Law Notes (LL.

B Notes)
Notes and Video Lecture of LL.B ( 3 Year) Kurukshetra University Kurukshetra
Home Blog By.... CONSTITUTION CONTRACT ... Hindu Law Indian Penal
Code JURISPRUDENCE Muslim Law.. Registration Act.. Law of Torts.. ENVIRONMENTAL
LAW Civil Procedure Cide (CPC) Cr.P.C (Criminal Procedure Code) RTI Act 2005 ▼

Indian Penal Code

INDIAN PENEL CODE Video Lecture Hindi...

Part 1---

Part-2

Question 1 :-Discuss the right of private defence against

offences relating the human body. Is there any difference
between Indian Law and English Law.?
OR
Section 97 of IPC defines that the right of private defence of
the body and of property?
Every person has a right, subject to the restrictions
contained in section 99, to defend :
1. First : His own body, and the body of any other person,
against any offence affecting the human body.
2. 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 ana
attempt to commit theft, robbery, mischief or criminal
trespass.
RIGHT OF PRIVATE DEFENCE OF BODY
Section 97 lays down that every person has a right subject to
restrictions contained in section 99, to defend his own body,
and the body of any other person, against any offence
affecting the human body. Section 102 of IPC provides that
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.
It is clear from the wording of the section that the
right commences and continues as long as danger to body
lasts. The extent to which the exercise of the right will be
justified will depend not on the actual danger but on whether
there was reasonable apprehension of such danger. There
must be an attempt or threat, and consequent thereon an
apprehension of danger, but it should not be a mere ide
threat. There must be reasonable ground for the
apprehension.
 The right of private defence of the body extends to the
voluntary causing of death or any other harm to the assailant
if the offence occasioning the exercise of the right be of any
of the following descriptions, viz :
1. An assault causing reasonable apprehension of death.
2. Even injury to innocent persons in the right of private
defence against an assault is excusable.
3. Assault with the intention of committing rape, gratifying
unnatural lust, kidnapping or abducting or wrongfully
confining a person causing reasonable apprehension that he
will not be able to have recourse to the public authorities for
his release.
For the purpose of exercising he right of private defence
physical or mental incapacity of he person against whom the
right is exercised is no bar.
There is however no right of private defence :
1. Against an act which does not reasonable cause the
apprehension of death or of grievous hurt, if done, or
attempted to be done, by a public servant or 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.
2. In cases in which there is time to have recourse to the
protection of the public authorities.
3. Nor does the right of private defence extend to the
inflicting of more harm than it is necessary to inflict for the
purpose of defence(Sec.99)
The measure of defence must bear proportion to the
quantum of force used by the attacker and which it is
necessary to repel. Thus where the accused who was
attacked by another with a kirpan succeeded in disarming his
opponent by taking away his weapon and showered blows
after blows including the serious once on the chest. It was
held that he must be held to have exceeded the right of self
defence and was guilty under section 304 Part I of IPC.
The right of private defence provided by section 97 IPC is
a right of protection and not of vengeance or aggression. An
act done in exercise of a right of private defence does not
give rise to any right of private defence in return. Case :
Mukhtiar Singh v. State of Punjab 1973.

Question No. 2 : Define criminal conspiracy and its

ingredients given in Section 120A of IPC. How it punishable.?
INTRODUCTION: The original Indian Penal Code did not have
an offence by the name of criminal conspiracy. However the
need to have this offence was felt later on and this chapter V-
A relating to criminal conspiracy with only two sections in it
i.e. section: 120-A which provides definition of criminal
conspiracy and Sec. 120-B providing its punishment was
added in IPC by the Criminal Law Amendment act 1913.
Definition of Criminal conspiracy under Sec.120-A
When two or more persons agree to do or cause to be done
I) An illegal Act
II) An act which is not illegal but when it is done by illegal
means.
Such an agreement is designated/made a criminal
conspiracy.
INGREDIENTS:-
1.There shall be minimum two or more person.
2. Agree for illegal act. The expression ‘ illegal’ has been
defined in Sec.43 of the code. According to this section, the
word illegal is applicable to everything :
i) Which is an offence
ii) Which is prohibited by law
iii) Which is furnishes ground for a civil action
iv) Act is done by illegal means.
Further provided that no agreement except an agreement to
commit an offence, shall amount to a criminal conspiracy
unless some act besides the agreement is done by one or
more parties to such agreement in pursuance thereof.
Explanation : It is immaterial whether he illegal act is the
ultimate object of such agreement or is merely incidental to
that object. In other words, the conspirator is guilty of
criminal conspiracy; whether the illegal act is the ultimate
object of the agreement or it is merely incidental to the
object of the agreement. The law does not treat these cases
differently.
Case : Mohd. Usman v/s State 1981 : In this case the accused
persons were selling explosive substances without valid
license for a very long time. The SC held that they were guilty
of criminal conspiracy, as they had been doing this for a very
long time, which could not have been possible without an
agreement between then, and this agreement was proved by
necessary implication.
ILLUSTRATION: ‘A’ the wife of ‘B’ had illicit connection with
‘C’, who wanted to murder ‘B’. Instead of telling B that C
waned to murder him, told C that B would go to lonely place
on a particular day & time. C murdered B at that particular
place, date and time. Thus A and C both are guilty of the
offence of criminal conspiracy. C is also guilty of adultery and
murder.
CONVICTION OF A SINGLE PERSON FOR CRIMINAL
CONSPIRACY:- An important question arises whether a single
individual can be held guilty of this offence. For criminal
conspiracy, there ‘must’ be at-least two persons. Thus the
section only says that agreement must be between two or
more persons and not that the connection must be of at-
least two persons.
ILLUSTRATION :- Where the prosecution case is that, four :
persons had entered into an agreement to commit murder of
‘Z’ and out of these four one is ‘D’ without a shadow of
doubt. The other three might be A,B and C or might not be
A,B and C because the evidence against them is doubtly. In
such case, since two things are certain the member of
conspirators was four and one of these four was definitely
“D’ thus D alone is guilty of criminal conspiracy.
Case : B.H. Narasimha Rao V/s Govt. Of A.P 1995 The
accused was charged for committing an offence in conspiracy
with seven other who were al acquitted. It was held that the
accused could not be convicted under section 120-B on the
mere ground that he was head of a section of he branch
where the fraud was alleged to have been committed.
Section 120-B : Punishment of criminal conspiracy: Whoever
is a party to a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence
punishable with death, imprisonment for life or rigorous
imprisonment for a term of two years of upwards shall,
where were no express provision is made in this code for
punishment of such conspiracy, be punished in he same
manner as if he had abetted of such offence.
# Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy other than a
criminal conspiracy to commit an offence punishable with
imprisonment for a term not exceeding six month or with
fine or with both.
Question No. 3 : Define Murder and distinguish it from
culpable homicide no amounting to murder
OR
Every murder is a culpable homicide, but every culpable
homicide is not murder. Discuss.
Ans :INTRODUCTION; Homicide means the killing of a man
by man. The homicide may be lawful or unlawful. Culpable
homicide means death through human agency punishable by
law. All murders are culpable homicide but all culpable
homicide is not murder. There are two classes of culpable
homicide :
1. Culpable Homicide Amounting to Murder: It is known as
simple murder.
2. Culpable homicide not amounting to Murder: There is
necessarily a criminal or knowledge in both. The difference
does not lie in quality, it lies in the quantity or degree of
criminality closed by the act. In murder there is greater
intention or knowledge than in culpable homicide not
amounting to murder. The culpable homicide is defined in
sec. 299 of the IPC which is as under :
CULPABLE HOMICIDE UNDER SEC.299 OF IPC
Whoever causes death by doing any act :-
(i) With the intention of causing death
(ii) With the intention of causing such bodily injury as is
likely to cause death.
(iii) With the knowledge that he is likely, by such act, to
cause death commits the offence of culpable homicide.
ILLUSTRATION
‘A’ knows that Z is behind a bush, B does not know it. A
intending to cause or knowing that is likely to cause Z’s death
induces B to fire at the bush. B fires and kills Z. Here B may
be guilty of no offence, but A has committed the offence of
culpable homicide. Here is the three explanations of this
section which are as under :-
Explanation No. 1 :- A person who causes bodily injury to
another who is labouring under disorder decease, or bodily
infirmity and thereby accelerates the death of that other,
shall be deemed to have caused his death.
Explanation No. 2 : Where death is caused by bodily injury
the person who causes such bodily injury shall be deemed to
have caused death, although by resorting to proper remedy
and skilful treatment, the death might have been prevented.
Explanation No. 3 : The causing of 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.
Case: Kedar Parsad V/s State 1992: It was held by the court
that the first accused was liable U/s 304 and the other U/s
324 for causing hurt by dangerous weapon & the third U/s
323 for causing simple hurt only.
Case:- Ghanssham V/s State of Maharashtra 1996 : The
accused husband stabbed his wife on chest resulting in her
death on her refusal to have sexual intercourse with him. It
was held that the act was done in sheer frustration and anger
and so his liability was based on sec. 299(2) of IPC.
Case: Sarabjeet Singh V/s St ate 1994. The accused did not
have good relation with complainant on account of sale
transaction of piece of land. He went to the house and
assaulted the complainant and his wife. He also picked up
the infant child of the complainant and threw him down on
the ground with force as a result of which the child died
some time later. The accused was held guilty under sec. 304
Part-II. When culpable homicide amounts to murder :
According to sec.300 of IPC except the exceptions culpable
homicide is murder, it the act by which death is caused:
1. It is done with the intention of causing death or
2. It is done with the intention of causing such bodily injury
as the offender knows that it is to be likely to cause the death
of the person to whom the harm is caused.
3. If it is done with the intention of causing bodily injury to
any person and the bodily injury intended to be inflicted is
sufficient ordinary cause of nature to cause death
4. If the person committed the act knows that it is so
imminently dangerous that it must in all probability, cause
death or such bodily injury as is like to cause death; and
commits such act without any excuse for incurring death or
such injury as said above.
ILLUSTRATION:
A. A shoots Z with intention of killing him, Z dies in
consequence, A commits murder.
B. A knowing that Z is labouring under such disease that a
blow is likely to cause his death, strike him with the intention
of causing bodily injury, Z dies in consequences of blow. A is
guilty of murder.
C. A intention gives Z a sword cut sufficient to cause the
death of a man in the ordinary course of nature. Z dies in
consequences. Here A is guilty of murder although he may
not have intended to cause Z’s death.
D. ‘ A’ without any excuse fires a loaded cannon in to a
crowd of persons and kills one of them. A is guilty of murder
although he may not have had a pre-meditated design to kill
any particular individual.
Cases:-
Sridharan Sathesan V/s State of Keral 1995:-
There was a dispute between the accused and the deceased
regarding the payment of money. The accused who was a
driver caused serious injuries by his mini bus and hit the
deceased with great speed in he middle portion of the body.
Tyre marks were also found on the thighs of the deceased. It
was held that it was an intentional killing and Sec.300 (1) was
applicable.
Case : State V/s Sadanand 1987 :-
Accused caused the first injury on the stomach of the
deceased by Rampuri Knife with a blade of more than six
inches long. While the deceased started running away from
the place to save himself, the accused gave another blow by
the same knife on his back. The injuries caused his death.
The SC held that the accused was guilty of murder and
Sec.300 (3) was applicable.
Case: - Lakha Singh V/s state of Rajasthan: The accused was
held guilty on the basis of cause (3) of section 300 of IPC.
Case: Dulal Hazara V/s State 1987: The accused tied the
mouth and throat and hands of the deceased causing her
death by asphyxiation due to throttling, he was held guilty of
murder. He knew that his act was so imminently dangerous
as to cause death probability.
Thus except the exceptions cases culpable homicide is
murder, if the circumstances described above any of the four
clauses are present. In other words, only these four classes
of culpable homicide are murder and any other kind of
culpable homicide continues to be culpable homicides and
does not become murder.

