1

SEM4
CRIMINAL LAW-I: INDIAN PENAL CODE

Objectives:
This course is designed to understand the meaning of crime, methods of controlling them and the essential
principles of criminal liability by a study of a range of offences under the Indian Penal Code.
Course contents:
UNIT - 1
General Principles of Crime; Conceptions of Crime; Distinction between Crime and other wrongs under common
Law.
Principles of criminal liability — Actus reus and mens rea (also statutory offences) and other maxims; Variations in
liability — Mistake, intoxication, compulsion, legally abnormal persons; Possible parties to the crime: Principal in
the I degree; Principal in the Il degree; Accessories before the fact; Accessories after the fact.
Indian Penal Code: General Explanation: From Section I to 5,SECTIONS6, 7,SECTIONS21 to 30, 32 to 37 and section
52 & 52A, Punishment: FromSECTIONS53 to 55A, 63, 64, 65, Section 73 to 75.
UNIT - 11
General Exceptions:SECTIONS76 — 106; Abetment:SECTIONS107 120; Criminal Conspiracy:SECTIONS120A &
120B; Offences against State:SECTIONS121 — 130; Offences against the public tranquility:SECTIONS141 160;
Difference between Section 34 & 149- Offences relating to election: Contempt of lawful Authority and Public
Servants (Brief discussion):SECTIONS172 190.
False evidence:SECTIONS191 197, 208 — 212: Offences relating to coins and Government Stamps:SECTIONS230 to
240 & 263A; Public Nuisance & Private Nuisance: Offences relating to religion: Section 295 — 298.
UNIT - 111
Offences affecting human life: (Section 299 to 31 1) - Hurt, Grievous Hurt - Wrongful restraint Wrong confinement -
Criminal force and Assault.
UNIT - IV
Kidnapping, Abduction — Sexual offences: Rape: custodial rape, marital rape (SECTIONS 375 377) — Offences
against property: Theft, robbery and dacoity - Criminal Misappropriation of property - Criminal breach of trust -
Receiving of stolen property Cheating - Fraudulent deeds and disposition of property.
UNIT - V
Mischief - Criminal Trespass - Offences relating to document and property Inarks - Offences relating to marriage
(SECTIONS 493 — 498 A) - Defamation (SECTIONS 499 502); Criminal intimidation and annoyance and attempt to
commit such offences (SECTIONS 506 — 51 1).

Introduction
Criminal law encompasses the body of laws that deal with crimes and the punishment of individuals who commit
them. In India, the Indian Penal Code (IPC) is the primary legislation that defines and governs criminal offenses and
their consequences. The IPC was enacted in 1860 during the British colonial period and continues to be the
principal criminal code in India.
The Indian Penal Code covers a wide range of criminal offenses, including offenses against the human body (such
as murder, assault, and kidnapping), offenses against property (such as theft, robbery, and mischief), offenses
against public tranquility (such as rioting and unlawful assembly), offenses against the state (such as treason and
sedition), offenses relating to public servants (such as corruption and bribery), offenses relating to elections, and
offenses affecting public health, safety, and morality.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 2

The IPC defines specific acts that constitute crimes and provides corresponding punishments for each offense. The
penalties prescribed under the IPC vary depending on the severity of the offense, ranging from fines to
imprisonment, and in some cases, even the death penalty.
It is important to note that the Indian Penal Code is not the only legislation governing criminal law in India. There
are various other laws and acts that complement the IPC, such as the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Indian
Evidence Act, and specialized statutes dealing with specific crimes, such as the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, and the Dowry Prohibition Act, among others.
The interpretation and application of criminal laws in India are primarily done by the judiciary, with the Supreme
Court of India being the highest judicial authority in the country. The principles of natural justice, presumption of
innocence until proven guilty, and the right to a fair trial are fundamental aspects of criminal law in India.
It is important for individuals to have a basic understanding of criminal law and the Indian Penal Code to ensure
compliance with the law and to protect their rights in case they become involved in criminal proceedings, either as
victims or as accused persons.

UNIT I

GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIME

The general principles of crime provide a framework for understanding and analyzing criminal offenses. These
principles form the basis of criminal law systems and help determine the elements required to establish guilt and
impose appropriate punishments. Here are some key general principles of crime:
1. Actus Reus (Guilty Act):
- Actus reus refers to the physical or external element of a crime.
- It signifies that a person must have committed a voluntary and intentional act or omission that is prohibited by
law.
- In some cases, the failure to act when there is a legal duty to act can also constitute actus reus.
2. Mens Rea (Guilty Mind):
- Mens rea refers to the mental state or intention of the offender at the time the crime was committed.
- It involves the awareness or knowledge of the wrongful nature of the act.
- Different crimes require varying levels of mens rea, ranging from intention and knowledge to recklessness or
negligence.
3. Concurrence:
- Concurrence means that the guilty act (actus reus) and the guilty mind (mens rea) must occur simultaneously.
- For a person to be held criminally liable, both the actus reus and mens rea must be present at the same time.
4. Causation:
- Causation refers to the link between the act of the offender and the harm caused.
- It establishes that the defendant's actions were the direct cause of the prohibited result.
- The causation element is important in determining criminal liability, especially in cases where the harm may have
occurred regardless of the defendant's actions.
5. Harm:
- A criminal offense typically involves causing harm, either to an individual or to society as a whole.
- The harm caused may be physical, psychological, financial, or social in nature.
- The extent of the harm caused is often considered during the determination of the severity of the offense and the
appropriate punishment.
6. Strict Liability:
- While most crimes require both actus reus and mens rea, there are certain offenses known as strict liability
offenses.
- Strict liability offenses do not require proof of a guilty mind (mens rea) as the focus is solely on the prohibited
act (actus reus).
- The offender can be held liable even if they did not intend to commit the offense or were unaware of its criminal
nature.
7. Defenses:
- Criminal law recognizes various defenses that can negate or reduce criminal liability.
- Common defenses include self-defense, duress, necessity, insanity, mistake of fact, and consent, among others.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 3

- The availability and requirements of specific defenses may vary based on jurisdiction and the nature of the
offense.
Here are some additional principles that are sometimes considered to be general principles of crime:
 Double jeopardy: A person cannot be tried twice for the same crime.
 Ex post facto laws: Laws that make an act a crime after the act has been committed are not valid.
 Innocent until proven guilty: A person is presumed innocent until they are proven guilty beyond a reasonable
doubt.
 Fair trial: A person has the right to a fair trial, which includes the right to a lawyer, the right to confront their
accusers, and the right to present evidence in their defense.
These principles are important because they help to protect the rights of individuals and ensure that they are not
punished for crimes that they did not commit.
CONCEPTIONS OF CRIME
Conceptions of crime refer to different perspectives and theories that attempt to explain the nature, causes, and
implications of criminal behavior. These conceptions provide insights into how society views and responds to criminal
acts. Here are some major conceptions of crime:
1. Legalistic Conception:
- The legalistic conception of crime defines crime based on the violation of laws established by the state.
- According to this perspective, crime is an act that is expressly prohibited by the legal system.
- The focus is primarily on the act itself and whether it falls within the scope of criminal law.
2. Normative Conception:
- The normative conception of crime views crime as a violation of social norms and values.
- It emphasizes that criminal behavior deviates from the accepted standards of behavior within a particular
society.
- Normative conceptions consider the cultural, moral, and ethical aspects of behavior when determining what
constitutes a crime.
3. Sociological Conception:
- The sociological conception of crime examines crime as a social phenomenon influenced by various social
factors.
- It explores how social structures, inequalities, and interactions contribute to criminal behavior.
- Sociological conceptions focus on understanding the root causes of crime in relation to poverty, unemployment,
social disorganization, and inequality.
4. Psychological Conception:
- The psychological conception of crime looks at individual factors and mental processes that contribute to
criminal behavior.
- It explores how personality traits, cognitive processes, emotional disturbances, and psychological disorders may
influence an individual's propensity to commit crimes.
- Psychological conceptions often emphasize the importance of understanding the offender's mindset and
motivations.
5. Biological Conception:
- The biological conception of crime examines the role of biological factors, such as genetics, brain structure, and
hormonal imbalances, in criminal behavior.
- It suggests that some individuals may have inherent biological predispositions that increase their likelihood of
engaging in criminal acts.
- Biological conceptions seek to understand the biological mechanisms that may contribute to criminal behavior.
6. Economic Conception:
- The economic conception of crime emphasizes the relationship between criminal behavior and economic
factors.
- It explores how economic conditions, such as poverty, unemployment, inequality, and lack of opportunity, can
drive individuals to engage in criminal activities.
- Economic conceptions consider the economic motivations behind criminal behavior, such as financial gain or the
pursuit of material resources.
7. Interactionist Conception:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 4

- The interactionist conception of crime examines the interplay between various factors, including social,
psychological, and environmental influences, in shaping criminal behavior.
- It recognizes the complex and dynamic nature of crime, emphasizing the importance of understanding the
individual in their social context.
- Interactionist conceptions focus on how personal characteristics, social interactions, and situational factors
contribute to the commission of criminal acts.
DISTINCTION BETWEEN CRIME AND OTHER WRONGS UNDER COMMON LAW.
Under common law, there are distinctions between crime and other types of wrongs. These distinctions revolve
around the nature of the offense, the parties involved, and the legal consequences. Here are the main differences
between crime and other wrongs:
1. Nature of the Offense:
- Crime: Crimes are considered offenses against society as a whole. They are acts or omissions that are deemed to
be harmful to society's interests, and their prosecution is pursued by the state. Crimes are generally considered
more serious and are subject to criminal laws and procedures.
- Other Wrongs: Other wrongs, such as torts or civil wrongs, primarily involve harm or injury to individuals or their
property. These wrongs are typically pursued by individuals through civil lawsuits seeking compensation or other
remedies.
2. Parties Involved:
- Crime: Crimes involve the state (represented by prosecutors) as one party and the accused or defendant as the
other party. The state acts on behalf of society to hold individuals accountable for their criminal actions.
- Other Wrongs: Other wrongs involve private parties as the primary parties in the dispute. The injured party, known
as the plaintiff, brings a civil lawsuit against the alleged wrongdoer, known as the defendant.
3. Burden of Proof:
- Crime: In criminal cases, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution. The prosecutor must prove the guilt of
the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. This is a higher standard of proof and requires a high level of certainty.
- Other Wrongs: In civil cases, the burden of proof rests with the plaintiff. The plaintiff must establish their case on a
balance of probabilities, meaning it is more likely than not that the defendant is responsible for the wrongdoing.
4. Legal Consequences:
- Crime: Criminal offenses can lead to legal penalties such as fines, imprisonment, probation, or even capital
punishment, depending on the severity of the crime. The primary aim of criminal law is to punish offenders and
protect society.
- Other Wrongs: Other wrongs in civil cases typically result in remedies aimed at compensating the injured party.
These remedies can include monetary damages, injunctions, specific performance, or declaratory judgments. The
focus is on providing justice to the aggrieved party and restoring them to the position they were in before the wrong
occurred.
5. Standard of Proof:
- Crime: Criminal offenses require proof beyond a reasonable doubt, which is a higher standard of proof. This
standard is necessary due to the potential loss of liberty and the severe consequences associated with criminal
convictions.
- Other Wrongs: Other wrongs in civil cases require proof on a balance of probabilities, meaning that it is more likely
than not that the defendant is responsible for the harm. This standard is lower than the beyond a reasonable doubt
standard.
It's important to note that the distinction between crime and other wrongs can vary across legal systems and
jurisdictions. Different legal systems may have their own unique categorizations and procedures for dealing with
offenses. The above distinctions are based on the general principles of common law.
PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY - ACTUS REUS AND MENS REA (ALSO STATUTORY OFFENCES)
OTHER MAXIMS
 Actus reus: This is the physical element of a crime. It is the act or omission that the law prohibits.
 Mens rea: This is the mental element of a crime. It is the intent or knowledge that the person had when they
committed the act.
 Statutory offences: These are offences that are created by statute, or by legislation. They are not created by
the common law.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 5

