete which a person kidnapped moves
when the person is removed from from place to place.
lawful guardianship
7 Whoever kidnaps any person from Abduction itself is not punishable,
India or from lawful guardianship but it is made criminal offence only
shall be punished with when it is committed with one or
imprisonment of either description other intents specified in Sections
for a term which may extend to 363A, 364, 364A to 369 of the
seven years, and shall also be liable Indian Penal Code
to fine.
Short note
Forgery (Section 463 to Section 474 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860)
Section 463 to Section 477A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 deal with the offences
relating forgery, forged documents and making or possessing counterfeit seal, etc
with intend to commit forgery. Section 463 and Section 464 of the Indian Penal Code
defines forgery as the making of a false document in order that it may be used as
genuine. Section 465 of the Code prescribes the Punishment for forgery.
1. Forgery :
According to Section 463 of the Indian Penal Code, "whoever makes any false
document or electronic record or part of a document or electronic record with intent
to cause damage or injury, to the public or to any person, or to support any claim or
title, or to cause any person to part with property, or to enter into any express or
implied contract, or with intent to commit fraud or that fraud may be committed,
commits forgery.
Ingredients :
To invoke Section 463 of the Indian Penal Code, the following ingredients must be
established -
(1) A person makes any document or part of a document
(2) The document or false electronic record or part of the document or electronic
record must be false.
(3) His Intention is -
(a) to cause damage or injury to the public or any person; or
(b) to support any claim or title; or
(c) to cause any person to part part with his property; or
(d) to enter into any express or implied contract; or
(e) to commit any fraud or that fraud may be committed
Short Note
Making a false document
According to Section 464 A person is said to make a false document or false

electronic record
First—
Who dishonestly or fraudulently —
(a) makes, signs, seals or executes a document or part of a document;
(b) makes or transmits any electronic record or part of any electronic record;
(c) affixes any digital signature on any electronic record;
(d) makes any mark denoting the execution of a document or the authenticity of the
digital signature, with the intention of causing it to be believed that such document or
part of document, electronic record or digital signature was made, signed, sealed,
executed, transmitted or affixed by or by the authority of a person by whom or by
whose authority he knows that it was not made, signed, sealed, executed or affixed; or
Secondly —
Who, without lawful authority, dishonestly or fraudulently, by cancellation or
otherwise, alters a document or an electronic record in any material part thereof, after
it has been made, executed or affixed with digital signature either by himself or by any
other person, whether such person be living or dead at the time of such alteration; or
Thirdly—
Who dishonestly or fraudulently causes any person to sign, seal, execute or alter a
document or an electronic record or to affix his digital signature on any electronic
record knowing that such person by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication
cannot, or that by reason of deception practised upon him, he does not know the
contents of the document or electronic record or the nature of the alteration.
Illustrations
(a) A has a letter of credit upon B for rupees 10,000, written by Z. A, in order to
defraud B, adds cipher to the 10,000, and makes the sum 1,00,000 intending that it
may be believed by B that Z so wrote the letter. A has committed forgery.
3. Punishment for forgery

Section 465 of the Indian Penal Code prescribes the punishment for forgery -
According to this Section whoever commits forgery shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with
fine, or with both.
The offence under this section is non-cognizable, bailable, non-compoundable and
triable by Magistrate of the first class.
Question
Explain in detail when Culpable Homicide is not Murder.
Answer
Introduction
Killing of human being by another human being is most heinous crime however it
may cause due to circumstances which were not predicted. Hence law finds it difficult
to place bold line between murder and culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
Meaning of Homicide:
Homicide means the killing of a human being by a human being. Homicide is the
highest order of bodily injury that can be inflicted on a human body. It has from
earliest times considered the most heinous of offences.
Murder (Section 300 of I.P.C)

Except in the cases hereinafter excepted, culpable homicide is murder, if the
act by which the death is caused is done -
Firstly - With the intention of causing death, or

Secondly - If it is done with the intention of causing such bodily injury as the offender
knows to be likely to cause the death of the person to whom the harm is caused. or
Thirdly - If it is done with the intention of causing bodily injury to any person and the
bodily injury intended to be inflicted is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to
cause death, or
Fourthly - If the person committing the act knows that it is so imminently dangerous
that it must, in all probability, cause death, or such bodily injury as is likely to cause
death, and commits such act without any excuse for incurring the risk of causing death
or such injury as aforesaid.
When Culpable Homicide is not Murder:

Exception 1 - Grave and Sudden Provocation -
When culpable homicide is not murder - 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 provisos -

