Advertisements
Advertisements
प्रश्न
Consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this Section. In other words, in answering these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles that are given herein below for every question.
Further, you must not assume any facts other than those stated in the question. The objective of this section is to test your interest in the study of law, research aptitude, and problem-solving ability, even if the 'most reasonable conclusion' arrived at may be absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of the law.
Therefore, to answer a question, the principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option.
Principle: Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code provides that ‘When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone.’
Facts: Three vagabonds, Sanju, Dilbag, and Sushil decided to commit burglary. In the night, Sushil opened the lock and they broke into a rich man’s house when the entire family was on a pilgrimage. Sanju had gone to that house earlier in connection with some cleaning job. Ther e was only a servant lady in the house. Hearing some sounds from the master bedroom, the servant switched on the lights and went up to the room from where she heard the sound. Noticing that the servant was going to cry for help, Sanju grabbed her and covered her mouth with his hands and dragged her into the nearby room. The other two were collecting whatever they could from the room. When they were ready to go out of the house, they looked for Sanju and found him committing rape on the servant. They all left the house and the servant reported the matter to the police and identified Sanju. Subsequently, all three were arrested in connection with the offences of housebreaking, burglary, and rape. Identify the legal liability of the three.
पर्याय
All three are liable for all the offences as there was a common intention to commit the crimes.
Sanju will be liable only for housebreaking and rape as he did not participate in the burglary.
Only Dilbag and Sushil are liable for burglary in looting the house, and all three will be liable for housebreaking and rape as they did not stop Sanju from committing the offence and hence were an accomplice to the offence.
Only Sanju will be liable for rape as he was the one who actually committed the offence.
उत्तर
Only Sanju will be liable for rape as he was the one who actually committed the offence.
Explanation:
Only Sanju will be liable for rape as he was the one who actually committed the offence. Sanju, Dilbag, and Sushil together decided to commit burglary and would hence be together charged for burglary, and as it was only Sanju who was committing the act of rape and only he will be charged under it. (Durga Prasad @ Bablu vs State on 28 August, 2009)
APPEARS IN
संबंधित प्रश्न
Direction : The passage given below is followed by a set of questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.
Juvenile delinquency is defined as "the habitual committing of criminal acts or offenses by a young person, especially one below the age at which ordinary criminal prosecution is possible." These acts are committed mostly by teenagers, cumulative in today's civilization, which is a very concerning matter and cannot be snubbed. The more concerning matter is that generations of youth are believed to be the future of the world. Their behavior shows how tomorrow's future will be.
Juvenile delinquency has become a major problem, and only by addressing the basics can it be tackled. Attention towards co-curricular activities should be given to mold the child in the right and engaging way. The more he is forced to obey rules at school, diktats at home, mores of the society, the more he will escape to criminal acts in order to vent out his frustration. Forcing him will only make him hate it all. Hence, the approach should be to make exercises of discipline, etiquette, and moral sense interesting. This is where cocurricular activities come into play.
Juvenile offenders have the same set of constitutional guarantees as an adult, such as a fair trial. But very often, adult offenders are able to secure bail faster than a juvenile offender. Merely because the juvenile is not punished, it can in no way take away his/her constitutional guarantees of liberty. The only difference is that, unlike adult offenders, the state must protect, and ultimately rehabilitate, juvenile offenders. But protection cannot become custody. Also, the statute stresses on privacy as a right for the juvenile offender. But in the garb of privacy, there is very little effort for scrutiny and transparency in the process. The statute focuses on necessary infrastructure with significant involvement of informal systems, specifically the family, voluntary organizations, and the community, to provide a system separate from the criminal justice system. For this to become a reality, we must build effective linkages between districts and states, among various government agencies in association with child rights groups, along with effective legal services for the children and their families. Otherwise, juvenile justice will become a poor copy of the criminal justice system, only hardening the children caught in it.
Therefore, the Juvenile Justice law should address the issues relating to children alleged and found to be in conflict with law and children in need of care and protection by catering to their basic needs through proper care, protection, development, treatment, social re-integration, by adopting a child-friendly approach in the adjudication and disposal of matters in the best interest of children and for their rehabilitation through processes provided, and institutions and bodies established.
By addressing the basics issues the problem of Juvenile delinquency can be tackled…hereby basics, the author refers to
Which one of the following is not valuable security?
In which of the following mens rea has been considered to be an essential element of an offence?
A finds a purse with money not knowing to whom it belongs he afterward discovers that it belongs to B and appropriates to his own use. A is guilty of –
What punishment may be awarded to the person, whose act is covered under general exceptions?
Under the Indian Penal Code, abetment is constituted :
Mark the best option:
Principles:
- The Indian Parliament can make laws for the whole of India or for any specific part of India. A law made by the Parliament which is in force is not invalid merely because it is valid beyond the territory of India.
- The Indian Penal Code is applicable on criminal acts of Indian citizens done in any territory within or beyond India.
- Any criminal offence committed by a non-citizen outside the territory of India is also triable in India if the offender is found in India.
Facts: Rajesh married Anjali in India in the year 2008 in a valid Hindu marriage ceremony and later registered his marriage in the Court as well. The following year Rajesh made frequent trips to Abu Dhabi in relation to his business and finally settled down there in January 2010 while Anjali continued to reside with her in-laws in Jaipur. Rajesh subsequently entered into a marriage with Nadira in 2011. Anjali brought about criminal proceedings against Rajesh in India for bigamy.
Anjali can bring about criminal proceedings against Rajesh in India because:
The effect caused partly by act and partly by an omission is
X, the servant of Y, takes a hundred rupee note fro Y's pocket and hides it under the carpet in the houses of Y, X tells Z another servant of Y, about the currency note and both, agree to share the money when the currency note is taken by X from the hiding place. Before X could recover the note, it was found by Y. Decide if an offence was committed and if so who committed the offence?
Principle: When a criminal act is done by one person in furtherance of the common intention of himself and some other persons, each of such person is liable for the act in the same manner as if it were done by each one of them.
A B and C decided to commit burglary. They broke into a locked house. However, before they had finished their work, a domestic servant appeared from the out-house and started shouting. A B and C left the house and started running away. They were pursued by a small crowd. A, on being caught by X, one of the persons pursuing them, stabbed him and ran away. By the time B and C had disappeared. X died on account of the stab wounds. Later, the police arrested all three. They were charged for attempted burglary and murder of X.