 Strict liability offences: These are offences where the prosecution does not have to prove mens rea. They are
typically minor offences, such as traffic offences.
 Doli incapax: This is a defence that can be used by children who are under a certain age. It means that they are
not capable of forming the mens rea for a crime.
 Innocent until proven guilty: This is a principle that states that a person is presumed innocent until they are
proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
 Double jeopardy: This is a principle that states that a person cannot be tried twice for the same crime.
 Ex post facto laws: These are laws that make an act a crime after the act has been committed. They are not
valid in most jurisdictions.
Here are some other maxims that are relevant to criminal law:
 Nullum crimen sine lege: This maxim means that there is no crime without a law. It means that a person
cannot be punished for an act that was not illegal when they committed it.
 Nullum dolo sine culpa: This maxim means that there is no guilt without fault. It means that a person cannot
be convicted of a crime unless they were aware that their actions were wrong.
 In dubio pro reo: This maxim means that in case of doubt, the benefit of the doubt goes to the accused. It
means that if there is doubt about whether a person committed a crime, they should be acquitted.

ACTUS REUS
Actus reus is a Latin term that translates to "guilty act" in English. In criminal law, actus reus refers to the physical act
or conduct that is prohibited by law and forms an essential element of a crime. It is one of the key components
necessary to establish criminal liability.
Actus reus encompasses both actions and omissions, meaning that a person can be held criminally liable for either
performing a prohibited act or failing to act when there is a legal duty to do so. Here are some important points to
understand about actus reus:
1. Voluntary and Deliberate Act: Actus reus requires a voluntary and deliberate act on the part of the accused. It
should not be the result of involuntary or reflexive behavior.
2. Physical Element of the Crime: Actus reus focuses on the external behavior or conduct rather than the mental state
of the offender. It represents the observable manifestation of the criminal offense.
3. Prohibited Conduct: The actus reus must involve an action or omission that is expressly prohibited by the law. It can
be a specific act, such as theft or assault, or a failure to fulfill a legal duty, such as failing to stop at a red light or failing
to provide assistance to a person in danger.
4. Causation: Actus reus also includes the causal link between the accused's conduct and the resulting harm or
consequence. It establishes that the accused's actions were the direct cause or a significant contributing factor to the
prohibited result.
5. Legal Elements: The actus reus of a crime may have specific legal elements that need to be proven. These elements
could include the nature and manner of the act, the surrounding circumstances, and any required consequences or
effects.
6. Strict Liability: In some cases, certain offenses are categorized as strict liability offenses, which means that the
prosecution does not need to prove a mental state (mens rea) to establish guilt. The actus reus alone is sufficient for
criminal liability in such cases.
It is important to note that actus reus, when combined with mens rea (the guilty mind), forms the complete basis
for determining criminal liability. Both elements must be present simultaneously for a person to be held legally
responsible for a crime. Analyzing the actus reus is crucial in understanding the prohibited conduct and assessing
the individual's role in committing the offense.
MENS REA (ALSO STATUTORY OFFENCES)
Mens rea is another important concept in criminal law that refers to the mental state or guilty mind of the accused
at the time the offense was committed. It is a crucial element in determining criminal liability, especially in cases
where the actus reus (guilty act) has been established. Here's an explanation of mens rea and its application to
statutory offenses:

1. Definition of Mens Rea:

- Mens rea is a Latin term meaning "guilty mind" or "criminal intent."

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 6

- It represents the mental element of a crime, focusing on the state of mind, knowledge, intention, or recklessness of
the offender when committing the prohibited act.
2. Mental States:
- Different crimes require varying levels of mens rea, depending on the specific intent or mental state required for
the offense.
- Common mental states include:
- Intention: The offender purposefully and consciously engages in the prohibited act, with the specific desire to
achieve the resulting consequence.
- Knowledge: The offender is aware that their actions will lead to a prohibited outcome or that a certain
circumstance exists.
- Recklessness: The offender consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that their actions may
cause harm.
- Negligence: The offender fails to exercise reasonable care, resulting in harm to another person or their property.
3. Application to Statutory Offenses:
- Statutory offenses are crimes defined by specific legislation or statutes, where the mens rea requirements are
explicitly stated.
- Legislation may specify the mental state required for each element of the offense, such as the act itself, the
surrounding circumstances, or any necessary consequences.
- The legislation may also outline different mental states for different degrees or variations of the offense, such as
varying levels of intent or knowledge.
4. Strict Liability Offenses:
- In some statutory offenses, strict liability may apply, which means that mens rea is not required to establish
guilt.
- Strict liability offenses focus solely on the actus reus and do not consider the mental state of the offender.
- Offenders can be held criminally liable for strict liability offenses even if they did not intend to commit the offense
or were unaware of its criminal nature.
5. Proof of Mens Rea:
- The prosecution bears the burden of proving the accused's mens rea beyond a reasonable doubt, just like any
other element of the crime.
- Mens rea can be established through direct evidence, such as the offender's statements or confessions, or
through circumstantial evidence, such as the nature of the act, the surrounding circumstances, or the offender's
behavior before and after the offense.

Understanding mens rea is crucial in criminal law as it helps distinguish between intentional criminal acts and
those committed without the requisite mental element. Analyzing the accused's state of mind is essential in
determining their culpability and the appropriate level of punishment for the offense.
OTHER MAXIMS
1. Ignorantia juris non excusat: This Latin maxim means "ignorance of the law is no excuse." It emphasizes that
individuals are expected to be aware of and comply with the laws of the jurisdiction in which they reside or
operate. Ignorance of the law is generally not considered a valid defense.
2. In dubio pro reo: Translated as "in doubt, for the accused," this maxim reflects the principle that if there is doubt
or uncertainty regarding a person's guilt, the decision should be made in favor of the accused. It highlights the
importance of the presumption of innocence and places the burden of proof on the prosecution.
3. Res ipsa loquitur: This Latin phrase means "the thing speaks for itself." It is used in cases where the mere
occurrence of an accident or injury implies negligence on the part of the defendant. The burden of proof shifts to
the defendant to provide an explanation or defense.
4. Nemo debet esse judex in propria causa: Translated as "no one should be a judge in their own cause," this maxim
emphasizes the principle of impartiality and fairness in legal proceedings. It means that a person should not be
allowed to act as a judge in a case where they have a personal interest or bias.
5. Audi alteram partem: This Latin phrase means "hear the other side." It represents the principle of natural justice
that both sides of a dispute should be heard before a decision is made. It underscores the importance of providing
an opportunity for all parties to present their arguments and evidence.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 7

6. Pacta sunt servanda: This maxim translates to "agreements must be kept." It signifies the principle of upholding
the sanctity of contracts and emphasizes that parties should honor the terms and obligations agreed upon in a
legally binding contract.
7. Salus populi suprema lex: Translated as "the welfare of the people is the supreme law," this maxim highlights the
idea that the well-being and interests of the community or society as a whole take precedence over individual
rights or interests.
These legal maxims serve as guiding principles and provide a concise expression of fundamental legal concepts.
They help shape the interpretation and application of the law, ensuring fairness, consistency, and adherence to
fundamental principles of justice.
VARIATIONS IN LIABILITY — MISTAKE, INTOXICATION, COMPULSION, LEGALLY ABNORMAL PERSONS
In criminal law, there are variations in liability when it comes to certain factors that can affect an individual's
culpability for a crime. Here are some of the key variations in liability based on factors such as mistake,
intoxication, compulsion, and legally abnormal persons:

1. MISTAKE:
I. Mistake of Fact:
- Mistake of fact occurs when an individual misinterprets or misunderstands certain facts or circumstances
surrounding a situation. It is based on an honest belief, even if that belief is ultimately incorrect.
- A genuine and reasonable mistake of fact can sometimes serve as a defense to a crime. If the mistake negates the
required intent or mental state (mens rea) for a particular offense, it may undermine criminal liability.
- The mistake must be objectively reasonable, meaning that a reasonable person in the same situation would have
made a similar mistake.
II. Mistake of Law:
- Mistake of law refers to a misunderstanding or incorrect belief about the law itself. Generally, ignorance of the
law is not a valid defense, as individuals are expected to be aware of and abide by the laws in their jurisdiction.
- However, there may be certain exceptions where a mistake of law can be considered. For example, if a person relied
on an official interpretation or advice from a legal authority, it may be taken into account in assessing criminal liability.
III. Effect on Criminal Liability:
- Mistake of fact can have different implications depending on the specific offense and the mental element
required for that offense.
- If the mistake negates the specific intent or mens rea necessary for a crime, it may result in a defense that can
lead to acquittal or a lesser charge.
- Mistake of law, in general, does not excuse criminal liability. However, there may be circumstances where it could be
relevant to other defenses, such as mistake of fact or due process violations.
IV. Burden of Proof:
- The burden of proof usually rests with the defense to establish the existence of a mistake and its impact on
criminal liability.
- Depending on the jurisdiction, the defense may need to prove the mistake on a balance of probabilities or present
sufficient evidence to raise a reasonable doubt.
It's important to consult specific legal statutes and seek advice from legal professionals to understand how mistake
operates in the particular jurisdiction and in relation to the specific offense at issue. The availability and
application of mistake defenses can vary, and the courts ultimately determine the weight and significance given to
the claimed mistake in each case.