EXCEPTIONS OR WHEN CULABLE HOMICIDE IS NOT MURDER

Five exceptions have been provided u/s 300 wherein causing
death does not amount to murder. If any of these exceptions
is held to be applicable in a case, the conviction of the
accused in that case would be for culpable homicide not
amounting to murder. In this sense, therefore, these five
exceptions are partial defences to murder thus following are
the exceptions:-
1. Grave and sudden provocation: Culpable homicide is not
murder if the offended, who deprived of the self control by
grave and sudden provocation, causes the death of a person,
who gave the provocation or causes the death of any other
person by mistake or accident. Thus for the first exception
following things are necessary :-
a) There must be provocation.
b) Provocation must be grave and sudden.
c) By reason of such provocation the offender have been
deprived of the power of self control.
d) The death must be of that person who gave the
provocation or any other person by mistake or accident.
ILLUSTRATION: Y gives grave and sudden provocation to A.
A on this sudden provocation fires a pistol at Y, neither
intending nor knowing himself to be likely to kill Z who is
near him but out of sight. A kills Z here, A has not committed
murder but merely culpable homicide.
Ajit Singh v/s State l991 : In this case the accused found his
wife and a neighbours in a compromising position and shot
both of them dead. It was held that he was acting under
provocation and is liable for sudden provocation.
2. RIGHT OF PRIVATE DEFENCE;- For the application of this
exception the following conditions must be fulfilled :-
A. Act must be done in good health.
B. Act must be done in exercise of the right of private
defence of person or property.
C. The person doing the act must have exceeded in his
right given to him by law and thereby caused death.
D. The act must be done without premeditation and
without any intention of causing more harm then was
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.
A believing in good faith that he can by no other mean,
prevent himself from being horsewhipped shoots Z and kills.
A has not committed murder but culpable homicide.
Bahadur Singh v/s State 1993 :The complainant party
assaulted the accused person who were also armed with
sharp weapons like Gandasa by the use of which death
caused. It was held they had excluded their right of private
defence in good faith and so exception N’s was available to
them.
3. OFFENCE BY PUBLIC SERVANT OR PERSON AIDING
PUBLIC SERVANT.
Culpable homicide is not murder if the following conditions
are there :-
a. Offence must be committed by public servant or by
some other person acting in the aid of a public servant in
advancement of public justice,
b. Public servant or such person must have exceeded the
power given to him by law.
c. Death must be caused by doing an act which he, in good
faith, believes to be lawful & necessary for discharge of his
duty.
d. The act must have been done without any malafide
intention towards the person whose death is caused.
Case : Dakhi Singh V/s State 1955.: It was held by the Court
that he was entitled to have the benefit of this exception and
so he was liable only for culpable homicide not amounting to
murder.
4. Death caused by sudden fight. For the application of
this exception
The following conditions must be ful-filled :-
a. Death must be caused by sudden fight.
b. Fight must be without any pre-meditation.
c. It must be occur in the heat of passion upon a sudden
quarrel.
d. It must be committed without the offender’s having
taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual
manner.
Explanation :- It is immaterial in such cases where party
offers the provocation or commits the first assault.
Case :- State v/s Jodha Singh 1989: A quarrel between
accused and the deceased parties changed in to a sudden
fight in which weapon were used by both parties resulting in
injuries on both sides and death of the deceased. This
exception was held to be applicable.
5. Death caused with the consent: Culpable homicide is
not murder when the person whose death is caused being
above the age of eighteen years suffers death or takes the
risk of death with his own consent.
Illustration :- ‘A’ by instigation, voluntarily caused Z, ( a
person under l8 years of age) to commit suicide. Here on
account of Z’s death (he was incapable of giving consent to
his own death). A has, therefore abetted murder.
Case :- Dashrath Paswan V/s State 1958 : The accused could
not passed the Xth Class examination for three years in a row
and become frustrated and decided to commit suicide and
informed his wife who asked him to kill her first which he did,
the exception was held to apply.

DISTINCION BETWEEN SECTION 299 AND 300 OF IPC

One of the most complex matters under the code is to
distinguish between culpable homicide and murder. The first
real attempt in this regard was made in the case :-
Case : Reg. V/s. Govinda 1876 (Bom): In this case the accused
kicked his wife who was 15 years old and gave her a few blow
on the body with the result she fell down on the ground.
Then he put one knee on her chest and struck her a few more
blow resulting in her death. The lower court convicted him of
murder. There were different opinions amongst the two
judges of the High Court and consequently the matter was
referred to a third Judge, Justice Melvil, who held the
accused guilty under clause (2) of sec.299 for culpable
homicide and sentenced him u/s 304 part I on the grounds
that the death was caused with the intention on the part of
the accused to cause such bodily injury as was likely to cause
death. Justice Melvil discussed the two sections clause by
clause and attempted to bring out the difference between
the two offence clearly in following manner :--

