Module 1-4 Flashcards
**
Sections describing essiantials of crime?
- Section 11- entitity, person or corporation, includes Iridium v Motorola- corporate criminal liability
- Mens Rea - voluntary (section 39 IPC)
- Actus reas- section 32
- Injury- section 44
Actus Non Facit Reum Nisi Mens Sit Rea:
“An act does not render a man guilty of a crime unless his mind is equally guilty,”
Intention, Knowledge, reason to believe
reason to beleive section
knowledge- intention used interchangeably-
Reason to beleive= Section 26 A person is said to have “reason to believe” a thing, if he has sufficient
cause to believe that thing but not otherwise
Om Prakash vs Punjab
Defendant does not give the food to his wife for several weeks and he is now liable for murder because Act must be done with intent or knowledge of the scarcity of food.
Territorial jurisdiction
Intra Territorial Jurisdiction of IPC (Section 2): includes indians and foreigners- as long as crime committed in india
Extra Territorial Offences under the IPC (Sections 3-4)
Any citizen of India in any place without and beyond India;
Any person on any ship or aircraft registered in India, wherever it may be;
Any person in any place without and beyond India committing an offence targeting a computer
resource located in India.
Cases: Mubarak Ali vs state of Bombay, State of Maharashtra vs Mayer Hans George
what persons are excluded from section 3/4?
presidents, PMs, diplomats, governors, foreign sovereigns, ambassadors, alien enemy, foriegn army, warships
theories of punishment
RETRIBUTIVE THEORY.- lex talonis eye for an eye, state beelives its important to inflict pain on criminal and generally doesnt consider factors behind the crime such as motive.
DETERRENT THEORY.- attempts to show futility of crime and teach the wrongdoes that crime is never profitiable
PREVENTIVE THEORY.- like the detterent theory but in the sense that instead of education to stop ppl or making them think 2 times b4 they act, preventative simply incapacitates them by killin them/confining them
REFORMATIVE THEORY. The reformative theory was born out of the positive theory that the focal point of crime is positive thinking. Thus, according to this theory, the objective of punishment needs to be reformation by the offender.- rather a rehabilitative process.
Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab
reaffirmed that death penalty is constitutional it is not the norm - to be used in the rarest of rare cases and to be the exception rather than the norm.
chapter for general exceptions ipc - ?
chapter IV = 4
sections 76-95
section 76 and 79 ipc
Under Section 76: Act done by a person bound or by mistake of fact believing, himself to be bound by law in included.
Under Section 79: Act done by a person justified or by mistake of fact believing, himself justified, by law is included.
excusable acts
sec80
Accident under sec 80 Accident committed while doing a lawful act. Nothing is an offence which is done by accident or misfortune, without any criminal intention or knowledge
King Emperor v. Timmappa
excusable
sec80
Accident under sec 80 Accident committed while doing a lawful act. Nothing is an offence which is done by accident or misfortune, without any criminal intention or knowledge
King Emperor v. Timmappa
excusable
Section 82 and 83
Infancy
Section 82: It includes an act of a child below seven years
of age. Nothing is an offence done by a child under seven years of age.
Section 83: It includes an act of a child above seven and below twelve of immature understanding Nothing is an offence which is done by a child above seven years of age and under twelve, who has not yet attained sufficient maturity
excusable
Krishna Bhagwan v. State of Bihar
section 84
Act of a person of unsound mind. Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who at that time of performing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law
Ashiruddin Ahmed vs. State
excusable
Section 85 and 86
Section 85- involuntary intoxication
Section 86: Offence requiring a particular intent or knowledge committed by one who is intoxicated.
basudev v state of pepsu not accepted 86
excusable
Section 77 and 78
Nothing is an offence - Section 77, 78: Act of Judge when acting judicially. in pursuance of judgement
justifiable
sec81
Necessity under 81
Act likely to cause harm, but done without criminal intent, and to prevent other harm.
In Bishambher v. Roomal
justifiable
sec87,89, 92
Section 87: Act not intended and not known to be likely to cause death or grievous hurt, done by consent.
88-Act not intended to cause death, done by consent in good faith for person’s benefit.
Section 89: Act done in good faith for the benefit of a child or insane person, by or by consent of the guardian
Section 92: Act done in good faith for benefit of a person without consent. - good samaritan/
87- Poonai Fattemah v. Emp, 88- R.P Dhanda V. Bhurelal
justifiable
sec90
Section 90: Consent known to be given under fear or misconception. A consent is not such a consent as is intended by any section of this Code- includes consent from children- uner 12, also consent from unsound mind or intoxicated ppl who cant understand consequence of consent
Jakir Ali v. State of Assam
sec93
Communication made in good faith. No communication made in good faith is an offence by reason of any harm to the person to whom it is made if it is made for the benefit of that person.
ex: doc telling bad news and person gets heart attack
94
Act to which a person is compelled by threats. Except murder, and offences against the state punishable with death, nothing is an offence which done by a person compelled to do it under threats, which, at the time of doing it, reasonably cause the apprehension that instant death
sec95
court doesnt deal with trifle matters
Mrs. Veeda Menezes v. Khan
durig argument papers were thrown homegirl got paper cut- this is no case and sc said not guilty