2. INTOXICATION:
Intoxication, in the context of criminal law, refers to a state of being under the influence of alcohol or drugs. It can
impact a person's ability to form the necessary intent (mens rea) required for certain criminal offenses. The treatment
of intoxication as a defense varies depending on the jurisdiction and the specific circumstances of the case. Here are
some key points to consider regarding intoxication in criminal law:
I. Voluntary Intoxication:
- Voluntary intoxication occurs when an individual willingly consumes alcohol or drugs, knowing that it may
impair their judgment or ability to control their actions.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 8

- In many jurisdictions, voluntary intoxication is not considered a complete defense to a crime. It is generally not
an excuse for criminal behavior, as individuals are expected to take responsibility for their actions, even under the
influence.
II. Specific Intent Crimes:
- Intoxication may have a greater impact on crimes that require a specific intent or a heightened mental state,
such as premeditated murder or theft with intent to permanently deprive.
- In some jurisdictions, if the level of intoxication is so extreme that it prevents the accused from forming the
specific intent required for the offense, it may serve as a defense to that specific intent crime.
III. General Intent Crimes:
- For general intent crimes, which involve a lower mental state requirement, intoxication generally has less
influence on criminal liability.
- Even if an individual is intoxicated, they can still be held liable for general intent crimes if it can be shown that
they had the general intent to engage in the prohibited act, regardless of their impaired judgment.
IV. Involuntary Intoxication:
- Involuntary intoxication occurs when an individual becomes intoxicated without their knowledge or against
their will, such as being drugged without consent.
- In some jurisdictions, involuntary intoxication may be considered a valid defense, as it can negate the necessary
mental element required for criminal liability. It is often treated similarly to mistake or lack of intent.
V. Diminished Capacity:
- In certain jurisdictions, intoxication may be relevant to establishing diminished capacity, which is a partial
defense. It acknowledges that the accused's mental capacity was diminished due to intoxication, potentially
affecting their ability to form specific intent or engage in certain mental processes required for the offense.
VI. Rehabilitation or Mitigating Factor:
- Even if intoxication is not a complete defense, it may still be considered as a mitigating factor during sentencing.
The court may take into account the role of intoxication in assessing the offender's moral culpability and
determining an appropriate punishment.

It is important to note that the treatment of intoxication as a defense can vary significantly between jurisdictions,
and the specific laws and legal principles governing intoxication defenses should be consulted in each particular
case. Consulting with legal professionals familiar with the jurisdiction's laws is crucial to understand the
implications of intoxication in a specific criminal matter.
3. COMPULSION:
- Compulsion, in the context of criminal law, refers to a situation where an individual commits a crime under
duress or under the threat of immediate harm to themselves or others. The defense of compulsion asserts that the
person should not be held criminally responsible for their actions because they were forced or compelled to
commit the offense. Here are some key points regarding the defense of compulsion:

I. Duress:
- Duress occurs when an individual is unlawfully coerced or threatened with serious harm or death if they do not
commit a criminal act.
- The defense of duress acknowledges that a person should not be held accountable for their actions if they were
compelled to act out of fear for their safety or the safety of others.
- For the defense of duress to apply, the threat must be imminent, immediate, and unavoidable. The individual
must reasonably believe that the threat will be carried out if they do not comply.
II. Elements of the Defense:
- The defense of compulsion generally requires the following elements to be established:
- Imminent Threat: The threat must be immediate and impending, leaving no reasonable opportunity to avoid it.
- Reasonable Belief: The accused must reasonably believe that the threat is genuine and that the harm will be
carried out if they do not comply.
- No Reasonable Alternative: The accused must demonstrate that there was no reasonable alternative course of
action available to them other than to commit the criminal act.
III. Limitations of the Defense:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 9

- The defense of compulsion is not available for all crimes. It typically applies to offenses that involve a lesser
harm than the harm threatened by the compelling party.
- In some jurisdictions, the defense may not be available for certain serious crimes, such as murder or treason.
- The defense may also be unavailable if the accused voluntarily placed themselves in a situation where they knew
or should have known that they would be subjected to compulsion.
IV. Burden of Proof:
- In most legal systems, the burden of proving the defense of compulsion rests with the accused. They must
present evidence to establish that they were compelled to commit the offense under duress.
- The standard of proof may vary, but generally, the accused must prove the defense on a balance of probabilities
or by a preponderance of the evidence.
It is important to consult the specific laws and legal principles of the jurisdiction where the offense occurred to
understand the applicability and scope of the defense of compulsion. Legal professionals experienced in criminal
law can provide guidance and assess the viability of the compulsion defense in a particular case.
4. LEGALLY ABNORMAL PERSONS
In the context of criminal law, legally abnormal persons refer to individuals who possess certain mental
conditions, disorders, or abnormalities that may impact their criminal responsibility. These conditions can affect
their ability to understand the nature and consequences of their actions or to conform their behavior to the
requirements of the law. Here are some important points to consider regarding legally abnormal persons in
criminal law:
I. Insanity Defense:
- The insanity defense is a legal concept that applies to individuals who, at the time of the offense, were suffering
from a mental illness or defect that substantially impaired their capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of their
actions or to conform their conduct to the law.
- The purpose of the insanity defense is to recognize that individuals with severe mental illnesses may lack the
necessary mental capacity to be held fully responsible for their criminal acts.
- The specific criteria and standards for establishing the insanity defense vary by jurisdiction. Common standards
include the M'Naghten rule, the irresistible impulse test, and the Model Penal Code test.
II. Competency to Stand Trial:
- Competency to stand trial refers to an individual's mental capacity to understand the criminal proceedings
against them and to effectively participate in their defense.
- Before a trial proceeds, the court may conduct a competency evaluation to determine if the accused is
competent to stand trial.
- Factors such as the ability to understand the charges, communicate with defense counsel, and make informed
decisions are considered in assessing competency.
III. Diminished Capacity:
- Diminished capacity recognizes that certain mental conditions or abnormalities may prevent an individual from
possessing the specific intent or mental state required for a particular offense.
- Unlike the insanity defense, diminished capacity is a partial defense that aims to reduce the culpability of the
accused. It may result in a conviction for a lesser offense or a reduction in the severity of punishment.
- The availability and acceptance of the diminished capacity defense vary by jurisdiction, and the specific legal
requirements must be met to establish it.
IV. Civil Commitment and Treatment:
- In cases involving legally abnormal persons, courts may consider alternative dispositions such as civil
commitment to a mental health facility.
- Civil commitment involves the involuntary confinement of individuals in mental health institutions for
treatment and rehabilitation rather than for criminal punishment.
- The purpose of civil commitment is to provide necessary care and treatment for the individual's mental
condition while ensuring public safety.

It is important to consult the specific laws and legal principles of the jurisdiction where the case is being
adjudicated to understand the application and scope of defenses and considerations related to legally abnormal
persons. Legal professionals with expertise in mental health and criminal law can provide guidance and support in
navigating these complex issues.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 10

POSSIBLE PARTIES TO THE CRIME

In criminal law, the concept of "parties to the crime" refers to individuals who are involved in the commission of a
criminal offense. These parties can be classified into various categories based on their level of involvement and
culpability. Here are some possible parties to a crime:
1. Principal:
- The principal is the person who directly commits the criminal act. They are the primary offender and actively
participate in the commission of the offense.
- The principal's involvement can range from physically carrying out the prohibited act to directly causing the
harm or damage that constitutes the crime.
- They may be referred to as the perpetrator, offender, or accused.
2. Accomplice:
- An accomplice is someone who aids, assists, or encourages the principal in the commission of the crime. They
play a supportive role in the criminal activity.
- Accomplices may provide assistance before, during, or after the offense. This can include providing tools,
weapons, or resources necessary for the crime, offering advice or guidance, or actively participating in the planning
or execution of the illegal act.
- They may be present at the scene of the crime or involved indirectly, such as by providing financial support or
transportation to facilitate the offense.
3. Accessories:
- Accessories are individuals who aid or assist the principal or accomplice after the commission of the offense.
Their assistance is typically aimed at helping the offender avoid detection, arrest, prosecution, or punishment.
- Accessories may provide shelter or refuge to the offender, hide or dispose of evidence, provide false alibis, or
obstruct the investigation in some way.
- Their actions are often intended to impede the legal process and hinder the authorities' ability to hold the
principal or accomplice accountable for their actions.
4. Co-conspirators:
- Co-conspirators are individuals who collaborate and agree with one or more persons to commit a crime. They
work together to plan and carry out the unlawful act.
- The co-conspirators may have different roles and levels of involvement in the execution of the offense, but they
share a common criminal purpose.
- Each co-conspirator is considered equally responsible for the crimes committed in furtherance of the
conspiracy, regardless of their individual actions or contributions.
5. Accessories Before the Fact:
- Accessories before the fact are individuals who aid or assist in the planning or preparation of a crime but are not
present at the scene when the offense is committed.
- They may provide information, resources, or encouragement to the principal or accomplice, contributing to the
commission of the offense.
- Their involvement occurs before the actual crime takes place, but their actions play a significant role in
facilitating the illegal act.
6. Accessories After the Fact:
- Accessories after the fact are individuals who, knowing that a crime has been committed, assist the principal or
accomplice in evading arrest, prosecution, or punishment.
- They may provide shelter, assistance in escaping or hiding, or help in disposing of evidence to hinder the
investigation or apprehension of the offender.
- Their actions occur after the commission of the offense and are aimed at obstructing the legal process and
protecting the offender from the consequences of their actions.

It is important to note that the specific roles and legal implications of parties to a crime may vary depending on the
jurisdiction and the specific offense involved. The laws governing the criminal liability of parties to a crime should
be consulted to understand the specific legal responsibilities and potential consequences for each category of
involvement. Legal professionals experienced in criminal law can provide further guidance and clarification based
on the specific circumstances of a case.
PRINCIPAL IN THE I DEGREE

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 11

The principal in the first degree is the primary offender who directly commits the criminal act. They are the
individual who physically carries out the prohibited conduct or performs the actions that constitute the offense.
Here are some key points to understand about the principal in the first degree:

1. Direct Involvement: The principal in the first degree is actively involved in the commission of the crime. They are
present at the scene of the offense and directly engage in the prohibited conduct. For example, in a robbery case,
the principal in the first degree would be the person who physically carries out the act of taking property from
another person by force or threat.

2. Essential Element: The principal's conduct forms an essential element of the offense. In many criminal statutes,
the prohibited act is defined in terms of the actions or conduct of the principal. Without the principal's direct
involvement, the offense may not be complete.

3. Culpability: The principal in the first degree is generally considered the most culpable party in the commission of
the crime. They are directly responsible for causing the harm or committing the offense. As such, they often face
greater legal consequences compared to other parties involved in the crime.

4. Legal Consequences: The principal in the first degree is the primary focus of the prosecution's case. They are
typically charged with the offense and bear the burden of proving their innocence or asserting any applicable
defenses. The legal consequences for being a principal in the first degree can include criminal penalties such as
imprisonment, fines, probation, or other sanctions.