First -That the provocation is not sought or voluntarily provoked by the offender as an
excuse for killing or doing harm to any person.
Secondly -That the provocation is not given by anything done in obedience to the law,
or by a public servant in the lawful exercise of the powers of such public servant.
Thirdly -That the provocation is not given by anything done in the lawful exercise of
the right of private defence.
Explanation -
Whether the provocation was grave and sudden enough to prevent the offence
from amounting to murder is a question of fact.
Exception 2 - Private Defence

Culpable homicide is not murder if the offender in the exercise in good faith of the
right of private defence or person or property, exceeds the power given to him by law
and causes the death of the person against whom he is exercising such right of defence
without premeditation, and without any intention of doing more harm than is
necessary for the purpose of such defence.
Illustration
Z attempts to horsewhip A, not in such a manner as to cause grievous hurt to A.
A draws out a pistol. Z persists in the assault. A believing in good faith that he can by
no other means prevent himself from being horsewhipped, shoots Z dead. A has not
committed murder, but only culpable homicide.

Exception 3 - Exercising Legal Power
Culpable homicide is not murder if the offender, being a public servant or aiding a
public servant acting for the advancement of public justice, exceeds the powers given
to him by law, and causes death by doing an act which he, in good faith, believes to be
lawful and necessary for the due discharge of his duty as such public servant and
without ill-will towards the person whose death is caused.
Exception 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 offender's having
taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner.
Exception 5 - Consent of the Victim -

Juistifiable Homicide (Indian Penal Code 1860)
Homicide means causing death of one human being by another human being.
Homicide may either Lawful or unlawful. Every Homicide is not unlawful. In case of
lawful homicide, a person causing death is either justified or excused from liability.
Lawful homicide may be classified into -(1) Excusable Homicide and (2) Justifiable
Homicide
In respect of right of private defence extending to causing of death under Section
100, 103, 106 are justified homicides. while death caused by accident, wherein there is
no criminal intention or knowledge, there is excuse from criminal liability.
A homicide is considered in law to be justified, if death is caused by -

1) A person who is bound , or by a mistake of fact, in good faith believes himself
to be bound by law -
Section 76 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 says that nothing is an offence which is
done by a person who is, or who by reason of a mistake of fact and not by reason of a
mistake of law in good faith believes himself to be, bound by law to do it.
Examples :
(a) A, a soldier, fires on a mob by the order of his superior officer, in conformity
with the commands of the law. A has committed no offence.
(b) A, an officer of a Court of Justice, being ordered by that Court to arrest Y, and
after due inquiry, believing Z to be Y, arrests Z. A has committed no offence.
2) A person who acts pursuant to a lawful to a lawful authority or by reason of a
mistake of fact, in good faith he believes himself so authorised -
According to Section 79 of the Indian Penal Code, Nothing is an offence which is
done by any person who is justified by law, or who by reason of a mistake of fact and
not by reason of a mistake of law in good faith, believes himself to be justified by law,
in doing it.
Short note
What is Culpable Homicide- explain in detail.
1) Meaning of Homicide:
Homicide means the killing of a human being by a human being. Homicide is the
highest order of bodily injury that can be inflicted on a human body. It has from
earliest times considered the most heinous of offences.
Homicide may be either lawful or unlawful.

(a) Lawful Homicide: In case of lawful homicide, law will set the culprit free.
(b) Unlawful Homicide:
If death is caused with intention or knowledge to cause death, then homicide is
classified as unlawful homicide. These cases are Culpable homicide Under Section
299 of the Indian Penal Code and Murder under Section 300 of I.P.C.
2) Culpable homicide
Section 299 of the Indian Penal Code says that, whoever causes death by doing an
act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such bodily
injury as is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that he is likely by such act to
cause death, commits the offence of culpable homicide.
3) Essential Elements of Culpable Homicide:

To invoke Section 299 of the Indian Penal Code following Conditions are to be
satisfied.
(1) There must be a death of a Person

(2) The death must have been caused by an act of an act of another person;
(3) The act of causing death must be :
(i) with the intention of causing death,
(ii) with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or
(iii) with the knowledge that such act is likely to cause death.
3) Punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder :

Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 prescribes the punishment for culpable
homicide not amounting to murder, it says that whoever commits culpable homicide
not amounting to murder shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall
also be liable to fine, if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention
of causing death. or of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death; or with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, or with
fine, or with both, if the act is done with the knowledge that it is likely to cause death,
but without any intention to cause death, or to cause such bodily injury as is likely to
cause death.
The offence under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code is cognizable, non-bailable,
non-compoundable and triable by Court of Session.
Short note
Inchoate offences
Introduction
Inchoate offences in English law are offences that cover illegal acts which have yet to
be committed, primarily attempts to commit crimes, incitement to commit crimes (edit
not applicable to incitement which was overruled by the Serious Crimes Act 2007),
and conspiracy to commit crimes.
Meaning and Scope
Inchoate means "just begun" or "undeveloped". It refer to situations where, although a

substantial offence has not been committed, the defendant has taken steps to commit
it, or encouraged others to do so.
Following are instances of inchoate offences;
Attempt
There are different stages of a crime and different legal systems Choose to prosecute
individuals at different stages. An attempt to commit a crime is where an individual
has the requisite mens rea and sets out commit the offence but falls short of such a
commission.
Conspiracy
An individual is guilty of conspiracy with the mere agreement between a group of

people to commit an offence. When the said offence is committed, such people will
become guilty of abetment by conspiracy. Therefore, the same individual is guilty of
conspiracy prior to the committing of the offence and for abatement by conspiracy
after the commission of the offence.
Abetment
The offence of abatement is committed when a person does not commit the crime he
wishes to commit, by himself, but urges or persuades another to commit the act.
e.g. Instigation in Dowry Cases
Short note
Hurt & Grievous Hurt
Section 319 to 338 of Indian Penal Code deals with hurt in various forms. Section 319
defines simple hurt as causing bodily pain, disease, or infirmity, and section 321
makes voluntary causing of hurt an offence punishable under section 323, IPC.
Section 319 of IPC – Hurt
Whoever causes bodily pain, disease or infirmity to any person is said to cause hurt.
To constitute hurt (battery under English Law) any of the following essentials needs to be
caused:-
1. Bodily pain, or
2. Disease, or
3. Infirmity to another.
Grievous Hurt
The code on the basis of gravity of the physical assault has classified hurt into simple
and grievous so that the accused might be awarded punishment commensurate to his
guilt.
Section 320 of The Indian Penal Code – Grievous hurt.
The following kinds of hurt only are designated as “grievous”:
First.— Emasculation.
Secondly.— Permanent privation of the sight of either eye.
Thirdly.— Permanent privation of the hearing of either ear.
Fourthly.— Privation of any member or joint.
Fifthly.— Destruction or permanent impairing of the powers of any member or joint.
Sixthly.— Permanent disfiguration of the head or face.
Seventhly.— Fracture or dislocation of a bone or tooth.
Eighthly.— Any hurt which endangers life or which causes the sufferer to be during
the space of twenty days in severe bodily pain, or unable to follow his ordinary
pursuits.
Section 320 designates eight kinds of hurt as grievous and provides enhanced
punishment in such cases. Thus, to make out the offense of causing grievous hurt,
there must be some specific hurt, voluntarily inflicted, and should come within any of
the eight kinds enumerated in this section.
No Hurt Grievous hurt

1. Definition: Definition:
Hurt defined under Section 319 According to Section 320 of Indian

of the Indian Penal Code- Penal Code - The following kinds of
“Whoever causes bodily pain, hurt only are designated as
disease or infirmity to any "grievous" -
person is said to cause hurt.” 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 joint.
5. Destruction or permanent
impairing of the 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 bodily pain, or unable
to follow his ordinary pursuits.
2 The nature of Hurt is simple The nature of Grievous hurt is

grievous.
3 It Covers bodily pains disease or According to Section 320 there are

infirmity to any person eight kinds of hurt which are said
grievous in nature.
4 The offence is non-cognizable, The offence is cognizable, bailable,

bailable and triable by any compoundable with the permission
Magistrate of the Court before which any
prosecution of such offence is
pending and triable by any
Magistrate .
5 Punishment : Punishment :
Whoever, except in the case Whoever, except in the case

provided for by section 334, provided for by section 335,
voluntarily causes hurt, shall be voluntarily causes grievous hurt,
punished with imprisonment of shall be punished with
either description for a term imprisonment of either description
which may extend to one year, or for a term which may extend to
with fine which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable
one thousand rupees, or with to fine.(Section 325 IPC)
both. (Section 323 IPC)
Question
What is the difference between "Wrongful Restraint" and "Wrongful