Q. No. 4: What do mean by kidnapping? Distinguish between

Kidnapping & Abduction.
Answer :-INTRODUCTION: Kidnapping and abduction are
particular types of offences under the law of crime. Under
these offences, a person is taken away secretly or forcible
without his consent or without the consent of authorised
guardian. Under kidnapping a person is kidnapped from
lawful custody. Under section 359 of IPC, there are two types
of kidnapping :-
1. Kidnapping from India.
2. Kidnapping from lawful guardianship.
Section 360 : defines that kidnapping from India and section
361 defines that kidnapping from lawful guardian ship. The
offence of abduction is defined under section 362 of IPC.
1. KIDNAPPING FROM INDIA:
Section 360 says that whoever conveys any person beyond
the limit of India without the consent of that person or of any
person legally authorised to consent on behalf of that
person, is said to kidnap that person from India. Age limit is
immaterial. This has two essentials :
(i) Convey any person beyond the limits of India.
(ii) Such conveying must be without the consent of that
person or of the person legally authorised to give consent
on behalf of that person.
2. KIDNAPPING FROM LAWFUL GUARDIANSHIP : SEC.361
Sec. 361 says that whoever takes or entices any minor under
sixteen years of age if a male or under eighteen years of age
if a female, or any person of unsound mind, out of the
keeping of the lawful guardianship of such minor or person of
unsound mind, without the consent of such guardian is said
to kidnap such minor or person from lawful guardianship.
The word lawful guardian here mans any person lawfully
interested with care or custody of such minor or other
person.
3. EXCEPTIONS :- There is one exception of this section,
this section does not extend to the act of any person who in
good faith believes himself to be the father of an illegitimate
child, or who in good faith, believes himself to be entitled the
lawful custody of such child unless such act is committed for
an immoral or unlawful purpose.
Take or entice away :- Take away or entice away means to
induce a person for going to another place. The object of this
Sec. Is to protect minor children from being reduced ( to
corrupt) for improper purpose.
Guadian consent :- The kidnapping must be without the
consent of the guardian. The consent may be expressed or
implied. Thus, to attract this sec. there must be taking or
enticing away any minor or unsound mind person out of
lawful guardianship.
ABDUCTION
Section 362 says that whoever by force compels or by any
deceitful induces any person to go from any place, is said to
abduct that person. This section may read with section 364,
365 and 360.
This section contains two essentials for the offence of
abduction :-
1. Forcible compulsion or inducement by deceitful means.
2. The object of such compulsion or inducement must be
going of a person from any place. Thus abduction is an
offence under sec.362. If by force a person compels or even
by fraudulent means induce any other person to go from any
place taken is called abduction.
PUNISHMENT FOR KIDNAPPING UNDER SEC. 363 :
Whoever kidnaps any person from India or from Lawful
guardianship shall be punished with imprisonment or either
description for a term which may extend to seven years and
shall be liable to fine.
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN KIDNAPPING AND ABDUCTION:

KIDNAPPING ABDUCTION

1. It is committed only in respect of It is committed in

respect of any
A minor under 16 years of age if person of any age.
A male and 18 years of age if a
Female, or a person of unsound
mind.
2. In kidnapping consent of the Consent of the
person removed, if
Person enticed is immaterial. Freely and voluntarily
given,
Condones the offence.
3. In kidnapping the intention of In abduction
intention is a very
The offender is irrelevant. Important factor.
4. It is not a continuing offence. The It is a continuing
offence. A
Offence is completed as soon as person is being
abducted both
The minor is removed from the when he is first taken
from one
Custody of his or her guardian. Place to and also
when he is
Removed from one place
to
Another.

UNIT IV
Question No. 11:- What is defamation? What defences are
available to a person who is charged with the offence of
defamation.? OR
Can a wrongful act of a defamation constitute an offence?
What are the defences available to the alleged wrong-doer?
Describe.
Answer : INTRODUCTION:-
Defamation is a crime against the reputation of a person.
Defamation is also a tort. It is one of the most important
rights of a person or right of his reputation. If any person by
way of libel i.e. written words or by salener i.e. spoken words
lowers the reputation of a person then it is called
defamation. The reputation must be lowered among the
reasonable person including relation of a person.
DEFINITION OF DEFAMATION :-
Section 499 of IPC says that whoever by words, spoken or
written or by sign or by visible representation, makes or
publishes any imputation concurring any person invading to
harm or knowing or having reason to believe that such
imputation will harm the reputation of such person is said,
except in the case of hereinafter accepted, to defamed that
person.
This section 499 of IPC contains the following things :-
1. Whoever makes publishes any imputation concurring
any person.
2. Such imputation must be made by words, signs or by
visible representation.
3. Such imputation must be made or published with the
intention of harming or with the knowledge or having reason
to believe that it will harm the reputation of such person.

ESSENTIAL OF THIS SECTION

The following are the essentials of this section regarding
defamation:-
1. PERSON :- Person means the person who publishes are
the person who makes an imputation. Person includes like
editor or a journal, the printer or the writer of the articles in
the paper.
2. PUBLICATION :- The expression ‘makes or publishes’ has
to be understood. The meaning of this expression is
publication. Publication of the defamatory statement is
essential. If a person merely writes out a defamatory matter
but does not publish, then the same will not be defamation.
Publication means the defamatory statement, must come
into the notice of third person. Because the reputation of a
person remains in the eye of third person. Publication may be
done by :-
1. An act which conveys the defamatory statement to a
third person.
2. By drawing the attention of others towards the
defamatory
matters already existed.
Thus, this communication of defamatory matter to the
person defamed and to the third person is necessary.
A case Krishana Nand v/s Emperor : The Allahabad High
Court held that the publication to a third person was deemed
to be necessary. However, in case of best land, the
presumption being that it was needed by other. Its sending
or pasting ward amount to publication.
3. Publication of defamatory statement must be intending
to harm the reputation of another person:- The information
to cause harm is the most essential part of an offence under
section 499 of IPC. There must be an intention of harming or
knowing or having reasons to believe that the imputation will
harm the reputation. It is sufficient that there was reason to
believe that the imputation made would harm the
reputation.

There are some explanations attached to this section:-

1. Explanation No. 1:- If any amount of defamation is
against the deceased person and the imputation would harm
the reputation of that person of living and is intended to be
harmful to the feelings of the family or relatives.
2. Explanation No.2 : This may amount to defamation to
take an imputation concerning to a company or association
selection of such person.
3. Explanation No.3: An imputation in the form of an
alternative or expressed ironically may amount to
defamation.
4. Explanation No.4 :- No estimate is said to harm a
person’s reputation unless that imputation directly or
indirectly in the estimation of others, lowers the normal
instinctual character of that person in respect of caste or if
his calling in respect of his caste lowers, the creditor of that
person in a locality or in a state is generally considered as
disgraceful. Such as A draws a picture of Z running with B’s
watch intending to cause it to be believed that Z has stolen
B’s watch. This is defamation unless it falls within one of
exception.
EXCEPTIONS :
Following are the exceptions to this offence :-
1. True statement : It is not defamation if any thing which
is true concerning only person if it is for the public interest or
welfare good. The imputation should be in good faith and for
public.
2. Public conduct of public servant:- It is not defamation to
express, in good faith any opinion whatever respecting the
conduct of a public servant in discharge of his public
sanctions or respecting his character so far as his character
appears in that conduct and not further.
3. Public quotation: It is not a defamation to express in
good faith any opinion whether respecting the conduct of
any person so far his character appears in that conduct and
no further.
4. Publication of court proceedings. It is not defamation to
publish a substantial true report of the proceedings of court
of justice.
5. Conduct of witness in the court:- It is not a defamation
to express in good faith any opinion whatever respecting the
writ of any case, civil or criminal which has been decided by a
court of justice or respecting the conduct of any person.
Along with witness or any agent in any such case or
respecting the character of such person as far as his
character appears in the conduct and no further.
6. Merit of public performance :- It is not defamation to
express in good faith any opinion respecting the merit of any
performance. Which is submitted to the judgment of public
or respecting the authority that appear in such performance
and no further.
7. Censure passed in good faith:- It is not a defamation of a
person to pass, In good faith any censure on the conduct of
that person in consented matter.
8. It is not defamation to perform in good faith, an
accusation against any person to any of these who has lawful
authority over that person with respect to subject matter or
within this exception.
9. It is not defamation to make an imputation if the
impanation is made in good faith for the protection of the
interest of the person making it.
10. It is not defamation to convey a caution that is intended
in the good faith of the person.
These are the exceptions to the offence of defamation.
Under these exceptions no offence of defamation is proved.
PUNISHMENT FOR THE ACT OF
DEFAMATION
Under section 500 of IPC it is provided that the punishment
for the offence of defamation , which is simple imprisonment
for a term which may extend to two years or with fine or with
both.

Q. No 9:- What do you mean by Kidnapping? Distinguish

between Kidnapping and Abduction.
OR
What are the ingredients of the offence of kidnapping ?