5. Differentiated from Accessories: The principal in the first degree is distinct from accessories or accomplices.
While accessories or accomplices may assist, aid, or encourage the commission of the offense, they do not directly
carry out the prohibited act. Instead, they play a supporting role or contribute to the offense in some way. The
principal in the first degree is the individual who directly commits the criminal act.

It's important to note that the specific legal definitions and consequences of being a principal in the first degree
may vary depending on the jurisdiction and the particular offense involved. The laws governing criminal liability
and the classification of offenders should be consulted to understand the specific implications in a given
jurisdiction. Legal professionals specializing in criminal law can provide further guidance and clarification based
on the specific circumstances of a case.
PRINCIPAL IN THE IL DEGREE
In criminal law, the term "principal in the second degree" refers to an individual who aids, abets, or assists the
principal in the first degree in the commission of a crime. While the principal in the first degree directly carries out
the prohibited act, the principal in the second degree plays a supportive role in the offense. Here are some key
points to understand about the principal in the second degree:
1. Involvement in the Crime: The principal in the second degree is actively involved in the commission of the
offense, but they do not directly carry out the prohibited act. Instead, they assist or encourage the principal in the
first degree.
2. Aiding, Abetting, or Assisting: The principal in the second degree aids, abets, or assists the principal in the first
degree in the planning, preparation, or execution of the crime. This assistance can include providing resources,
advice, encouragement, or physical assistance.
3. Intent: The principal in the second degree must possess the intent to assist or encourage the commission of the
offense. They must have knowledge of the principal's criminal intent and willingly contribute to its realization.
4. Criminal Liability: The principal in the second degree shares criminal liability for the offense committed by the
principal in the first degree. They are considered equally responsible for the crime and can be charged and
prosecuted accordingly.
5. Lesser Culpability: While the principal in the second degree shares criminal liability, their level of culpability
may be considered lower than that of the principal in the first degree. This distinction reflects the difference in
their direct involvement in carrying out the prohibited act.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 12

6. Legal Consequences: The principal in the second degree can face legal consequences, including criminal
penalties, similar to those imposed on the principal in the first degree. The severity of the consequences may
depend on the specific offense, the level of involvement, and the jurisdiction's laws.
It's important to note that the specific legal definitions and consequences of being a principal in the second degree
may vary depending on the jurisdiction and the particular offense involved. The laws governing criminal liability
and the classification of offenders should be consulted to understand the specific implications in a given
jurisdiction. Legal professionals specializing in criminal law can provide further guidance and clarification based
on the specific circumstances of a case.
ACCESSORIES BEFORE THE FACT
Accessories before the fact are individuals who assist or aid in the planning, preparation, or organization of a crime
but are not present at the scene when the offense is actually committed. They provide support and contribute to the
commission of the crime by assisting the principal or other perpetrators before the criminal act takes place. Here are
some key points to understand about accessories before the fact:
1. Role in Planning: Accessories before the fact play a significant role in the pre-crime phase. They assist the principal
or other perpetrators by providing resources, knowledge, or guidance in planning and preparing for the offense. This
can include helping with logistics, providing information, suggesting methods, or offering assistance in any other way
that facilitates the commission of the crime.
2. Lack of Presence at the Scene: Unlike principals or accomplices, accessories before the fact are not physically
present at the scene when the crime is committed. Their involvement typically ends before the actual commission of
the offense. However, their contribution is crucial in enabling the crime to occur.
3. Knowledge and Intent: Accessories before the fact must have knowledge of the intended crime and willingly provide
assistance or support. They must possess the intent to aid or encourage the commission of the offense, even though
they are not physically present when the crime takes place.
4. Criminal Liability: Accessories before the fact share criminal liability for the offense committed by the principal or
other perpetrators. Even though they may not directly participate in the criminal act, they are considered equally
responsible for the crime and can be charged and prosecuted accordingly.
5. Legal Consequences: Accessories before the fact can face legal consequences, including criminal penalties, for their
role in the commission of the offense. The severity of the consequences may depend on the specific offense, the level of
involvement, and the jurisdiction's laws.
It's important to note that the specific legal definitions and consequences of being an accessory before the fact may
vary depending on the jurisdiction and the particular offense involved. The laws governing criminal liability and
the classification of offenders should be consulted to understand the specific implications in a given jurisdiction.
Legal professionals specializing in criminal law can provide further guidance and clarification based on the specific
circumstances of a case.
ACCESSORIES AFTER THE FACT
Accessories after the fact are individuals who, with knowledge that a crime has been committed, provide assistance or
support to a person who has already committed the offense. Unlike principals, accomplices, or accessories before the
fact, accessories after the fact become involved after the commission of the crime. Here are some key points to
understand about accessories after the fact:
1. Knowledge of the Crime: Accessories after the fact have knowledge that a crime has been committed. They are
aware of the unlawful act, whether through direct observation, confession by the offender, or other means of obtaining
information about the crime.
2. Assistance and Support: Accessories after the fact provide assistance, aid, or support to the person who committed
the crime. This can include actions such as providing shelter, helping the offender evade capture, concealing or
disposing of evidence, or offering false alibis or misleading information to law enforcement.
3. Intent: Accessories after the fact must possess the intent to help the offender avoid detection, arrest, prosecution, or
punishment. Their actions are aimed at obstructing the legal process and protecting the offender from the
consequences of their actions.
4. Criminal Liability: Accessories after the fact share criminal liability for their assistance to the offender. While
they did not directly participate in the commission of the offense, their actions contribute to the ongoing
concealment of the crime and hinder the administration of justice.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 13

5. Legal Consequences: Accessories after the fact can face legal consequences, including criminal penalties, for their
role in assisting the offender. The severity of the consequences may depend on the specific offense, the level of
involvement, and the jurisdiction's laws.
6. Differentiated from Other Parties: Accessories after the fact are distinct from principals, accomplices, and
accessories before the fact. They do not directly commit the crime or participate in its planning or preparation.
Instead, their involvement occurs after the offense has been committed.
It's important to note that the specific legal definitions and consequences of being an accessory after the fact may
vary depending on the jurisdiction and the particular offense involved. The laws governing criminal liability and
the classification of offenders should be consulted to understand the specific implications in a given jurisdiction.
Legal professionals specializing in criminal law can provide further guidance and clarification based on the specific
circumstances of a case.
INDIAN PENAL CODE: GENERAL EXPLANATION
The Indian Penal Code (IPC) is the main criminal code of India. It is a comprehensive legislation that defines and
categorizes various criminal offenses and their punishments. The IPC was enacted in 1860 and is applicable
throughout the country, except for the states of Jammu and Kashmir, which have their own penal code.

Here is a general explanation of the Indian Penal Code:

1. Structure: The IPC is divided into 23 chapters, each dealing with specific categories of offenses. These chapters
cover a wide range of criminal activities, including offenses against the person, property, public order, morality, and
the state.
2. Offenses and Punishments: The IPC defines different types of criminal offenses, ranging from minor offenses to
serious crimes. Each offense is classified under specificSECTIONSof the IPC and is accompanied by a prescribed
punishment, which may include imprisonment, fines, or both.
3. Essential Elements: Each offense in the IPC consists of certain essential elements that need to be proved for a
person to be convicted. These elements include the actus reus (the physical act or conduct) and the mens rea (the
mental intention or guilty mind) of the accused.
4. Classification of Offenses: The IPC categorizes offenses into several broad categories, including offenses against the
human body (such as murder, assault, and kidnapping), offenses against property (such as theft, robbery, and
mischief), offenses against public order (such as rioting and unlawful assembly), and offenses against the state (such
as sedition and treason).
5. Punishment Provisions: The IPC specifies the punishments for different offenses, considering the severity of the
crime. The punishments can range from simple fines to imprisonment for various terms, including life imprisonment
and the death penalty.
6. Principles of Criminal Liability: The IPC follows the general principles of criminal liability, such as the presumption
of innocence until proven guilty, burden of proof on the prosecution, and the requirement of mens rea (except in
certain strict liability offenses). It also recognizes various defenses available to accused persons, such as self-defense,
insanity, mistake of fact, and necessity.
7. Amendments: Over the years, the IPC has been amended to reflect changing societal values, address emerging
crimes, and strengthen provisions for the protection of vulnerable groups. These amendments are aimed at ensuring
the effectiveness and relevance of the penal code in contemporary times.
It is important to consult the latest version of the Indian Penal Code and seek professional legal advice for a
comprehensive understanding of its provisions and their application to specific cases. Legal professionals,
including lawyers and judges, are well-versed in the interpretation and application of the IPC and can provide
detailed guidance based on the specific circumstances of a case.
SECTION 1
Section 1 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the title and extent of operation of the code. Here is a detailed
explanation of Section 1:

1. Title: Section 1 provides the official title of the code as the "Indian Penal Code." The title reflects the purpose and
nature of the legislation, which is to define and penalize various criminal offenses in India.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 14

2. Extent of Operation: Section 1 specifies the extent of operation of the IPC. It states that the code applies to the
whole of India, except for the state of Jammu and Kashmir. Jammu and Kashmir, at the time of writing this
response, has its own separate penal code called the Ranbir Penal Code, which is applicable within the state.
3. Applicability to All Persons: The IPC applies to all persons within the territory of India, regardless of their
nationality, citizenship, or residency. This means that both Indian citizens and foreign nationals are subject to the
provisions of the IPC if they commit an offense within India.
4. Application to Indian Citizens Outside India: Section 1 does not explicitly address the application of the IPC to
Indian citizens who commit offenses outside India. However, subsequent Sections of the IPC, such as Section 3 and
Section 4, provide provisions for the extraterritorial application of the code in certain circumstances.
5. Legislative Authority: The IPC was enacted by the British colonial government in India in 1860 and has since
undergone several amendments. The legislative authority to enact and amend the IPC rests with the Indian
Parliament. Any modifications or updates to the code are made through the legislative process.

Section 1 sets the foundation for the Indian Penal Code by establishing its title and the territory to which it applies.
It ensures that the IPC is applicable throughout India, with the exception of Jammu and Kashmir, and covers all
persons within the Indian territory. The section provides a broad overview of the scope and reach of the code,
serving as a starting point for understanding the subsequent provisions of the IPC.
SECTION 2

Section 2 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the punishment of offenses committed within India. Here is a
detailed explanation of Section 2:
1. Applicability: Section 2 states that every person, irrespective of their nationality or citizenship, is subject to the
provisions of the IPC if they commit an offense within the territory of India. This means that anyone who commits a
crime in India is liable to be prosecuted and punished under the IPC, regardless of their background.
2. Territorial Jurisdiction: The IPC applies to offenses committed within the geographical boundaries of India. It
encompasses all states and union territories of the country.
3. Criminal Liability: Section 2 establishes the principle of territorial jurisdiction, which means that the laws of the
land apply to all individuals within its territory. It ensures that offenders are held accountable for their actions and
are subject to the legal consequences prescribed under the IPC.
4. Nature of Offense: Section 2 does not specify the types or categories of offenses covered. It is a general provision
that sets the foundation for the application of the IPC to any offense committed within India.
5. Prosecution and Punishment: Once an offense is committed within India, the appropriate law enforcement
agencies have the authority to investigate, gather evidence, and initiate legal proceedings against the offender. If
found guilty, the person may face punishment as prescribed under the relevantSECTIONSof the IPC.