Confinement"?
Answer
A. Wrongful restraint:
The expression “Wrongful restraint” implies keeping a man out of a place where he
wishes and has a right to be. Section 339 defines it thus: “Whoever voluntarily ob-
structs any person so as to prevent that person from proceeding in any direction in
which that person has a right to proceed is said wrongfully to restrain that person.
B. Wrongful confinement:
Section 340 lays down that whoever wrongfully restrains any person in such a manner
as to prevent that person from proceeding beyond certain circumscribing limits, said
“wrongfully to confine” that person.
To cite an illustration, A causes Z to go within a walled space, and locks Z in. Z is

thus prevented from proceeding in any direction beyond the circumscribing line of the
wall.
Difference between wrongful confinement and wrongful restraint:
No Wrongful Restraint Wrongful Confinement

1 Meaning : Meaning :
Wrongful restraint means In wrongful confinement, a

obstructing a man from moving person is wrongfully restrained
from one place to another where from proceeding beyond certain
he has the right to be and wants circumscribing limits.
to go.
Definition: Definition :
2 Section 339 of the Indian Section 340 of Indian Penal code
Penal Code defines wrongful defines Wrongful confinement as
restraint as, “Whoever “Whoever wrongfully restrains
voluntarily obstructs any person any person in such a manner as to
so as to prevent that person prevent that person from
from proceeding in any proceeding beyond certain
direction in which that person circumscribing limits, is said
has a right to proceed, is said “wrongfully to confine” that
wrongfully to restrain that person.”
person.”
3 Illustrations: Illustrations:
I) A obstructs a path along I) A causes Z to go within a

which Z has a right to pass. A walled space, and locks Z. Z is
not believing in good faith that thus prevented from proceeding
he has a right to stop the path. Z in any direction beyond the
is thereby prevented from circumscribing line of wall. A
passing. A wrongfully restrains wrongfully confines Z.
Z.
II) A places men with firearms at
the outlets of a building, and tells
Z that they will fire at Z if Z
attempts leave the building. A
wrongfully confines Z.
4 Seriousness: Seriousness:
Wrongful restraint is not serious Wrongful confinement is serious

as wrongful confinement and offence and hence more
hence lesser punishment is punishment provided by the code.
provided by the code.
5 Punishment : Punishment :
Whoever wrongfully restrains Whoever wrongfully confines

any person shall be punished any person shall be punished with
with simple imprisonment for a simple imprisonment of either
term which may extend to one description for a term which may
month, or with fine which may extend to one year, or with fine
extend to five hundred rupees, which may extend to one
or with both. thousand rupees, or with both.
Question
Define and Discuss offence of robbery under IPC.
Answer
Legal Provisions Regarding “Robbery” – Section 390 of IPC
Sec. 390 explains that in all robbery there is either theft or extortion. Robbery In all
robbery there is either theft or extortion.
Theft
Legal provisions regarding Theft under section 378 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.
To constitute theft, the following ingredients are required:
1. The property must be movable;
2. The property must be taken out of possession of another person resulting in

wrongful gain by one and wrongful loss to another;
3. The accused must have a dishonest intention to the property;
4. Taking must be without that person’s consent (express or implied);
5. The property must be moved in order to such taking i.e., obtaining property by
deception.
1. Movable Property:
Movable property is defined in Section 22, IPC as including ‘corporeal property of

every description, except land and things attached to the earth or permanently fastened
to anything which is attached to the earth’.
2. Out of the possession of any person:
The movable property which is subject of theft must be in the possession of the
prosecutor. The word possession is not defined in the IPC
Wrongful gain:
‘Wrongful gain’ is gain by unlawful means of property to which the person gaining is
not legally entitled.
Wrongful loss:
‘Wrongful loss’ is the loss by unlawful means of property to which the person losing
it is legally entitled.
3. Dishonest Intention:
Intention is the gist of the offence. It is the intention of the taker at the time when he
removes the article that determines whether the act is theft or not.
4. Without consent:
The thing stolen must have been taken without the consent of the person in possession
of it. There can be no theft where the owner actually consents to or authorizes the
taking.
5. Moves that property:
The offence of theft is completed when there is a dishonest moving of the property,
even though the property is not detached from that to which it is secured. There must
be moving of the property with an intention to take it.
When theft is robbery:
Theft is “robbery” if, in order to the committing of the theft, or in committing the
theft, or in carrying away or attempting to carry away property obtained by the theft,
the offender, for that end, voluntarily causes or attempts to cause to any person death
or hurt or wrongful restraint, or fear of instant death or of instant hurt, or of instant
wrongful restraint.
When extortion is robbery:
Extortion is “robbery” if the offender, at the time of committing the extortion, is in the
presence of the person put in fear, and commits the extortion by putting that person in
fear of instant death, or of instant hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint to that person,
or to some other person, and, by so putting in fear, induces the person so put in fear
then and there to deliver up the thing extorted.
Important Points:
A. Meaning:
Robbery means a felonious taking from the person of another or in his presence or
against his will, by violence or putting him in fear. Robbery is an aggravated form of
theft or extortion. If there is no theft or no extortion, there is no robbery.
B. In all robbery there is either theft or extortion:
The framers of the Indian Penal Code observed: “There can be no case of robbery
which does not fall within the definition either of theft or extortion; but in a practice it
will perpetually be a matter of doubt whether a particular act of robbery was a theft or
extortion.
C. When theft is robbery: Before theft can amount to robbery,—
Firstly:
The offender must have voluntarily caused or attempted to cause to any person death
or hurt or wrongful restraint or fear of instant death or of instant hurt or of instant
wrongful restraint,
Secondly:
This must be in order to the committing of theft, or in committing of theft, or in