Answer : INTRODUCTION :- kidnapping and adduction are

particular types of offence under the law of crime. Under
these offences, a person is taken away secretly or forcible
without his consent or without the consent of his authorised
guardian. Under kidnapping a person is kidnapped from
lawful custody. Kidnapping is defined under section 359 of
IPC, which gives two type of kidnapping:-
i) Kidnapping from India.
ii) Kidnapping from lawful guardianship.
Section 360 says that Kidnapping from India end. Section 361
defines that Kidnapping from lawful guardianship. The
offence of abduction is defined under section 362 of IPC.
Section 359 of IPC says that there are two types of
kidnapping:-
1. Kidnapping from India: Under section 360 of IPC :- This
section provides that whoever conveys any person beyond
the limit of India without the consent of that person or any
person legally authorised to consent on behalf of that
person, is said to kidnap that person from India. Age limit
immaterial. This section has two essentials :-
I) Convey any person beyond the limits of India.
II) Such conveying must be without the consent of that
person or the person legally authorised to give consent on
behalf of that person.
2. Kidnapping from lawful guardianship 361 IPC:- It defines
as that whoever takes or entices any minor under sixteen
years of age if a male or under eighteen years of age if a
female, or any person of unsound mind, out of the keeping of
the lawful guardianship of such minor or person of unsound
mind, without the consent of such guardian, is said to kidnap
such minor or person from lawful guardianship. The word
lawful guardian here means any person lawfully interested
with care or custody of such minor or other person.
3. Exception :- There is one exception of this sec. This
section does not extend to the act of any person who in good
faith, believes himself to be the father of an illegitimate child,
or who in good faith believes himself to be entitled the lawful
custody of such child unless such act is committed for an
immoral or unlawful purpose.
#.Take or Entice Away:- means to induce a person for going
to another place. Object of this section is to protect minor
children from being reduced ( to corrupt) for improper
purpose.
#. Guardian consent: The kidnapping must be without the
consent of the guardian. The consent may be expressed or
implied. Thus to attract this section there must be taking or
enticing away any minor or unsound mind person out of
lawful guardianship.
ABDUCTION
Section 362 of IPC says that whoever by force, compels or by
any deceitful means induces any person to go from any
place ,is said to abduct that person.
Two essential ingredients of the offence of abduction
are :
i) Forcefully compulsion or inducement by deceitful
means.
ii) The object of such compulsion or inducement must be
the going of a person from any place. Thus abduction is an
offence under section 362. If a person compels or even by
fraudulent means induce by .other person to go from any
place taken is called abduction.
PUNISHMENT FOR KIDNAPPING UNDER
SEC.363 IPC
Whoever kidnaps any person from India or from lawful
guardianship shall be punished with imprisonment or either
description for a term which may be extended to seven
years, and shall be liable to fine.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN KIDNAPPING & ABDUCTION

KIDNAPPING ABDUCTION
1. It is committed only in respect It is committed in
respect of any
Of minor under 16 years of age person of any age.
If a male and 18 years if a female
Or a person of unsound mind.
2. In kidnapping the consent of Consent of the
person removed, if
Enticed is immaterial. Freely and voluntarily
given,
Condones the offence.
3. In kidnapping the intention In abduction
intention is a very
Of the offender is irrelevant. Important factor.
4. It is not a continuing offence It is a continuing
offence. A person
Is completed as soon as the is being abducted both
when he is
Minor is removed from the first taken from one
place to and
Custody of his or her also when he removed
from one
Guardian. Place to other.
Unit No. 1
Q. No. 12: Explain in detail the concept of Abetment.
Answer :- INTRODUCTION :- A crime may be committed by
one or more persons involved in crime then their liability
depends upon the extent of their participation. Thus this rule
of joint liability comes into existence. But there is an
important fact which is that the law has a knowledge about
the abettor, who has given help to another in crime. This rule
is very ancient and was applied in Hindu Law also. In English
Law, criminals are divided in four categories, but in India
there is only one distinction between the doer and his helper
who is known as abettor. The crime of abetment come under
section 107 to 120 of the IPC. Section 107 defines ‘abetment
of a things’ and section l08 defines about the abettor.
SECTION 107 IPC ‘ABETMENT OF THING’:
A person abets the doing of a thing by instigation :-
1. Instigate any person to do that things
2. By conspiracy.
3. By aids.
BY INSTIGATION ANY PERSON TO DO THAT THINGS :-
According to the first clause of section 107 a person abets of
thing that instigates any person to do that thing. A person is
said to instigate another when he incites, urges, encourages,
provokes, counsels, procures or command him to do
something.
EXPLANATION :- A person who by wilful misrepresentations
or by wilful concealment of a material fact, which he is bound
to disclose, voluntary causes or procures or attempts to
cause or procures a thing to be done, is said to instigate the
doing of that things.
ILLUSTRATION :-
A Police Officer is authorised by a warrant from a court of
justice to apprehend Z. B knowing that fact and also that C is
not Z, wilfully represents to A that C is Z and thereby
intentionally causes A to apprehend C. Here B abets by
instigation the apprehension of C.
Case : Gurbachan Singh v/s Sat Pal Singh, AIR- 1990
A newly wedded girl died of burns. The father of deceased
had stated in FIR that the deceased committed suicide
because of harassment and constant taunt for insufficient
dowry. It was held by the SC that the deceased had
committed suicide at the instigation of her husband and in
laws and it was not a case of accidental death.
2. ABETMENT BY CONSPIRACY
The second clause of this section states that a person abets
the doing of a thing who engages with one or more other
persons in conspiracy for the doing of that thing. If an act or
illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy
and in order to doing of that thing then it is called abetment
by conspiracy. If an act or illegal omission takes place in
prurience of that conspiracy.
ILLUSTRATION :-
A concerts with B a plans for poisoning Z. It is agreed that A
shall administer the poison. B then explains the plan to C
mentioning that a third person is to administer the poison,
but without mentioning A’s name. C agrees to procure the
poison and deliver it to B for the purpose explained ‘A’
administers the poison and Z dies. Here A and C have not
conspired together, yet C has therefore committed the
offence and is liable for punishment.
A case : Rup Devi v/s State : 1955.
The deceased & his wife had strained relationship. The wife
had illicit intimacy with the accused. The deceased was
scheduled to go to ‘Sadhu” on a particular day. The wife told
the accused about this programme even though she knew
that the accused was waiting for the opportunity to kill her
husband and taking the opportunity he killed him. It was
held that the wife was not guilty of abetment by conspiracy,
even though her conduct was open to censure.

3. ABETMENT BY AIDING:
The third clause of the section says that,” A person abets the
doing of thing who intentionally aids by any act in the illegal
omission of the doing of that thing.
EXPLANATION :- Whoever either prior to or at the time of the
commission of an act does anything in order to facilitate the
commission of that act thereby facilitates the commission
thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act.
ILLUSTRATION :- If the servant keeps the gate open of the
master’s house so that thrives may enter and thieves do not
come, he cannot be held to have abetted the commission of
theft.
A case: Ram Kumar v/s State of H.P. 1995. The 19 years old
prosecutrix was taken to the police station by the accused
that kept watch over her husband while she was raped by the
co-accused. In this custodial rape the accused turned deaf
ears towards the cries of the prosecutrix and did nothing to
help her. The SC implied abetment of the accused for
abetment of rape.
SECTION 108 OF IPC: ABETTOR :
A person can become an abettor in two ways :-
1. When he abates the commission of an offence : Example
: Where he abets ‘B’ to commit murder of ‘Z’. Here A is an
abettor.
2. When the abets the commission of an offence it is
committed by a person capable by law to commit an offence
with the same intention or knowledge as that of the abettor.
Example : “A” abets B, a five year old child, to commit
murder of Z, he is still an abettor under the 2nd category
because even though the child will not be guilty of anything
by virtue of the protection given to him by section 82 of the
IPC.
To define the abettor the explanation must be read as :-
EXLPLANATION No.1 :- The abetment of the illegal omission
of an act may amount to an offence although the abettor
may not himself be bound to do that act.
ILLUSTRATION :- ‘A’ instigates B to murder C. B refuses to do
so. A is guilty of abetting B to commit murder.
Explanation No.2 :- To constitute the offence of abetment it
is not necessary that the particular act of abettor should be
committed.
ILLUSTRATION :- ‘A’ instigates B to Murder D. B in pursuance
of the instigation stabs D. D recovers from wound. A is guilty
of instigation B to commit murder.
Explanation No. 3 :- It is not necessary that the abettor & the
person abetted must have same guilty intention or
knowledge.
ILLUSTRATION :- ‘A’ with a guilty intention, abets a child or a
lunatic to commit an act which would be an offence if
committed by a person capable by law lof committing an
offence and having the same intention as A. Here A, whether
the act be committed or not is guilty of abetting an offence.
EXPLANATION NO. 4 :-The abetment of an offence being an
offence the abetment of such an abetment is also an
offence.
ILLUSTRATION :- ‘ A ‘ instigates B to instigate C to murder Z.
B accordingly instigates C to murder Z and C commits that
offence in consequences of B’s instigation. B is liable to be
punished for his offence with the punishment for murder and
as A instigated B to committed the offence. A is liable to the
same punishment.
EXPLANATION NO 5 ;-It is not necessary to the commission of
the offence of abetment by conspiracy that the abettor
shoulbigamyd concert the offence with the person who
commits it. It is sufficient if he engages in the conspiracy.
ILLUSTRATION : ‘ A’ concerts with B a plan of poisoning Z. It
is agreed that A shall administer the poison. B then explains
the plan to C mentioning that a third person is to administer
the poison but without mentioning A’s name C agrees to
procure the poison & deliver lit to B the purpose of its being
used in the matter explained. ‘A” administers the poison, Z
dies in consequence, Here though A and C did not conspired
together, Yet C has been engaged in the conspiracy in
pursuance of which Z had been murdered. C has therefore
committed the offence defined in the section and is liable to
the punishment of murder.