Section 2 establishes the fundamental principle that offenses committed within the territorial limits of India fall
under the jurisdiction of the IPC. It ensures that individuals who commit crimes in India are subject to the penal
provisions outlined in the code. The section emphasizes the importance of territorial jurisdiction in holding
offenders accountable and maintaining law and order within the country.

SECTION 3
Section 3 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the punishment of offenses committed beyond the boundaries
of India but which have an impact within India. Here is a detailed explanation of Section 3:

1. Extraterritorial Application: Section 3 allows for the extraterritorial application of the IPC. It states that if an
offense is committed by any person outside of India, and the act or omission constituting the offense has an effect
in India, that person may be tried and punished under the IPC as if the offense had been committed within India.
2. Jurisdiction: The IPC extends its jurisdiction to offenses committed outside of India if they have a nexus or
impact on India. This means that individuals who commit crimes outside the geographical boundaries of India but
whose actions have consequences or implications within India can still be prosecuted and punished under the IPC.
3. Impact within India: To establish jurisdiction under Section 3, it must be proven that the offense committed
outside India has an effect, whether direct or indirect, on any person or property within India. The impact can be in
the form of harm, damage, consequences, or any other relevant factor that connects the offense to India.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 15

4. Prosecution and Punishment: If it is established that the offense committed outside India has an impact within
India, the appropriate law enforcement agencies in India have the authority to investigate, gather evidence, and
initiate legal proceedings against the offender. If found guilty, the person may face punishment as prescribed under
the relevantSECTIONSof the IPC.
5. Application of Indian Law: The purpose of Section 3 is to ensure that individuals who commit offenses outside
India that affect the interests of India or its residents are not immune from prosecution. It allows the Indian legal
system to maintain jurisdiction and hold such offenders accountable under Indian law.

Section 3 of the IPC expands the territorial jurisdiction of the code by enabling the prosecution and punishment of
individuals who commit offenses outside of India but whose actions have an impact within the country. It ensures
that offenders cannot escape liability merely by committing crimes beyond the boundaries of India if those crimes
have repercussions or connections within the country.
SECTION 4
Section 4 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the extension of the code to offenses committed by Indian
citizens outside of India. Here is a detailed explanation of Section 4:

1. Applicability to Indian Citizens: Section 4 states that if an offense is committed by an Indian citizen outside of
India, the person may be tried and punished under the IPC as if the offense had been committed within India. This
provision extends the jurisdiction of the IPC to Indian citizens who commit crimes abroad.
2. Conditions for Application: For the IPC to be applicable to offenses committed by Indian citizens outside of India,
the following conditions must be satisfied:
a. The offense must be punishable under the IPC: The specific offense committed by the Indian citizen must be
covered and punishable under the IPC. The IPC provides a wide range of offenses, and if the offense falls within its
purview, the IPC may be applied.
b. The offender must be found in India: The Indian citizen who committed the offense must be present within the
territory of India. If the person returns to India or is apprehended and brought back to India, they can be tried and
punished under the IPC.
3. Principle of Nationality: Section 4 follows the principle of nationality, which asserts that a country can exercise
jurisdiction over its citizens regardless of where they commit the offense. This ensures that Indian citizens who
engage in criminal activities abroad are not immune from prosecution and can be held accountable under Indian
law.
4. Cooperation with Foreign Jurisdiction: When an offense committed by an Indian citizen outside of India comes to
the attention of Indian authorities, they may cooperate with the relevant foreign jurisdiction to gather evidence,
extradite the offender, or take other necessary steps for the prosecution of the offense.

Section 4 of the IPC aims to prevent Indian citizens from evading legal consequences by committing crimes outside
of India. It allows the Indian legal system to assert jurisdiction over its citizens and ensure that they can be held
accountable for offenses committed abroad if the conditions specified in the section are met.

SECTION 5
Section 5 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) provides an important clarification regarding the impact of the IPC on
other laws. Here is a detailed explanation of Section 5:

1. Non-Affecting of Special or Local Laws: Section 5 states that the IPC does not affect any special or local law in
force in India at the time of its enactment. This means that the existence of the IPC does not nullify or override any
specific laws that have been enacted by the Indian government or any specific jurisdiction within India.
2. Special and Local Laws: Special laws refer to legislation enacted by the Indian Parliament that is applicable
throughout the country, addressing specific subject matters or offenses. Local laws, on the other hand, are laws
enacted by state governments or other local authorities that are applicable within specific regions or jurisdictions.
3. Continuation of Special and Local Laws: Section 5 ensures that any special or local laws that were in force before
the enactment of the IPC continue to be applicable and enforceable, even though the IPC is now in effect. These
laws retain their legal status and are not affected by the provisions of the IPC.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 16

4. Concurrent Operation: While the IPC is the general criminal law applicable throughout India, special and local
laws can coexist and operate alongside the IPC. Special or local laws may provide specific provisions, offenses, or
procedures that differ from those outlined in the IPC, but they continue to be valid and enforceable within their
respective jurisdictions.

Section 5 of the IPC serves as a safeguard to ensure that special and local laws retain their significance and validity.
It acknowledges the diversity and complexities of the legal framework in India, where different jurisdictions may
have their own specific laws addressing unique concerns or offenses.

SECTIONS 6
Section 6 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) provides an explanation for the definitions and classifications of
"Government," "Public Servant," and "Person." Here is a detailed explanation of Section 6:

1. Definitions:
a. Government: Section 6 defines "Government" as the central government or a state government. It includes both
the executive and legislative branches of the government.
b. Public Servant: Section 6 defines "Public Servant" as a person who holds any office or performs any duty in
connection with the affairs of the government. This includes government officials, employees, officers, and anyone
appointed or elected to a public office.
c. Person: Section 6 defines "Person" as any individual or entity, whether a natural person or a legal entity such as
a corporation or organization. It encompasses both human beings and artificial entities.
2. Importance of Definitions: The definitions provided in Section 6 are crucial for the interpretation and application
of various provisions within the IPC. They establish the scope and applicability of certain offenses and penalties,
particularly those that involve the actions or conduct of government officials or individuals in positions of public
authority.
3. Application in Offenses: The definitions of "Government" and "Public Servant" are often relevant in offenses such
as corruption, bribery, abuse of power, and acts committed by or against government officials in the course of their
duties. The IPC provides specific provisions and penalties for such offenses, and the definitions in Section 6 help
determine their applicability.
4. General Application: The definition of "Person" in Section 6 has a broader application and is not limited to
offenses involving government or public servants. It is applicable throughout the IPC and encompasses all
individuals and legal entities who can be held liable for criminal actions under the code.
Section 6 of the IPC serves to clarify and define key terms that are fundamental to the understanding and
application of various provisions within the code. By providing definitions for "Government," "Public Servant," and
"Person," this section ensures consistency and accuracy in the interpretation of the IPC and aids in determining the
scope and applicability of different offenses and penalties.
SECTIONS 7
Section 7 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) defines what constitutes an "offense" under the code. Here is a detailed
explanation of Section 7:

1. Definition of Offense: Section 7 states that an offense is any act or omission made punishable by law. It
encompasses both actions and inactions that are recognized as criminal offenses and for which there are
prescribed penalties under the IPC.
2. Elements of an Offense: To establish an offense, certain elements must be present:
a. Act or Omission: An offense can arise from either an act committed by a person or an omission (failure to act)
when there is a legal duty to act.
b. Punishable by Law: The act or omission must be made punishable by law. This means that the IPC or any other
relevant statute must specify the offense and prescribe a penalty for it.
3. Classification of Offenses: The IPC categorizes offenses into various SECTIONS, each defining specific offenses
and providing corresponding punishments. Offenses can range from minor infractions to serious crimes, and their
classification depends on the nature and severity of the act or omission.
4. Intentional and Unintentional Offenses: Offenses can be classified as intentional (where there is a deliberate
intent to commit the act) or unintentional (where the act is committed without intent but still attracts legal

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 17

liability). The IPC provides separate provisions for both types of offenses and specifies the requisite mental state or
mens rea for each offense.
5. Legal Presumption: Section 7 establishes a legal presumption that every person is presumed to know the law.
Ignorance of the law is not a valid defense for committing an offense, and individuals are expected to be aware of
the legal consequences of their actions or omissions.

Section 7 sets the foundation for the concept of offenses under the IPC. It defines an offense as an act or omission
that is made punishable by law and establishes the legal framework for determining liability and prescribing
penalties for different types of offenses.
SECTIONS 21
1. Offense: Section 21 states that a public servant who is employed in a civil or military capacity, or in the
administration of justice, is prohibited from engaging in any trade or being a partner in any trade.
2. Public Servant: The term "public servant" refers to a person who holds a public office or is employed in a civil or
military capacity, or is involved in the administration of justice. This includes government officials, employees,
officers, judges, and other individuals working in public service roles.
3. Prohibition on Trade: Section 21 prohibits public servants from carrying on any trade or becoming a partner in
any trade. The rationale behind this provision is to prevent conflicts of interest, corruption, and the misuse of
public office for personal gain. It ensures that public servants focus solely on their official duties and do not engage
in activities that may compromise their integrity or impartiality.
4. Exceptions: Section 21 provides exceptions to the prohibition on trade. Public servants are allowed to engage in
certain transactions or trade-related activities under certain circumstances. These exceptions may be defined by
specific laws, rules, or regulations governing the conduct of public servants.
5. Punishment: If a public servant is found guilty of unlawfully engaging in trade in violation of Section 21, they
may be subjected to punishment as prescribed under the IPC. The punishment may include imprisonment and/or a
fine, depending on the specific circumstances of the case.