carrying away or attempting to carry away property obtained by the theft,
Thirdly:
The offender must voluntarily cause or attempt to cause to any person hurt, etc., for
that end, that is in order to committing theft or for carrying away or attempting to
carry away property obtained by the theft,
Fourthly:
The offender must voluntarily attempt one or any of the above acts.
Question
Explain in detail ‘Extortion’.
Answer
Legal Provisions Regarding “Extortion” in India – Section 388 of IPC
Section 383 defines “Extortion” Sec. 384 prescribes punishment for extortion. Sec.
385 states about putting person in fear of injury in order to commit extortion. Sec. 386
explains about extortion by putting a person in fear of death or grievous hurt. Sec. 387
explains about putting person in fear of death or grievous hurt, in order to commit
extortion.
Meaning:
Extort means to obtain possession of any property or money by force or compulsion,

etc.; to wrest from another by force, menace, duress, to obtain money or other
valuable thing either by compulsion, by actual force, or by the force of motives
applied to the will, and often more overpowering and irresistible than physical force.
This term which signifies the adoption of illegal means?
Extortion- This term is derived from Latin term “extorsio”. In its widest sense means,
any oppression under pretence or colour of right. In a popular sense it is used as
equivalent to black mailing or obtaining money by threats.
Definition:
Section 383 defines “Extortion”. This Section contains four illustrations.
Sec. 383. Extortion:
Whoever intentionally puts any person in fear of any injury to that person, or to any
other, and 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”.
A threatens to publish a defamatory libel concerning Z unless Z gives him money. He

thus induces Z to give him money. A has committed extortion.
Important Points:
A. Ingredients:
1. The accused must put any person in fear of injury to that person or any other
person.
2. The putting of a person in such fear must be intentional.
3. The accused must thereby induce the person so put in fear to deliver to any person
any property.
4. Such inducement must be done dishonestly.
5. Extortion is an aggravated form of theft.
In all robbery, there is either theft or extortion;
In the offences of theft and extortion, one’s property is taken away by the accused
either by dishonestly or putting the owner in fear. Extortion is an aggravated form of
theft.
Short Note
Dacoity
Legal Provisions Regarding “Dacoity” – Section 391 of IPC
Section 391 defines “Dacoity” Dacoity is a most heinous crime considered by the
people all over the world. Where robbery is committed by five or more persons, the
offence committed is dacoity.
Sec. 391. Dacoity:
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”.
Important Points:
A. Ingredients of Sec. 391:
1. Where robbery is committed by five or more persons, the offence is dacoity.
2. Even if their attempt is failed, it is also considered as dacoity.
3. “Five or more persons”: It is the most essential ingredient of offence of dacoity.

Minimum number of accused five persons is necessary to constitute this offence.
4. “Conjointly commit or attempt to commit”: Another essential element of dacoity is

that the accused (five or more) must conjointly commit or attempt to commit robbery.
Punishment for dacoity: Sec. 395 imposes punishment imprisonment for life or with
rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years and also fine. The
offence under this Section is cognizable, non-bailable, non-compoundable, and triable
by the Court of Session.
Question
What is the Meaning of Cheating under Section 415 of IPC?
Answer
Introduction
Meaning of Cheating is defined under section 415 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. This is
well celebrated crime in routine life. However in legal parlance it has certain
essentials presence of which constitutes the crime of cheating and not otherwise.
Essential ingredients
The essential ingredients of the offence of cheating are:
1) The accused must deceive the complainant fraudulently or dishonestly or

intentionally.
2) The complainant must have been induced, to:
a) Deliver any property or allow any person to retain any property; or
b) Do or omit to do anything which he ought not have done, if he was not so deceived.
3) The act or omission likely to cause any harm to the complainant in body, mind,
reputation or property. Generally speaking, ‘deceiving’ is to lead into error by causing
a person to believe what is false or to disbelieve what is true and such deception may
be by word or by conduct.
Inducement:
The second essential ingredient to the offence of cheating is the element of