Unit No. iv
Question No. 13 :-What are the ingredients of the offence of
“Bigamy”? Discuss in detail. OR
What are the several offences set out in the IPC relating to
Marriage ? OR
What is bigamy? Under what circumstances would a woman,
who in the life-time of one husband, marries another, not be
guilty of bigamy.?
Answer : INTRODUCTION :-
OFFENCES RELATING TO MARRIAGE :- The following are the
provisions in the Indian Penal Code dealing with the offences
relating to marriage.
Under section 494 defines the offence of bigamy as under: “
Whoever having a husband or wife living, marries in any case
in which such marriage is void by reason of its taking place
during the life of such husband or wife, shall be punished
with imprisonment of either description for a term which
may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.”
In Bigamy case, the second marriage as a fact, that is to say,
the essential ceremonies constituting it must be proved.
Admission of marriage by the accused is not the evidence of
it in bigamy case. Under section 494 and 109 of IPC the
evidence of witness called to prove the marriage ceremonies
showed that the essential ceremonies had not been
performed. On admission of the accused in a written
statement that the parties married after the first marriage
was dissolved & was not justified, In a case Kanwal Ram v/s
Himachal Pradesh Administration 1966.
An another case of Shanti Dev Barma v/s Kanchan Prava Devi
1991 Orissa,“it was held that No plea was raised that the
second marriage was performed as per custom which
dispensed with ‘saptapadi’ oral evidence was adduced that
the accused and his alleged second wife were living as
husband and wife. It was not found sufficient to draw an
inference as to performance of ceremonies essential for valid
marriage. The accused was entitled to be acquitted.
Cohabitation caused by a man deceitfully inducing
a belief of lawful marriage. Dishonestly or fraudulently going
through a marriage ceremony knowing that no lawful
marriage is hereby created Bigamy i.e. marriage again during
the lifetime of the husband or wife where such marriage is
void. If the former marriage is concealed from the person
with whom the subsequent marriage is contracted, the
punishment is ten years or fine or both.
The exception to section 494 provides the
circumstances where a woman in the life-time of one
husband or vice versa can marry another without incurring
the offence of bigamy. It provides that section 494 does not
extend :-
a) To any person whose marriage with such husband or
wife has been declared void by a court of competent
jurisdiction.
b) To any person who contracts a marriage during the life
of a former husband or wife, it such husband or wife at the
time of the subsequent marriage shall have been continually
absent from such person for the space of seven years, and
shall not have been heard of by such person as being alive
within that time, such marriage can takes place.
Chapter-IV
Question :-14: What is an attempt to commit offences.
Discuss in the light of section 511 of IPC. OR
How far are attempts to commit offences punishable under
section 511 of IPC? What must be proved in order to support
the conviction of an attempt under this section.? OR
What are the different stages of the commission of an
offence and how far each of them is punishable? (b)
Distinguish between ”preparation to commit an offence” and
“attempt to commit an offence.”
Answer: INTRODUCTION:-

ATTEMPTS TO COMMIT OFFENCES : Section 511 lays down

that,” whoever attempts to commit an offence punishable by
this code with imprisonment for life or imprisonment, or to
cause such an offence to be committed, and in such attempt
does any act towards the commission of the offence, shall,
where no express provision is made by this code for the
punishment of such attempt, be punished with imprisonment
of any description provided for the offence.
The points which require proof under the above
section they are as follows :-
1. That the accused attempted to commit some offence
punishable with imprisonment for life or imprisonment or he
attempted to cause such and offence to be committed.
2. That in attempting to do the above act he did some act
towards the commission of the offence.
ILLUSTRATION :-
a) A makes an attempt to steal some jewels by breaking
open a box, and finds after so opening the box that there is
no jewel in it. He had done an act towards the commission of
theft, and therefore is guilty under this section.
b) A makes an attempt to pick pocket of Z by thrusting his
hand into Z’s Pocket and fails to pick the pocket with the
result A found nothing in the pocket of Z and was held guilty
of an offence under this section.
DIFFERENT STAGES OF THE COMMISSION OF AN OFFENCE
There are three stages for the commission of a crime in the
section number 511 of IPC, which are as under :-
i) Intention to commit a crime.
ii) Preparation to commit it and attempt to commit it. The
crime is when complete is successful.
INTENTION TO COMMIT THE CRIME :
It consists the evil intention or design to commit the crime.
Mere intention or evil design not followed by an act, does
not constitute an offence. The will cannot be taken for the
deed, unless there has been some external act showing the
progress made towards maturing the crime. The judges
cannot look into the breast of the criminals.
PREPARATION TO COMMIT IT AND ATTEMPT TO COMMIT IT:-
As clear from the above heading that preparation to commit
a crime, It is devising or arranging the means or measures
necessary for commission of an offence. Mere preparation
to commit an offence is punishable only in three cases :-
a) Preparation to wage war against the Govt of India u/s
122.
b) Preparation to commit depredation on territories of any
power at peace with the govt. Of India u/s 126.
c) Preparation to commit dacoity under section 399.
Preparation widely differs from attempts. Attempt is
therefore, preparation plus something more. Attempt begins
where preparation ends. A preparation is generally not
punished while every attempt is the reason being that a
preparation apart from its motives would generally be a
harmless act.
It is impossible to show in most cases that the
preparation was directed to a wrongful end or was done with
an evil motive or intention. An attempt is however made
punishable because every attempt, although it fails to
achieve the result, must create alarms which of itself is an
injury and the moral guilt of the offender is the same as if he
had succeeded.
There are however some exceptional cases where
the contemplated offence may be so grave that it must be
nipped in the bud at its earlier stage. Such as :-
1. Preparation to wage war against Govt., of India,
preparation to commit depredation on territories of any
power at place with the government of India and preparation
to commit dacoity.
2. There are also a few cases where even mere preparation
is made punishable because they cannot by the very nature
of things be meant for innocent purposes e.g. provision
against making mending buying or selling or being in
possession of instruments for counterfeiting coins, or making
the dies or other instruments used in the manufacture of
coin.
3. There are also a few acts which although in reality are
mere preparation have been regarded as substantive
offence, viz., possession of counterfeit coins, false weights
and forged documents.

Question No.15: What is criminal trespass.? Critically

examine the essential ingredients of criminal trespass with
special reference to Section 441 of IPC. OR
Can an owner himself be guilty of criminal trespass of his
own property.? Explain with the help of cases.
OR
A entered the house of K at night to carry on an intrigue with
the grown up unmarried daughter of B, having taken
precautions not to let his presence in the house be known to
anyone. A was surprise and caught by B. Is ‘A’ guilty of any
offence? Give full reasons for your
Answer.: INTRODUCTION :-
Criminal trespass is dependent not upon the mere nature of
the act, but upon the intention of the offender. As to what
intentions constitute criminal trespass enumerated in the
section itself, and beyond these no other intention will
constitute criminal trespass. In other words, not all intents of
the offender will constitute criminal trespass but only those
mentioned in the section.
DEFINITION OF CRIMINAL TRESPASS
Criminal trespass as define in Section 441 of IPC as follows :-
“ Whoever trespass into or upon property in the possession
of another with intent to commit an offence or to insult or
annoy any person in possession of such property or having
lawfully entered into or upon such property, unlawfully
remains there with intent thereby to intimidate, insult or
annoy any such person or with the intent to commit an
offence is said to commit ‘criminal trespass.”
INGREDIENTS OF CRIMINAL TRESPASS
The following are the ingredients of criminal trespass :-
i) Entry into or upon the property of another.
ii) If such entry is lawful, then unlawfully remaining upon
such property.
iii) Such entry as above in Sr.No.(ii) above remaining
unlawfully there must be with the following intentions :-
a) To commit an offence.
b) To insult, annoy or to intimidate any person in
possession of the property.
It should be noted that the use of criminal force is not at all a
necessary ingredient to constitute criminal trespass. The
entry upon the property of another relates to immovable
corporeal property and not incorporeal property such as a
right of ferry or fishery. The property must be in the actual
possession of another person. The offence of criminal
trespass can only be committed against the person who is in
actual physical possession of the property. It is not necessary
that the owner of the property be present there. The criminal
trespass can be done even in the absence of owner of
property.
In order to establish that the entry on the property
was with the intention to annoy or insult, it is necessary for
the court to be satisfied that causing such annoyance or
insult was the aim of entry. That in deciding the case
whether the aim of entry was the causing of such annoyance
or insult, the court has to consider all the relevant
circumstances and to include the probability of something
also being the dominant intention which prompted the entry.
as in the case of Mathuri v/s State of Panjab 1964-65.
In another case of Rash Bihari Chartterjee v/s Fegu Shaw
1979 S.C:- It was held that the law does not require that the
intention must be to annoy person who is actually present at
the time of the trespass.
In order to submit the reasons in support of the
problem given in the question it is submitted as under :-
That in the given case ‘A’ is not guilty of any offence for it
could not be said that he intended to cause annoyance to B
within the meaning of section 441 IPC, referred to case of
Abdul Majid 1938 Lahore. This is inferred from the
circumstances that A had taken all precautions not to let his
presence in the house known to any one and also that he was
not forbidden to enter the house. The purpose of carrying on
an intrigue with an unmarried grown up daughter is not
illegal nor is it an offence.
However if B had expressly forbidden A from
entering his house, then the position would have become
different. A’s entry would then have been in direct defiance
of an express order and an intention to annoy B could be
inferred from it.
HOW THE OWNER HIMSELF BE GUILTY OF CRIMINAL
TRESPASS OF OWN PROPERTY:-