Section 21 of the IPC aims to maintain the integrity and impartiality of public servants by prohibiting them from
engaging in trade while holding public office. By preventing public servants from using their position for personal
gain or indulging in activities that may compromise their public duty, this section helps uphold the principles of
transparency and accountability in public service.
SECTIONS 22
Section 22 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the definition of the term "act" in relation to the IPC. Here is a
detailed explanation of Section 22:

1. Definition of "Act": Section 22 states that "act" includes any series of acts and also, where appropriate, omissions.
This means that an act, as defined in the IPC, encompasses not only a single action but also a series of actions.
Additionally, in certain situations, omissions or failures to act can also be considered as acts for the purposes of the
IPC.
2. Series of Acts: The term "act" extends beyond a single isolated action and includes a sequence or series of
actions. This recognizes that certain offenses may involve a continuous course of conduct or a combination of
several actions that collectively form an offense under the IPC.
3. Omissions as Acts: In specific cases, omissions or failures to act can also be treated as acts under the IPC. This
means that when there is a legal duty to act or when the law imposes a responsibility to prevent harm or protect
others, a failure to fulfill that duty can be considered an act for the purposes of criminal liability.
4. Application in Offenses: Section 22 has implications for the interpretation and application of various provisions
within the IPC. It ensures that the scope of criminal liability is not limited to single, isolated actions but can extend
to a series of related acts or even omissions where appropriate.

Section 22 clarifies that an "act" under the IPC includes both single acts and a series of acts, as well as omissions
where relevant. This broadens the scope of criminal liability and enables the prosecution of offenses that involve
continuous conduct or failures to act in situations where there is a legal duty to do so.
.
SECTIONS 23

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 18

Section 23 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the concept of "wrongful gain" and "wrongful loss." Here is a
detailed explanation of Section 23:

1. Wrongful Gain: Section 23 defines "wrongful gain" as any gain by unlawful means of property to which the
person gaining is not legally entitled. In other words, it refers to any financial or material benefit obtained through
illegal or improper methods, without the person having a lawful claim or right to the property.
2. Wrongful Loss: Section 23 defines "wrongful loss" as any loss by unlawful means of property to which the person
losing it is legally entitled. It refers to the deprivation or harm suffered by an individual due to the illegal or
improper actions of another person, resulting in the loss of property that they have a lawful right to.
3. Components of Wrongful Gain and Loss: To establish wrongful gain or loss under Section 23, the following
elements must be present:
a. Unlawful Means: The gain or loss must result from unlawful or illegal means. This can include theft, fraud,
cheating, extortion, embezzlement, or any other prohibited activity under the IPC or other relevant laws.
b. Property: The gain or loss must involve property, which includes both tangible and intangible assets such as
money, goods, rights, interests, or claims.
4. Relationship to Offenses: Wrongful gain and wrongful loss are relevant in various offenses under the IPC. These
concepts help determine the financial implications and motives behind certain criminal acts, such as theft,
cheating, criminal breach of trust, and dishonest misappropriation of property.
5. Implications for Liability: Establishing wrongful gain or loss is often crucial in determining the criminal liability
and punishment for offenses. The IPC provides specific provisions for different offenses that involve wrongful gain
or loss, prescribing penalties based on the extent and nature of the gain or loss involved.

Section 23 of the IPC provides a framework for understanding the concepts of wrongful gain and wrongful loss. It
helps assess the financial impact and motives behind criminal acts, ensuring that individuals are held accountable
for their unlawful gains or responsible for the losses they cause to others.
SECTIONS 24
Section 24 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the concept of "intentional" and "knowledge" as it relates to
criminal liability. Here is a detailed explanation of Section 24:

1. Intentional Act: Section 24 states that an act committed with the intention to cause a particular result or with the
knowledge that the result is likely to occur is considered an intentional act. Intention refers to the conscious desire
or purpose to achieve a specific outcome.
2. Knowledge: Section 24 also includes acts committed with knowledge. Knowledge refers to awareness or
understanding of certain facts or circumstances that make the result likely to occur, even if there is no specific
intent to cause that result.
3. Mental State: Intention and knowledge are both considered important mental states in determining criminal
liability. They establish the mental culpability or state of mind of the person committing the act.
4. Relevance to Offenses: Intention and knowledge are crucial elements in various offenses under the IPC. Different
offenses may require specific mental states, such as intention to cause harm, knowledge of the illegal nature of an
act, or awareness of the consequences of one's actions.
5. Degree of Liability: The mental states of intention and knowledge are often considered in determining the degree
of liability and the appropriate punishment for an offense. Offenses committed with intention may attract more
severe penalties compared to those committed with mere knowledge.

Section 24 of the IPC establishes the significance of intention and knowledge in determining criminal liability. It
recognizes that individuals who commit acts with a specific intent or awareness of the likely consequences should
be held responsible for their actions, even if the actual result differs from their initial intention.
SECTIONS 25
Section 25 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the concept of "consent" in relation to the commission of an
offense. Here is a detailed explanation of Section 25:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 19

1. Consent: Section 25 states that if a person voluntarily consents to the commission of an act or omission, it cannot
be considered an offense. In other words, the presence of valid consent may negate the criminal liability of the
person who performs the act or omission.
2. Voluntary Consent: For consent to be valid, it must be given voluntarily. It should be free from any undue
influence, coercion, threat, or deception. The person giving consent must have the capacity to understand the
nature and consequences of the act or omission.

3. Limits on Consent: Section 25 specifies that consent cannot justify certain types of acts or omissions that are
inherently unlawful or against public policy. For example, consent cannot be used as a defense for offenses such as
murder, rape, or causing grievous hurt.
4. Invalid Consent: Even if consent is present, there are certain situations where it may be deemed invalid. These
include situations where the consent is obtained by fraud, misrepresentation, or misconception, or when the
person giving consent is incapable of giving valid consent due to factors such as age, mental incapacity, or
intoxication.
5. Consent as a Defense: Consent can serve as a valid defense in certain offenses where it is a relevant
consideration. For example, in cases of assault or causing hurt, if the act was done with the consent of the person
involved, it may provide a defense against criminal liability.

Section 25 of the IPC recognizes the importance of consent in determining criminal liability. It acknowledges that
acts or omissions done with the voluntary consent of the affected person may not constitute offenses, except in
cases where consent is not a valid defense due to the nature of the offense or the circumstances surrounding the
consent.

SECTIONS 26
Section 26 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the concept of "offense committed by several persons in
furtherance of common intention." Here is a detailed explanation of Section 26:

1. Common Intention: Section 26 states that when an offense is committed by several persons in furtherance of a
common intention, each person is held liable as if they individually committed the offense. This means that when
two or more individuals act together with a shared intention to commit a crime, they are all equally responsible for
the consequences of that crime.
2. Common Intention Defined: The term "common intention" refers to a pre-arranged plan or understanding
between two or more individuals to commit a specific offense. It involves a meeting of minds and a shared resolve
to engage in criminal conduct.
3. Act Done in Furtherance of Common Intention: To attract liability under Section 26, the act must be done in
furtherance of the common intention of the individuals involved. This means that the act must be a direct result of
their shared plan or understanding.
4. Joint Liability: Section 26 establishes joint liability for the individuals who act with a common intention. This
means that each person is held responsible for the entire offense, regardless of their individual roles or actions
within the commission of the crime.
5. Punishment: The punishment for an offense committed by several persons in furtherance of a common intention
may be prescribed under the IPC for the specific offense committed. The punishment can vary depending on the
nature and seriousness of the offense.

Section 26 of the IPC serves to deter individuals from engaging in criminal activities through joint efforts and
shared intentions. It ensures that all participants in a criminal act are held equally accountable, regardless of their
specific roles or actions, as long as they act in furtherance of the common intention.
SECTIONS 27
Section 27 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the concept of "abetment" in relation to the commission of an
offense. Here is a detailed explanation of Section 27:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 20

1. Abetment: Section 27 defines abetment as the instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aiding of another person in
the commission of an offense. Abetment involves actively encouraging, supporting, or facilitating the commission of
a crime by another person.
2. Three Forms of Abetment: Section 27 identifies three forms of abetment:
a. Instigation: Instigation refers to actively provoking, urging, or inciting another person to commit an offense.
b. Conspiracy: Conspiracy involves an agreement or plan between two or more persons to commit an offense.
c. Intentional Aid: Intentional aid refers to providing assistance, support, or resources to another person with the
knowledge and intention that they will use them to commit an offense.
3. Abetment and Principal Offense: The abettor, or the person who abets the commission of an offense, is held liable
as if they had committed the offense themselves. The abettor's liability is linked to the commission of the principal
offense and is contingent upon the actual commission of the offense by the person abetted.

4. Punishment: The punishment for abetment is generally prescribed under the IPC for the specific offense that was
abetted. The punishment may vary depending on the nature and severity of the offense.
5. Knowledge and Intent: To establish abetment, it is necessary to prove that the abettor had the knowledge of the
intended offense and the intention to aid or encourage its commission. Mere presence or passive acquiescence
does not amount to abetment.

Section 27 of the IPC recognizes the significance of abetment in criminal offenses. It ensures that individuals who
actively encourage, conspire, or aid others in the commission of crimes are held accountable for their actions, even
if they do not directly commit the offense themselves.
SECTIONS 28
Section 28 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the liability of a person for acts done by them in a state of
intoxication. Here is a detailed explanation of Section 28:
1. Voluntary Intoxication: Section 28 applies when a person voluntarily consumes alcohol, drugs, or any other
intoxicating substance, resulting in a state of intoxication. It does not cover situations where intoxication is
involuntary, such as when someone is forcefully administered a substance.
2. Ineffectiveness of Intoxication as a Defense: Section 28 states that voluntary intoxication is not a defense against
any criminal charge. It means that a person cannot escape criminal liability by claiming that their actions were
influenced by their intoxicated state.
3. Exceptions: However, there are two exceptions to the general rule stated in Section 28:
a. Specific Intent Offenses: If the offense requires a specific intent or mental state, the accused may argue that
their intoxication prevented them from forming that specific intent. In such cases, the court may consider the effect
of intoxication on the accused's ability to form the required mental state.
b. Mental Disorder Due to Intoxication: If a person's intoxication causes them to develop a mental disorder, and
the offense requires a particular mental state, the person may be exempt from criminal liability on the grounds of
insanity.
4. Limited Relevance: It's important to note that intoxication may still be relevant in certain circumstances, but not
as a defense to escape liability. It may be considered as evidence to establish other elements of the offense, such as
the accused's state of mind or their capacity to understand the consequences of their actions.
Section 28 of the IPC recognizes that voluntary intoxication does not absolve an individual from criminal liability. It
establishes that individuals are responsible for their actions even when under the influence of alcohol or drugs,
with exceptions for specific intent offenses and the development of mental disorders due to intoxication.
SECTIONS 29
Section 29 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the concept of "abetment by conspiracy" in relation to the
commission of an offense. Here is a detailed explanation of Section 29:
1. Abetment by Conspiracy: Section 29 states that when two or more persons agree to commit an offense and
intentionally aid each other in the commission of that offense, it constitutes abetment by conspiracy. This means
that individuals who conspire together to commit a crime and actively assist each other in its execution are held
liable for abetment.