‘inducement’ leading to either delivery of property or doing of an act or omission.
Short Note
House-trespass
Offence of House-trespass
Whoever commits house-trespass shall be punished with imprisonment of either

description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to
one thousand rupees, or with both.
Ingredients of offence:
The essential ingredients of the offence under Section 448 are as follows:
(1) The complainant was in possession of the property;
(2) Property consisted of a building, tent or vessel used as human dwelling or a

building used as place of worship or custody of property;
(3) Accused entered into or upon such building, tent or vessel;
(4) Having entered lawfully into such building, tent or vessel accused remains there
unlawfully;
(5) His intention was to commit an offence, or intimidate, insult or annoy the person
in possession.
Short note
Lurking house-trespass or house-breaking – Section 453 of IPC:
Whoever commits lurking house-trespass or house-breaking, shall be punished with

imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, and
shall also be liable to fine.
For Lurking House Trespass:
(1) The accused committed house trespass by entering into or unlawfully remaining in
any building, tent or vessel used as a human dwelling or place of worship or for
custody of property;
(2) Such entry was lurking, i.e., surreptitious.
For House Breaking:
(1) Accused committed house trespass;
(2) He committed that by effecting entry into the house or any part thereof—
(a) Through a passage made by himself or any of his abettors;
(b) through any passage not meant for human passage or through passage to which he
obtained access by scaling or climbing over any wall or building or to any passage
which he or his abettors opened by any means which was not intended to be opened
by the occupier of the house;
(c) By opening any lock; or
(d) Using criminal force or by committing an assault or by threatening any person

with assault;
(e) Or by any passage which he knows to be fastened against such entrance or

departure which has been unfastened by the accused or by any of his abettors.
lurking house-trespass or house-breaking by night – Section 456 of IPC:
Whoever commits lurking house-trespass by night, or house-breaking by night, shall

be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to
three years, and shall also be liable to fine.
(1) For lurking house-trespass by any —
(a) The accused committed lurking house-trespass;
(b) He did so after sunset and before sunrise;
(2) For house-breaking by night—
(a) The accused committed house-breaking;
(b) He did so after sunset and before sunrise.
Question
Explain - Difference between ‘giving false evidence’ and ‘fabricating false

evidence’.
Giving false evidence
(i) The offence of giving false evidence is committed by a person who is bound by an
oath or an express provision of the law to tell the truth but it is not so in the case of
fabricating false evidence,
(ii) In the case of giving false evidence, the false statement need not be made on a
material point but in the case of fabricating the false evidence the evidence fabricated
must be on a material point,
(iii) The question of the effect of the evidence on the officer before whom the
evidence is given is of no consequence in the case of giving false evidence but this
effect is the important point in fabricating false evidence,
(iv) It is essential that there should be a proceeding, judicial or non-judicial, being

conducted at the time of fabricating false evidence which only contemplates a
reasonable prospect of such a proceeding having regard to the circumstances of the