Unit-IV
Question No. 16:-What is the law relating to cruelty by
husband or relatives of the husband of the woman? How is it
punishable.?
OR
Are you satisfied with the definition of Section 498-A
enshrined in the IPC? Discuss the relevance and
constitutionality of Section 498-A also.
Answer : INTRODUCTION :- Chapter XXA comprising Section
498-A which punishes cruelty by the husband or relatives of
the husband to the woman has been inserted by the Criminal
Law(Second Amendment)Act 1983, in Act No. 46 of 1983 it
received the assent of the President on 25th.December,1983
and the same was published in the Gazette of India
Extraordinary, dated 26.12.1983.
The new provision seeks to curb atrocities on women
including those arising out of dowry demands. The extremer
reticence of Indian women to expose the bestiality and
cruelty perpetrated on them led the crusading members to
raise the matter in the Parliament which led to the passing of
the Criminal Law (First and Second ) Amendments, 1983
Section 498-A. Therefore envisages that if a husband or the
relatives of the husband of a woman subjects such woman
to cruelty, he shall be liable to punishment for three years
and fine.
HUSBAND OR RELATIVE OF HUSBAND OF A WOMAN
SUBJECTING HER TO CRUELTY :-
Whoever being the husband or the relative of the husband of
a woman subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished
with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three
year and shall also be liable for fine.
EXPLANATION IN THIS REGARD:-
To define the word cruelty according to this section :-
(a) Any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely
to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave
injury or danger to life or health( whether mental or physical)
to the woman.
(b) Harassment of the woman where such harassment is
with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to
meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable
security or is on account of failure by her or any person
related to her to meet such demand.

Unit-II
Question No.17:-Distinguish between, Hurt and Grievous
Hurt. OR
The accused struck a woman, carrying an infant in her arms
violently over her head and shoulders. One of the blows fell
on the child’s head causing death. Of what offence is the
accused guilty.?
OR
The accused demanded one anna from the deceased which
the latter owed him. The deceased promised to pay later and
the accused thereupon kicked him twice on the abdomen
and the deceased collapsed and died. Of what offence is the
accused guilty.?
Answer :- INTRODUCTION :-
Hurt generally means injury on the body of a person. It is
such an injury which causes bodily pain or disease or infirmity
or fracture or disfigurement of face etc.
KINDS OF HURT
There are two kinds of Hurt:-
1. Simple Hurt.
2. Grievous Hurt.
1. Simple Hurt :- simple hurt is defined under section 319
of IPC whereas the grievous hurt has been defined under
section 320. Simple hurt causes simple injury with simple
bodily pain, while grievous hurt causes serious injury and
serious pain in the body too.
DEFINITION OF SIMPLE HURT:
Section 319 says that,” whoever causes bodily injury or pain
or disease or infirmity by an act to any other person, such act
is called simple hurt.
Section 319 contains the following ingredients:-
a) Bodily Pain:- The words show that there must be some
pain in the body of a person. It means mental paid does not
come under bodily pain. Any such injury which causes pain
on any external part of body comes under simple hurt.
b) Disease : Disease means any illness. By such act which
creates weakness and if a man comes into contract of any
disease then it will come under simple hurt.
c) Infirmity:- Infirmity means by illness. By such act which
creates weakness in the body, comes under simple hurt.
d) To any other Person : The hurt must be caused to any
other person not to himself. In this way, in a simple hurt
there is no need of physical contact. A hurt may be caused by
any mean or method. Such hurt must cause bodily pain or
disease or infirmity. Such hurt must be caused to another
person and not to himself.
e) Section 319 does not show that there must be direct
physical contact with another person for committing simple
hurt.
2. Grievous Hurt : There are various kinds of grievous hurt
which have been defined in section 320 in IPC. Thus a hurt is
more than a slightly causing harm as defined in section 95 of
IPC and less the culpable homicide. If the hurt results into
death land fulfils the conditions of section 299 then it
becomes culpable homicide, otherwise it grievous hurt.
The grievous hurt can be classified/designated as under :-
a. Emasculation : The destruction of private organ of a
human being is known as emasculation. Any injury which
makes a person incapable for functioning of the private
organ, person comes under grievous hurt.
b. Permanent privation of the sight of either eye if there is
privation or separation or destruction either eye of a person,
is grievous hurt.
c. Permanent privation of the hearing of either ear.
Similarly the destruction or separation of either ear is
grievous hurt. Here the power of hearing must be affected.
The eye and ears are the main functional organs of a human
being. They have is an important role in the life.
d. Privation of any member or joint: Privation of any
member or joint also comes under grievous hurt.
e. Destruction or permanent loss of the power of any
member or joint:- If there is destruction of any member of
joint of the body then it is also a grievous hurt or if any
member or joint fails to work properly then also it will comes
under grievous hurt.
f. Permanent disfiguration of the head or face :-
Permanent disfiguration of the head or face means to cause
such an injury on the head or face that they look bad or head
becomes crucial.
g. Fracture or dislocation of Bone or tooth:- When any
bone or tooth is dislocated it means they loss their original
place. Fracture of any bones comes under grievous hurt.
h. When there is an such hurt which endangers to life or
which causes paid continuously for a period of 20 days.
Endanger to life mean there must be death from such hurt. If
the death is caused by grievous then it will not be culpable
homicide or murder because there is no intention to cause
death. So any hurt to create danger to life is also called
grievous hurt.

Who was guilty in the exemplary/given cases :

In the case of Palani Goudon v/s Emperor Madras. It was held
by a full bench of the Madras High Court that the accused
was guilty of either murder or culpable homicide not
amounting to murder. However Their Lordship held that on
the facts found the accused could not be convicted either of
murder or culpable homicide, he could of course be punished
both of his original assault on his wife and for his attempt to
create false evidence by hanging her. He was convicted under
section 326 Of IPC.
PUNISHMENT FOR SIMPLE & GRIEVOUS HURT:
Section 323 : Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt is one
year or fine or with both.
Section 325: For voluntarily causing grievous hurt, the
punishment is 7 years with fine.
Section 326: Whoever except the case provided for by
sec.335 voluntarily causes grievous hurt by means or any
instrument for shooting or cut or any instrument which is
used as a weapon of offence is likely to cause death or by
means of fire. Punishment imprisonment of life, it is ten
years with fine.
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SIMPLE HURT AND GRIEVOUS HURT
SIMPLE HURT GRIEVOUS HURT
1. Simple hurt is defined in sec Grievous hurt defined
in sec.320.
Section. 319.
2. In simple hurt injury is commi There may be injury
of external or
-tted on the external part of internal part of the body.
The body causing bodily pain.
3. Simple hurt is a form of simple Grievous hurt is a
serious form of hurt.
Injury.
4. The types of injury are bodily Important organs of
the body like eye,
Pain, disease, infirmity etc. Ear, joints, face dislocation
or broken
5. Punishment is of one year or Punishment is of
seven years with fine. Fine.

Unit-IV.
Question No.18:-Define Adultery and distinguish it from
rape?
OR
Discuss fully the law relating to offence of Adultery. Is the
present law satisfactory or does it need change in the
present day context?