2. Elements of Abetment by Conspiracy: To establish abetment by conspiracy under Section 29, the following
elements must be present:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 21

a. Agreement: There must be an agreement or understanding between two or more persons to commit a specific
offense.
b. Intentional Aid: The persons involved in the conspiracy must intentionally aid or facilitate each other in the
commission of the offense.
3. Liability: Section 29 holds each member of the conspiracy liable for the offense as if they had individually
abetted it. This means that all individuals who conspire and aid each other in the commission of the offense are
equally responsible for the consequences of that offense.
4. Punishment: The punishment for abetment by conspiracy is generally prescribed under the IPC for the specific
offense that was conspired to be committed. The punishment may vary depending on the nature and severity of the
offense.
5. Separate Offense: Abetment by conspiracy is considered a separate offense from the underlying offense itself. It
recognizes the culpability of individuals who conspire and actively support the commission of a crime, even if they
do not personally carry out the criminal act.
Section 29 of the IPC emphasizes the importance of holding individuals accountable for their participation in
conspiracies to commit offenses. It recognizes that individuals who conspire and aid each other in the commission
of a crime should be held equally responsible for their actions, regardless of their individual roles or actions within
the commission of the offense.

SECTIONS 30
Section 30 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the liability of a person who commits an offense in furtherance
of a common intention of a group. Here is a detailed explanation of Section 30:
1. Common Intention: Section 30 states that when a criminal act is committed by several persons with a common
intention, each person is held liable for that act as if they had individually committed it. This means that if multiple
individuals act together with a shared intention to commit a crime, they are all equally responsible for the
consequences of that crime.
2. Joint Liability: Section 30 establishes joint liability for the individuals who act with a common intention. Each
person is held responsible for the entire offense, regardless of their individual roles or actions within the
commission of the crime.
3. Common Intention Defined: The term "common intention" refers to a pre-arranged plan or understanding
between two or more individuals to commit a specific offense. It involves a meeting of minds and a shared resolve
to engage in criminal conduct.
4. Act Done in Furtherance of Common Intention: To attract liability under Section 30, the act must be done in
furtherance of the common intention of the individuals involved. This means that the act must be a direct result of
their shared plan or understanding.
5. Punishment: The punishment for an offense committed in furtherance of a common intention may be prescribed
under the IPC for the specific offense committed. The punishment can vary depending on the nature and
seriousness of the offense.

Section 30 of the IPC ensures that individuals who act together with a common intention to commit a crime are
held equally responsible for their actions. It recognizes the importance of collective responsibility and
accountability in cases where multiple individuals collaborate to commit an offense.
SECTIONS 32
Section 32 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the concept of "voluntarily causing hurt" in certain
circumstances. Here is a detailed explanation of Section 32:

1. Voluntarily Causing Hurt: Section 32 states that a person who voluntarily causes hurt to another person is not
criminally liable if the act is done for a justifiable purpose and in good faith. This means that causing hurt to
someone may be justified in certain situations where it is done in good faith and for a legitimate reason.
2. Justifiable Purpose: The act of causing hurt must be done for a purpose that is considered justifiable by law. It
means that the act must be aimed at protecting oneself, another person, or property from harm, and it must be
reasonable in the circumstances.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 22

3. Good Faith: The act of causing hurt must be done in good faith, which means that the person causing hurt
genuinely believes that they are acting in the best interest of themselves or others. Good faith implies honest intent
and absence of malice.
4. Limitations: Section 32 does not provide an absolute defense for causing hurt. It imposes certain limitations on
the extent and manner in which hurt can be caused. The harm caused must be proportionate to the perceived
threat or danger, and the act must not exceed what is reasonably necessary to achieve the justifiable purpose.
5. Punishment: If the act of causing hurt falls within the scope of Section 32, the person may not be criminally liable
for the offense. However, if the act goes beyond the justifiable purpose or is done without good faith, it may attract
criminal liability under the relevant provisions of the IPC.

Section 32 of the IPC recognizes that there may be situations where causing hurt to another person is justified and
not punishable under the law. It acknowledges the importance of individual protection, self-defense, and the
preservation of property, while also setting limitations to prevent the abuse of this provision.
SECTIONS 33
Section 33 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the liability of a person who voluntarily causes grievous hurt
to another person. Here is a detailed explanation of Section 33:

1. Voluntarily Causing Grievous Hurt: Section 33 states that a person who voluntarily causes grievous hurt to
another person is held criminally liable for the offense. Grievous hurt refers to any injury that endangers life,
causes severe bodily harm, or results in permanent disfigurement or impairment of any organ.
2. Voluntary Act: The act of causing grievous hurt must be done voluntarily, meaning that it is committed with the
intention of causing such harm or with the knowledge that such harm is likely to occur as a result of the action.
3. Physical Harm: Grievous hurt involves causing significant physical harm or injury to another person. This
includes injuries that are severe, dangerous, or have long-lasting consequences.
4. Criminal Liability: The person who voluntarily causes grievous hurt is held criminally liable for the offense. The
punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt may be prescribed under the IPC, depending on the specific
circumstances of the case.
5. Exceptions: Section 33 does not apply in situations where the act is done in self-defense, in the exercise of the
right to private defense, or under any other circumstances recognized by law as justifiable.

Section 33 of the IPC recognizes the seriousness of causing grievous hurt to another person and imposes criminal
liability on the perpetrator. It aims to protect individuals from severe bodily harm and ensure that those who inflict
such harm are held accountable for their actions.
SECTIONS 34
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the concept of "acts done by several persons in furtherance of
common intention." Here is a detailed explanation of Section 34:

1. Common Intention: Section 34 states that when a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of a
common intention, each person is held liable for that act as if they had individually committed it. This means that if
multiple individuals act together with a shared intention to commit a crime, they are all equally responsible for the
consequences of that crime.
2. Joint Liability: Section 34 establishes joint liability for the individuals who act with a common intention. Each
person is held responsible for the entire offense, regardless of their individual roles or actions within the
commission of the crime.
3. Common Intention Defined: The term "common intention" refers to a pre-arranged plan or understanding
between two or more individuals to commit a specific offense. It involves a meeting of minds and a shared resolve
to engage in criminal conduct.
4. Act Done in Furtherance of Common Intention: To attract liability under Section 34, the act must be done in
furtherance of the common intention of the individuals involved. This means that the act must be a direct result of
their shared plan or understanding.
5. Punishment: The punishment for an offense committed in furtherance of a common intention may be prescribed
under the IPC for the specific offense committed. The punishment can vary depending on the nature and
seriousness of the offense.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 23

Section 34 of the IPC emphasizes the principle of joint liability when multiple individuals act together with a
common intention to commit a crime. It recognizes the importance of collective responsibility and accountability in
cases where several individuals collaborate to commit an offense.
SECTIONS 35
Section 35 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the concept of "when an act is an offense by reason of its
relation to another offense." Here is a detailed explanation of Section 35:

1. Relationship between Offenses: Section 35 states that if an act is an offense because of its relation to another
offense, then the person who commits that act may be held liable for both offenses. This means that if an act is
connected to another offense in a way that makes it an offense itself, the person may be charged and punished for
both offenses.
2. Two or More Offenses: Section 35 applies when there are two or more offenses involved, and the act in question
is connected to one or more of those offenses. The act may contribute to the commission of another offense or may
be an essential part of another offense.
3. Liability for Both Offenses: If the act is an offense in relation to another offense, the person who commits the act
can be held liable for both offenses. This means that they may face separate charges and punishments for each
offense.
4. Punishment: The punishment for each offense will be determined separately based on the provisions of the IPC
that correspond to those offenses. The punishment may vary depending on the nature and seriousness of each
offense.

Section 35 of the IPC ensures that when an act is connected to another offense and contributes to its commission,
the person responsible can be held accountable for both offenses. It recognizes that certain acts can have a
significant impact on the commission of multiple offenses and therefore warrant separate punishment for each
offense.

SECTIONS 36
Section 36 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the concept of "Effect caused partly by act and partly by
omission." Here is a detailed explanation of Section 36:

1. Act and Omission: Section 36 states that when an act and an omission together cause a particular effect, the
person who does the act as well as the person who omits to prevent the effect are both considered to have caused
the effect. This means that if both an act and an omission contribute to the occurrence of a particular effect, both
actions are considered causative factors.
2. Causation: For liability under Section 36, there must be a causal connection between the act and the omission.
The act must have been a substantial factor in bringing about the effect, and the omission must have played a
significant role in allowing the effect to occur.
3. Joint Liability: Section 36 establishes joint liability for both the person who does the act and the person who
omits to prevent the effect. Both individuals are held responsible for causing the effect, and they may be charged
and punished accordingly.
4. Punishment: The punishment for the effect caused by both the act and the omission may be determined based on
the specific provisions of the IPC that correspond to the offense. The punishment will depend on the nature and
severity of the effect caused.

Section 36 of the IPC recognizes that both acts and omissions can contribute to the occurrence of certain effects. It
ensures that individuals who actively perform an act and those who omit to prevent the effect are held accountable
for their roles in causing the outcome.

SECTIONS 37
Section 37 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the concept of "cooperation by doing one of several acts
constituting an offense." Here is a detailed explanation of Section 37:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 24

1. Cooperative Acts: Section 37 states that when a criminal offense requires the participation of multiple acts, and a
person intentionally cooperates in the commission of the offense by doing any one of those acts, they are held
liable for the offense as if they had personally committed the entire offense.
2. Joint Liability: Section 37 establishes joint liability for individuals who participate in the commission of an
offense by performing one of several acts. Each person is held responsible for the entire offense, regardless of the
specific act they performed within the overall commission of the offense.
3. Intentional Cooperation: The person must intentionally cooperate in the commission of the offense by
performing one of the acts required for the offense. It means that they must have the intention to participate in the
criminal activity and contribute to its commission.
4. Liability for the Entire Offense: By performing one of the acts necessary for the offense, the person becomes
liable for the entire offense. They are treated as if they personally committed all the acts required for the
commission of the offense.
5. Punishment: The punishment for the offense will be determined based on the provisions of the IPC that
correspond to that offense. The punishment can vary depending on the nature and gravity of the offense
committed.

Section 37 of the IPC recognizes that in some cases, multiple acts are required to commit an offense, and
individuals who contribute to the commission of the offense by performing one of those acts are equally
responsible for the entire offense. It ensures that all individuals involved in the commission of the offense are held
accountable for their participation.
SECTIONS 52
Section 52 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the concept of "good faith." Here is a detailed explanation of
Section 52:

1. Good Faith: Section 52 states that nothing is an offense which is done in good faith for the benefit of a person,
without that person's consent, and with no intention to cause harm to that person. It means that if an act is done
with honest intent, believing it to be for the benefit of someone else, and without any intention to cause harm, it
may not be considered an offense.
2. Benefit of a Person: The act must be done for the benefit of a person other than the one who performs the act.
The person performing the act must genuinely believe that it will benefit the other person.
3. Absence of Consent: The act must be done without the consent of the person for whose benefit it is performed.
This means that the person performing the act may act in the absence of the other person's consent, but with the
genuine belief that it will benefit them.
4. No Intention to Cause Harm: The person performing the act must have no intention to cause harm to the person
for whose benefit it is performed. Their motive should be solely to benefit the other person.