case and that the evidence fabricated is intended to be used in such a proceeding,
(v) Last but not the least, it is the intentional giving of false evidence or the intentional
fabrication of false evidence that is punishable.
Fabricating false evidence (Section 192 of IPC)
Legal provisions regarding Fabricating false evidence under section 192 of Indian
Penal Code, 1860.
Fabricating false evidence:
The essence of the offence of fabricating false evidence under Sec. 192 consists in
endeavour to injure another by supplying false data upon which a judicial decision
may rest.
The ingredients of the offence of fabricating false evidence are:
(i) The causing of –
a) Any circumstance to exist; or
b) Making any false entry; or
c) Of any document containing a false statement.
(ii) With intention that it may appear in evidence in, –
a) A judicial proceeding; or
b) In a proceeding taken by law before a public servant; or
c) An arbitrator.
(iii) In order to cause any person whose duty it is in such proceedings to form an
opinion upon the evidence, to arrive at an erroneous opinion on any point material to
the result of such proceeding. The term ‘fabrication’ refers to the fabrication of false
evidence; and if the evidence fabricated is intended to be used in a judicial
proceeding, the offence is committed as soon as the fabrication is complete; it is
immaterial that the judicial proceeding has not been commenced, or that no actual use
has been made of the evidence fabricated.
Question
Explain in detail offence of Defamation.
Answer
Introduction
The word defamation has taken from Latin word ‘Diffamare’. Semantics or
Etymology of the Latin word ‘Diffamare’ provides that it means 'Spreading evil report
about someone'. Thus, defamation is nothing but causing damage to reputation of
another.
In India this right is safeguarded both in civil law and in criminal law.
Criminal Defamation in India
The elements of defamation include (i) making a false statement and (ii) "tending to
lower a person in the estimation of members of correct thinking of society" Therefore,
the crime of defamation is against the right of reputation.
Reputation has been defined as "the estimate in which a person is held by others, the
character that imputes him in the community or the society to which he belongs."
Defamation can be committed in two ways, namely: (i) speaking, or (ii) in writing and
its equivalent ways.
The English Common Law describes the first as "SLANDER" and the second as
"LIBEL". Slander has also been attributed several ways.
The penalty and penalty for the offense of defamation are provided for in Article 500
of the IPC. But article 499 speaks of a dozen exceptions on what cannot be called
defamation:
First exception: Imputation of the truth whose public good must be made or
published:
It is not defamation to impute anything that is true about any person, if it is for the
public good that the imputation must be made or published. Whether or not it is for
the public good is a matter of fact.
Second Exception: Public Conduct of Public Servants:
It is not defamatory to express in good faith any opinion concerning the conduct of an
official in the performance of his public duties or the respect for his character, insofar
as His character appears in this conduct.
Third Exception: Conduct of Any Person Affecting a Public Question:
It is not a defamation to express in good faith any opinion as to the conduct of a

person and respecting its character, insofar as its character appears in this conduct, and
no longer.
Fourth Exception: Publication proceedings of court proceedings:
It is not defamatory to publish a genuinely authentic report of the deliberations of a

Court of Justice or the outcome of such proceedings.
Fifth Exception: Merits the case decided in court or the conduct of witnesses and
other persons concerned:
It is not defamatory to express in good faith any opinion concerning the merits of a
case, whether civil or criminal, decided by a Court Of justice, or concerning the
conduct of a person as a party, witness or agent, or by respecting the character of that
person, to the extent that his character appears in that conduct, and no longer.
Sixth Exception: Merits of public performance:
It is not defamatory to express in good faith any opinion on the merits of any
performance which the author has submitted to the judgment of the public or on the
character of the author to the extent that his character appears in such performance and
not .
Seventh Exception: Censure passed in good faith by person having lawful

authority over another:
This is not defamation in a person having on another authority, conferred by law or

arising from a lawful contract concluded with another, to pass in good faith any
censorship on the conduct of that other person.
Eighth Exception: Favourable Charges in Good Faith to the Authorized Person:
It is not defamatory to prefer in good faith a charge against a person to one who has
the lawful authority over that person in respect of the person Object of the charge.
Ninth exception: Charge made in good faith by a person to protect his interests
or those of others:
It is not defamatory to impute the character another person Provided that the charge
which is made in good faith for the protection of the interest of the person who makes
it or any other person or for the public good.
Tenth Exception: Caution intended for good of person to who conveyed or for
public good:
It is not a defamation to give a warning in good faith to one person against another,
provided that the warning is for the benefit of the person to whom it is transmitted or
of any interested person. Chapter XXI, Articles 500, 501 and 502 of the IPC deal with
the sanction for defamation.
CONCLUSION
The severity of the crime and whether it justified the liberty limiting punishment of
criminal sanctions. While there is harm to the reputation of the victim, the penalty
under Sec. 500 is far too harsh and restrictive for it to be justified.
Short Note
Public Nuisance
Legal provisions regarding Public Nuisance is mentioned under section 268 of Indian
Penal Code, 1860.
Public Nuisance:
Meaning of Nuisance (Nocumentum)
Nuisance or annoyance means anything which causes hurt, inconvenience, or damage,

or which essentially interferes with the enjoyment of life or property. ‘Nuisance’
includes any act, omission, place, or thing which causes or is likely to cause injury,
danger or offence to the sense of sight, smell or hearing or which is, or may be,
dangerous to life or injurious to health or property.
Kinds of nuisance:
Nuisances may be divided into two main headings namely, (i) private nuisances and
(ii) public nuisances. Nuisances may be permanent, continuing, recurrent and
temporary nuisances. Nuisances may be (i) nuisances per se or nuisances at law and
(ii) nuisances per accidents or nuisances in fact. Private Nuisances:
Private nuisance is anything which causes material discomfort and annoyance to a