Answer :- INTRODUCTION :- Adultery is an act which requires

the consent of both the parties. The male offender alone is
liable to punishment and the married woman is not liable
even as an abettor.
DEFINITION OF ADULTERY
Under Section 497 of IPC it is defines that,” whoever has
sexual intercourse with a person who is and whom he knows
or has reason to believe to be the wife of another man,
without the consent or connivance of that man, such sexual
intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, is guilty of
the offence of adultery.
The offence under the act 497 of IPC is limited to
adultery committed with a married woman. It does not
constitute an offence of adultery if one has sexual
intercourse with a widow or an unmarried woman. Even in
the case of a married woman the adulterer is not liable if the
husband consents to it.
IS PRESENT LAW IS SATISFACTORY OR DOES IT NEED TO
CHANGE
DISTINGUISH BETWEEN ADULTERY & RAPE
Adultery is altogether differs from rape in several ways,
which are described as under :-

ADULTERY RAPE
1. Adultery is an act which requires In case of rape the
consent of woman
The consent of both the parties. Is essential.
2. Woman must be married woman. It can be committed
on any woman,
i.e. the wife of another man. Married woman or
widow.
3. Adultery cannot be committed Rape can be
committed by a husband
By a husband with his own wife . if she is below
fifteen years of age.
4 Adultery is an offence relating Rape is an offence
against the person
To marriage. Of the woman.
5 The aggrieved party is the In the rape the
woman is aggrieved p
Husband the wife having party.
Consented to the act.
6 Adultery is not so serious an It is against the will
of the women.
Offence as rape. And rape is a serious
offence.

UNIT-III
Question No.19:- Discuss the ingredients of theft with the
help of decided case? Also distinguish between theft and
extortion.
Answer :- Theft is an offence in which moveable property of
a person is taken away without his consent. Such property
must be taken away dishonesty. Thus in theft there would be
a moveable property. It should be taken dishonestly and
without the consent of the owner. Theft has been defined in
Section 378 of IPC. Simultaneously the punishment for the
commitment of act of theft has also been defined in Section
379 of IPC.
DEFINITION OF THEFT U/S 378 OF IPC
“ 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.”
INGREDIENTS OF DEFINITION
1. There must be a dishonest intention of a person to take
the property.
2. Removal of movable property.
3. Such movable property must be taken away.
4. The property must be taken away from the possession
of a person. In other words there must be a possession of
that property.
5. Such property must be taken away without the consent
of such person.
A. Dishonest Intention:- It is also called as malafied
intention which can be representation in the form of
mensrea. This mensrea is the base of the theft. The petitioner
must prove that a thing was taken away with the dishonest
intention.
However intention is a mental element which is
difficult to prove but circumstantial evidences are considered
for this purpose. The main measurement of dishonest
intention is to make a wrongful loss to another person then
such act is considered to be done with dishonest intention.
B.MOVABLE PROPERTY:- The subject of theft is movable
property. Immovable property cannot be stolen. A movable
property is a property which is able to move easily or which is
not immovable. It means the thing permanently attached to
the earth is immovable property, is not the subject of theft. It
becomes capable of being the subject of theft when it is
severed from the earth.
C. Be taken away out of Possession of another Person:- The
property must be in the possession of another person from
where it is removed. There is no theft of wild animals, birds
or fish while at a large but there is a theft of tamed animals.
ILLUSTRATION :- ‘A’ finds a ring lying on the road which was
in the possession of any person. A by taking it commits no
theft, though he may commit criminal misappropriation of
property.
D. IT SHOULD BE TAKEN WITHOUT CONSENT OF THAT
PERSON:- The consent may be express or implied and may be
given either of the person in possession, or by any person
having for that purpose express or implied authority.
ILLUSTRATION NO. 1:- ‘A’ being on friendly terms with Z, goes
into Z’s library in Z’s absence, and takes away a book without
Z’s express consent for the purpose of merely reading it (with
the intention of returning it)Here it is probable that A may
have conceived that he had Z’s implied consent to use Z’s
book. If this was A’s impression, A has not committed theft.
ILLUSTRATION NO.2:- ‘A’ asks charity from Z’s wife, she gives
A money, food and clothes, which A knows to belong to Z,
her husband. Here it is probable that A may conceive that Z’s
wife is authorised to give away alms. If this was A’s
impression. A has not committed theft.
ILLUSTRATION NO.3 :- ‘A’ is the paramour of Z’s wife and she
gives A, the valuable property, which A knows that these
belongs to her husband Z, although she has not authority
from Z to give the same. If takes the property dishonestly, he
commits theft.
ILLUSTRATION NO.4:- A sees a ring belonging to Z lying on
the table in Z’s house. A hides the ring in a place where it is
highly improbable that it will ever be found by Z, with the
intention of taking the ring from the hiding place and selling
it when the loss is forgotten. Here A at the time of first
moving the rings, commits theft.
PUNISHMENT FOR THE OFFENCE OF THEFT
The punishment for committing theft in Indian Penal Code
under section 379 for offence of theft is an imprisonment
which may extend to three years or with fine or both.

EXTORTION U/S 383

According to Section 383 of IPC,” Whoever intestinally 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
valuable security commits, “Extortion”.
ESSENTIALS OF EXTORTION
1. There must be a show of force or threat.
2. Such force or threat should be in the form of fear of
injury.
3. Such injury may be for the person who is put under the
fear or for any other persons in which the former person has
interest.
4. Such force should be shown with a view to take a thing
for property or valuable security or sign or seal or a
document.
5. There must be dishonest intention.
Thus if the above elements are present then it is an offence
of extortion, dishonest intention is also an essential element
of extortion. Dishonest intention is measured from the
circumstances and facts of each case. Anything taken from a
person at the point of pistol is an e.g. of extortion.

ILLUSTRATIONS :-
I) ‘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.
II) ‘A’ threatens Z that he will keep Z’s child in wrongful
confinement unless Z will sign and deliver to A a promissory
note binding Z to pay money to ‘A’. Z signs and delivers the
note. ‘A’ has committed the offence of extortion.
PUNISHMENT FOR THE OFFENCE OF EXTORTION
A has committed the offence of extortion. Punishment for
EXTORTION under section 384 of IPC,” 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.
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEFT & EXTORTION
THEFT EXTORTION
1. The offender’s intention is to Consent is obtained by
putting the
Take away something without person, in possession of
property.
The owner’s consent. In fear of injury to himself
or to any
Other person, i.e. there is
wrongful
Obtaining of consent.
2. Theft is limited only to move- Both movable and
immovable
Able property. Property may be the
subject of the
Offence of extortion.
3. There is no element of force There is the element
of force, for
In theft. Property is obtained by
putting a
Person in fear of injury to
that
Person, or to any other.
4. The offender takes the Delivery of property
as distinct from
Property without the owner- taking away property is
of its
Ship’s consent and hence essence.
There is no delivery by the
Owner.

UNIT-II
Question :20 : Define “wrongful restraint” and “Wrongful
confinement” and distinguish between the two.
Answer :- INTRODUCTION:-
The expression “wrongful restraint” implies keeping a man
out of a place where he wishes and has a right to be.
DEFINITION,”WRONGFUL RESTRAINT”
According to section 339 of Indian Penal Code it lays down
that, ”whoever voluntarily obstructs 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
restraint that person.”
ILLUSTRATION:-
‘A’ obstruct a path along which Z has a right to pass. B not
believing in good faith that he has a right to stop the path, Z
is thereby prevented from passing A wrongfully restrains Z.
Similarly B threatens to set a salvage dog at Z if Z
goes along a path along which Z has a right to go. Z is this
prevented from going along that path. B thus wrongfully
restrains Z.

WRONGFUL CONFINEMENT
According to section 340 of Indian Penal code it is lays down
that,” whoever wrongfully restrains any person in such a
manner as to prevent that person from proceeding beyond
certain circumscribing limits is said,” wrongfully to confine”
that person.”
ILLUSTRATION NO 1:-
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. A wrongfully confines Z.
ILLUSTRATION NO.2 :-
Similarly, A places men with firearms at the outlets of a
building, and tells Z that they will fire at Z if Z attempts to
leave the building. A wrongfully confines Z.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WRONGFUL CONFINEMENT &

WRONGFUL RESTRAINT.
WRONGFUL CONFINEMENT WRONGUL
RESTRAINT
1. Wrongful confinement is a Wrongful restraint
is keeping a man
Form of wrongful restraint. Out of a place where he
wishes to go
It is keeping a man within and has a right to be.
Limits out of which he wishes to
Go and has a right to go.
2. A person is restrained from moving He is free to move
anywhere other
Beyond a certain area within than to proceed in a
particular
Which he is confined. Direction. In other
words there is
Full restraint in the
former, but
Only partial in the
latter.
3. It is a more serious offence This offence is also
punishable with
In as much it prescribes simple imprisonment
upto one
Punishment with imprisonment month or with fine of
Rs.500/- or
Simple or rigorous extending to with both.
One year or fine up to Rs.1000/-
Or both.

Q. No. 10: What do you mean by Extortion? When does

extortion amount to Robbery? Discuss.
ANS: INTRODUCTION :- The chief elements of extortion are
the intentional putting of a person in fear of injury to himself
or another and dishonestly inducing the person so put in fear
to deliver to any person any property or valuable security.
DEFINITION OF EXTORTION
Whoever intentionally puts any person in fear or any injury to
that person, or to any other, and thereby dishonesty induces
the person so put in fear to deliver any person any property
or valuable security or anything signed or sealed which may
be converted into a valuable security, commits ‘Extortion’
under section 383 of IPC.
ESSENTIALS OF EXTORTION
According to section 383 of IPC the following are the
essentials of extortion :-
1. There must be a show of force or threat.
2. Such force or threat should be in the form of fear of
injury.
3. Such injury may be for the person who is put under the
fear or for any other persons in which the former person has
interest.
4. Such force should be shown with a view take a thing or
property or valuable security or sign or seal or a document.
5. There must be a dishonest intention.
Thus if the above elements are present then it is an offence
of Extortion dishonest intention is also an essential element
of extortion.
DISHONEST INTENTION IS MEASURED FROM THE
CIRCUMSTANCES AND FACTS OF EACH CASE.
Any thing taken from a person at the point of pistol is an
example of extortion.
a) ILLUSTRATION :- ‘A’ threatens to publish a defamatory
libel concerning Z unless Z gives him money. He thus induces
Z to give him money. A committed Extortion.
b) ‘A’ threatens ‘Z’ that he will keep ‘Z’s child in wrongful
confinement unless Z will sign and deliver to A, a promissory
note binding ‘Z’ to pay money to ‘A’. Z signs and delivers the
note to A. A has committed the offence of extortion.
PUNISHMENT FOR EXTORTION U/S 384 IPC
Whoever commits the offence of extortion, shall be punished
with imprisonment of either description for a term which
may extend to three years, or with fine or with both.

WHEN DOES EXTORTION AMOUNT TO ROBBERY ?

Under section 390 of IPC 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
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.
 To describe in short,” robbery ” is :-
1. Theft plus violence causing or attempting to cause
death, hurt or wrongful restraint or fear of instant violence.
2. Extortion plus offender present plus fear of instant
violence plus immediate delivery of the thing is extorted.
ILLUSTRATION :- ‘A’ holds Z down, and fraudulently takes Z’s
money and jewels from Z clothes without Z’s consent. Here A
has committed theft, and in order to committing of that theft
has voluntarily caused wrongful restraint to Z. A has
therefore committed robbery.
PUNISHMENT FOR ROBBERY.
Imprisonment up to ten years and also fine. But if
robbery committed on the highway between sunset and
sunrise then up to 14 years

40 comments:

1.

Unknown26 April 2016 at 09:53

awsome notes. so much in detail. great work. really helpful.....

Reply

2.

Paras3 July 2016 at 20:21

Awesome
Reply

3.

solo17 September 2016 at 04:12

great job, well done, God bless you

 Reply
Replies

1.

Wellness27 March 2020 at 02:22

Hey, This post is really amazing and informative. A professionally managed best
patent law firm in India, KnS Partners is regularly engaged by its clients for
thoughtful and reliable IP solutions. The firm balances commercial realities with legal
practicality. It caters to customers from all industries including Pharmaceutical,
Automotive, Telecom, Energy, Chemicals. This firm is at the forefront of changes
that are changing the patent landscape in India and has received numerous awards and
accolades. Thank you for sharing this post.
Reply

4.

Unknown22 October 2016 at 20:53

good but answers could have been more better

Reply

5.

Manu Besra6 November 2016 at 11:59

thank you sir

Reply

6.

Unknown7 December 2016 at 01:33

great works thanks for ur kindness

Reply

7.

Unknown18 December 2016 at 23:17

Good notes was really helpful thank you sir

Reply

8.

Unknown11 January 2017 at 07:09

Awesome notes. Thanks a lot

Reply
9.

Unknown19 March 2017 at 07:17

thanks for this wonderful and tremendous JOB .. Nice work .

Reply

10.

Unknown7 April 2017 at 04:03

This comment has been removed by the author.

Reply

11.

Unknown14 April 2017 at 13:04

Sir can u please explain the constitutional validity of the offence of attempt to commit suicide
with decided cases
Reply

12.

Unknown16 November 2017 at 07:41

Superb job sirji

Reply

13.

Unknown1 December 2017 at 09:57

Thank you so much..I'm pursuing LLB along with my part time job... bcz of my work I can't
able to concentrate more on studies... This notes could helped me a lot... .
Reply

14.

Unknown25 January 2018 at 05:22

WONDERFUL SIR
Reply

15.

Unknown12 May 2018 at 22:00

 🎯Get - Law Notes, Bare Acts, Syllabus, Law Vacancies and Important Ruling. 🎯 From 🎓
*Law Student India* 🍁App for your preparations 🍁 Click link to download 👇
https://goo.gl/FuoNby
🍁 Like & Share to others...
Reply
Replies

1.

Unknown25 June 2019 at 21:10

Link not opn

2.

simran8 October 2019 at 18:50

superb its vry helpful nd in proper format thnks alot

Reply

16.

Unknown24 May 2018 at 07:58

Simply superb
Reply

17.

Unknown18 July 2018 at 00:30

Nice
Reply

18.

Unknown28 July 2018 at 09:58

sir
ipc ko yaad krne ki koi trick h to send pllz hindi me
riteshmangwani143@gmail.com
Reply

19.

Unknown27 August 2018 at 06:25

Thanq dr
Reply
20.

Unknown31 August 2018 at 09:43

Sir is ka pdf ka link send kr dijiye

Reply

21.

Unknown31 August 2018 at 09:43

Sir is ka pdf ka link send kr dijiye

Reply

22.

Asif15 November 2018 at 21:32

Good knowledge procured from this notes

Reply

23.

Unknown27 November 2018 at 09:09

It was very informative.

Reply

24.

G Chetan nayaka27 December 2018 at 16:54

Good notes
Reply

25.

Unknown31 December 2018 at 09:18

Thanks ...
Reply

26.

Unknown16 February 2019 at 21:29

Thank you
Reply
27.

Unknown1 June 2019 at 03:24

super sir thanks , u did great job

Reply

28.

Unknown1 December 2019 at 09:38

Thank u so much sir

Reply

29.

Unknown11 December 2019 at 21:45

Thanks a lot .
Reply

30.

richard18 February 2020 at 22:40

Hey, This information is very helpful. KnS Partners is the best trademark law firm in India. It
is expanding intellectual property services for global corporations, research institutes,
technology-driven industries, and government institutions in India and helping Indian
businesses worldwide to procure and protect intellectual property rights. Thanks for sharing.
Reply

31.

Unknown1 April 2020 at 12:32

Thank you
Reply

32.

jigurug25 November 2020 at 14:42

Great post shared I really need this post your blog is very useful to me. Meraeducation is a
leading education brand in India. Offering List Of Top IAS coaching in Mumbai in Mumbai.
Best IAS coaching Center in Mumbai
Best IAS coaching in Mumbai
Reply

33.
 Prince Sharma10 December 2020 at 00:48

Thank you sir

Reply

34.

onlinekhanmarket5 January 2021 at 04:39

Many thanks for the exciting blog posting! Many aspirants are increasingly opting for UPSC
and IAS preparation. The students need the right coaching academy and top guiding teacher
to help candidates crack the UPSC entrance examination.Top IAS Coaching in Mumbai,
Details For Best IAS Coaching in Mumbai, Address, fee, batch Size, past Year result, etc..

Visit for more info:Top IAS Coaching In Mumbai

Visit for more info:Best IAS Coaching In Mumbai
Reply

35.

RITIKA SAXENA8 January 2021 at 01:32

This is a great inspiring article. You put really very helpful information. Are you searching
for the best online neet Coaching in Patna? NEET preparation is not easy and students require
tough preparation. In toppers, academy candidates are provided with course programs like
KVPY, OLYMPIAD as well as neet preparation service with the best service. The weekly
assessment and test series with expert sessions are provided by the Toppers academy so that
the candidate can prepare thoroughly and crack the NEET examination. Topper's academy is
a platform that helps you realize your dream of getting admission to the top medical college
in India by learning with the latest technology.
Reply

36.

vinnu batra8 January 2021 at 22:38

Thank you so much..I'm pursuing LLB along with my part time job Valentine week 2021
Reply

37.

RITIKA SAXENA28 January 2021 at 03:12

Nice blog. Thanks for sharing with us. We know that we are living in a competitive world and
wherever we go we find a lot of competition. In this competitive world, every aspirant who is
going to appear for any entrance examination needs a great mentor who will guide him with
the right mindset . With the right mentor in the best Neet coaching in Chandigarh, you will
achieve success and heights. In these top Neet coaching in Chandigarh, you will get every
possible facility and best study material that will help you in cracking your Neet entrance
examination.
Also check our post:
 Top neet coaching in hyderabad
Top neet coaching in patna
Reply
Home

View web version

ABOUT ME
Unknown

View my complete profile

Powered by Blogger.