man in the use for ordinary purposes of his house or property and for the suppression
of which the individuals aggrieved are entitled to invoke the assistance of the courts.
Public or Common nuisances:
Public nuisance or common nuisance is an offence against the public either by doing a
thing which tends to the annoyance of the whole community in general, or by
neglecting to do anything which the common good requires.
Section 268 of the Code requires the following essentials.
(1) Doing of any act or illegal omission to do an act.
(2) The act or omission;
(i) Must cause any common injury, danger or annoyance-
a) To the public, or
b) To the people in general who dwell or occupy property in the vicinity, or
(ii) Must necessarily cause injury, obstruction, danger or annoyance to persons who
may have occasion to use any public right.
Short Note
Offences against Public Decency and Morals in India
Punishment for offences against Public Decency and Morals in India
Offences against public decency and morals consist in publicity and circulation of
obscene literature, doing obscene acts, reciting obscene songs, uttering obscene words
etc. in public, exhibiting objects, corrupting any person under the age of twenty years
by obscenity.
The concept of obscenity has always been directly linked with the concept of morality
in the society. The socially acceptable standard of morality and obscenity have always
been in a state of flux from the ancient time. Even today it is difficult to find the exact
meaning of obscenity.
“Obscenity” —Meaning of: Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000

also gives provisions regarding obscenity. It runs as follows:
The Code does not define what is obscene, but Section 292 points out that any writing,
drawing, painting or object or engraving etc. kept or used for bona fide religious
worship is not deemed to be obscene for the purposes of the law relating obscenity.
The constitutional validity of the section has been upheld by the Supreme Court in
Ranjit D. Udeshi v. State of Maharashtra.

Law of Crime IPC

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Law of Crime IPC

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Notes Law of Crimes (IPC) – I, LL. B. I, Sem.

Paper No. IV-

LAW OF CRIMES I- (Indian Penal Code)

Unit- 2 - Foundation of Criminal Liability.

Unit- 3 -General exceptions under sec. 76 to 106

Unit- 5 – Inchoate Offences.

Unit- 6- Offences affecting Life.

Unit- 7- Offences against Property.

Unit- 8- Offences of False Evidence & Offences Relating To Documents.

10.1 Offences affecting the Public Health (Section 268-278)

10.3. Public Decency and Morals (ss 292-294A)

Crime and Stages of Crime

There are four stages in commission of a Crime.

In the Indian Law, Mere Preparation to commit an offense is punishable in the

2. Preparation to commit a dacoity

3. Preparation for counterfeiting coins and Government stamps

4. Possessing counterfeit coins, false weight or measurement and forged

1. Guilty intention to commit an offence

2. Some act done towards committing the offence

3. The act must fall short of the completed offence

Prescribed Punishments in the Indian Penal Code

2. In certain cases, punishments for attempt to offences and completed offences

No man should be a convicted of a crime unless the two requirements of mental

Mens Rea (Mental Element)

Actus Reus (Physical Element)

Meaning of Mens rea

Actus Reus (Physical Element) -

An actual action that is a fundamental component of a crime, as compared with the

omission involves a failure to engage in a necessary bodily movement resulting in

What are the Different Kinds of Punishment Practiced in India? – Explain.

They are described hereunder.

It is the maximum punishment possible to be imposed on a criminal. This punishment

The punishment of death may be imposed on the following offences:—

Punishment for murder by a life-convict – Sec. 303

Dacoity with murder – Sec. 396 I.P.C.

2. Imprisonment for Life:

The Fourth kind of punishment is “Imprisonment”. It is of two descriptions, viz.—

(i) Rigorous, i.e., with hard labour; and

(i) Rigorous Imprisonment i.e. with Hard Labour:

(ii) Simple imprisonment:

“Forfeiture” is the divestiture of specific property without compensation in

Explain in detail General Exceptions under Indian Penal Code.

Classification of general exceptions

Excusable Act – Excusable General Exceptions

 Mistake of fact (Section 76 and79)

 Accident (Section 80)

 Infancy (Section 82, 83)

 Insanity (Section 84)

 Judicial Act (Section 77 and 78)

 Necessity (Section 81)

 Consent (Section 87 – 89 and 92)

 Duress (Section 94)

 Communication (Section 93)

 Trifles (Section 95)

 Private Defense (Section 96-106)

The law of private defence is based on two main principles -

2) Right of private defence of the body and of property (Section 97):

3) Right of private defence against the act of a person of unsound mind,

4) Acts against which there is no right of private defence (Section 99):

i) against the acts of a public servant acting in good faith and;

Thirdly - An assault with the intention of committing rape;

unnatural lust, kidnapping or abduction, wrongful confinement etc.

10) Commencement and continuance of the right of private defence of property