5. Limitations: Section 52 provides a defense against criminal liability but has certain limitations. If the act done in
good faith causes harm or injury beyond what is reasonably necessary for the benefit of the other person, it may
still attract liability under the relevant provisions of the IPC.

Section 52 of the IPC recognizes that certain acts done in good faith and for the benefit of others, without their
consent, and without an intention to cause harm, may not be considered offenses. It acknowledges the importance
of good faith actions aimed at benefiting others while providing a balance between individual rights and societal
interests.
SECTIONS 52A
Section 52A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) defines the term "harbour" and clarifies its meaning in some cases. The
section states that, except inSECTIONS157 and 130 (in the case of the wife or husband of the person harboured),
the word "harbour" includes the following:
 Supplying a person with shelter, food, drink, money, clothes, arms, ammunition, or means of conveyance; or
 Assisting a person by any means, whether of the same kind as those enumerated in this section or not, to
evade apprehension.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 25

Section 52A is important because it clarifies the meaning of the word "harbour" and makes it clear that certain acts
that may not seem like harbouring under a literal interpretation of the word can still be considered harbouring
under the law. This is important because harbouring is a crime, and it can lead to serious punishment.
Here are some examples of acts that may be considered harbouring under section 52A:
 Providing a person with a place to stay, even if it is just for a few hours.
 Giving a person food or money.
 Driving a person to a place where they can hide from the police.
 Helping a person to get a new identity.
It is important to note that not all acts of assistance will be considered harbouring. For example, if a person simply
provides a friend with a ride home after they have been drinking, this would not be considered harbouring.
However, if the friend is wanted by the police for a crime, and the person who provides the ride knows this, then it
could be considered harbouring.
The punishment for harbouring under section 52A is imprisonment for up to six months, or a fine, or both. The
punishment may be more severe if the person who is harboured is a fugitive from justice or if the harbouring is
done for the purpose of helping the person to commit a crime.
Punishment:
Punishment is a crucial aspect of criminal law, as it is the legal consequence imposed on individuals who have been
found guilty of committing a crime. The Indian Penal Code (IPC) provides for different types of punishments based
on the severity and nature of the offense. Here are some important points to understand about punishment under
the IPC:

1. Classification of Offenses: The IPC classifies offenses into two broad categories: (a) Bailable offenses, where the
accused may be granted bail, and (b) Non-bailable offenses, where the accused may be arrested and detained without
bail.
2. Types of Punishment: The IPC prescribes various types of punishments for different offenses. These include:

a. Death Penalty: Certain heinous offenses, such as murder and treason, are punishable by death.

b. Life Imprisonment: In cases where the death penalty is not imposed, the maximum punishment may be life
imprisonment, which means the offender is sentenced to remain in prison for the remainder of their natural life.

c. Fixed-Term Imprisonment: Offenses that are not punishable by life imprisonment may carry a specific term of
imprisonment, such as 1 year, 5 years, or any other specified duration.

d. Fine: Some offenses may attract a monetary penalty, known as a fine, in addition to or instead of imprisonment.

e. Combination of Punishments: In certain cases, the court may impose a combination of imprisonment and fine
as punishment.

3. Sentencing Discretion: The court has discretion in determining the appropriate punishment for a particular offense.
It considers various factors such as the nature and gravity of the offense, the circumstances of the offender, the
presence of any aggravating or mitigating factors, and the principles of proportionality and deterrence.
4. Minimum and Maximum Punishments: The IPC often specifies the minimum and maximum punishments for each
offense. The court has the authority to choose an appropriate punishment within this range, taking into account the
facts and circumstances of the case.
5. Sentencing Guidelines: In certain cases, the courts may follow sentencing guidelines or precedents established
by higher courts to ensure consistency and fairness in imposing punishments.

SECTIONS 53
Section 53 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the concept of "Punishments." It provides a framework for the
classification and application of punishments for various offenses. Here is a detailed explanation of Section 53:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 26

1. Types of Punishments: Section 53 outlines the different types of punishments that may be imposed for criminal
offenses. These include:

a. Death: The most severe punishment, the death penalty, may be imposed for certain grave offenses like murder,
treason, or acts of terrorism. However, it is important to note that there has been a global trend towards the
abolition or restriction of the death penalty.

b. Imprisonment: The IPC recognizes two types of imprisonment: life imprisonment and fixed-term
imprisonment. Life imprisonment entails imprisonment for the remainder of the offender's natural life, while
fixed-term imprisonment involves a specific period of imprisonment, such as one year, five years, or any other
specified duration.

c. Fine: The court may impose a monetary penalty, known as a fine, as a punishment for certain offenses. The
amount of the fine may vary depending on the nature and severity of the offense.

d. Forfeiture of Property: In some cases, the court may order the forfeiture of property acquired through the
commission of an offense.

2. Aggravated Forms of Punishment: Section 53 also specifies certain aggravated forms of punishment. These include
enhanced punishment for repeat offenders or those who commit offenses under specific circumstances.
3. Proportionality: The court must consider the principle of proportionality while determining the appropriate
punishment. The punishment should be commensurate with the gravity of the offense committed.
4. Sentencing Discretion: The court has the discretion to determine the specific punishment within the prescribed
limits. It takes into account various factors such as the nature of the offense, the circumstances of the offender, the
presence of any mitigating or aggravating factors, and the principles of justice and fairness.
5. Reformation and Rehabilitation: The purpose of punishment is not only to penalize offenders but also to reform
and rehabilitate them. The courts may consider the possibility of reform and rehabilitation while deciding on the
appropriate punishment.

Section 54
Section 54 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the concept of "Commencement and continuance of the right
of private defense of the body." Here is a detailed explanation of Section 54:

1. Right of Private Defense: The IPC recognizes that individuals have the right to defend themselves, their property,
and others from unlawful acts of aggression. This right is known as the right of private defense.
2. Commencement of the Right: Section 54 states that the right of private defense begins as soon as a reasonable
apprehension of danger to the body arises from an attempt or threat to commit a criminal offense. The right of private
defense commences at the moment when there is a perceived threat to one's person.
3. Continuance of the Right: The right of private defense continues as long as the threat to the body or the commission
of the criminal offense continues. The right to defend oneself or others can be exercised throughout the duration of
the threat or attack.
4. Reasonable Force: The right of private defense is subject to the condition that the force used must be reasonable
and proportionate to the threat faced. The force used in self-defense or defense of others should not exceed what is
necessary to repel the attack or prevent the commission of the offense.
5. No Extending of the Right: The right of private defense does not extend to the infliction of more harm than is
necessary to protect oneself or others. It does not authorize the use of force that is intended or likely to cause
death, unless there is a reasonable belief that such force is necessary to prevent death or grievous bodily harm.

It is important to note that the right of private defense is a legal concept with certain limitations and conditions.
The specific provisions and limitations of the right of private defense can be found throughout the Indian Penal
Code (IPC). Legal professionals and experts in criminal law can provide further guidance and clarification on the
application and scope of the right of private defense based on the latest amendments and judicial interpretations.
Section 55

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 27

Section 55 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the concept of "Commutation of sentence of imprisonment for
life." Here is a detailed explanation of Section 55:

1. Life Imprisonment: Life imprisonment is a form of punishment where the offender is sentenced to remain in prison
for the remainder of their natural life. However, Section 55 provides a provision for the commutation of this sentence.
2. Commutation of Sentence: Section 55 states that the appropriate government or authority has the power to
commute a sentence of life imprisonment to a term of imprisonment of a specified duration. This means that the
punishment of life imprisonment can be reduced or converted into a fixed-term imprisonment by the competent
authority.
3. Factors Considered: The decision to commute a sentence of life imprisonment is typically based on several factors,
including the conduct of the offender during their imprisonment, the presence of any mitigating circumstances, the
possibility of reformation, and the recommendations or guidelines issued by the appropriate government or authority.
4. Exercise of Discretion: The power to commute a sentence of life imprisonment is discretionary and rests with the
appropriate government or authority. They have the authority to consider the relevant factors and exercise their
judgment in determining whether to commute the sentence or not.
5. Limitations: It is important to note that the power to commute a sentence of life imprisonment does not extend
to cases where the punishment is specifically mandated by law, such as in cases of death penalty commutation.

The decision to commute a sentence of life imprisonment is a significant one and is usually made after careful
consideration of various factors. The specific provisions and procedures for the commutation of a sentence of life
imprisonment can be found in the relevant laws, rules, and guidelines issued by the appropriate government or
authority. Legal professionals and experts in criminal law can provide further guidance and clarification on the
application and process of sentence commutation based on the latest amendments and judicial interpretations.
SECTION 55A
Section 55A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) defines the term "appropriate government" as used inSECTIONS54 and
55 of the IPC. Section 54 deals with the power of the appropriate government to grant pardons, reprieves, and
remissions of punishment, while Section 55 deals with the power of the appropriate government to commute
sentences.
The appropriate government is defined as follows:
 In cases where the sentence is a sentence of death or is for an offence against any law relating to a matter to
which the executive power of the Union extends, the Central Government;
 In cases where the sentence (whether of death or not) is for an offence against any law relating to a matter to
which the executive power of the State extends, the Government of the State within which the offender is
sentenced.
For example, if a person is sentenced to death for an offence against a law relating to a matter to which the
executive power of the Union extends, such as treason, the appropriate government to grant pardon, reprieve, or
remission of punishment would be the Central Government. However, if a person is sentenced to death for an
offence against a law relating to a matter to which the executive power of the State extends, such as murder, the
appropriate government would be the Government of the State in which the offender is sentenced.
Section 55A was added to the IPC in 1974. The purpose of the section was to clarify the meaning of the term
"appropriate government" as used inSECTIONS54 and 55 of the IPC. This was done in order to ensure that there
was no confusion about which government had the power to grant pardons, reprieves, and remissions of
punishment, or to commute sentences.
SECTION 63
Section 63 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) pertains to "Child" under the definition of certain terms within the code.
Here is a detailed explanation of Section 63:

1. Definition of "Child": Section 63 provides the definition of a "Child" for the purposes of the IPC. According to this
section, a "Child" is a person who has not attained the age of 12 years.
2. Age of Consent: The IPC recognizes that children below the age of 12 are not capable of giving consent to any act.
This is an important consideration in various offenses under the IPC, such as sexual offenses, where the consent of the
victim is a relevant factor.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 28

3. Protection of Children: Section 63 reflects the legal principle that children require special protection due to their
vulnerability and inability to fully comprehend the consequences of their actions. It acknowledges that children below
the age of 12 are deemed incapable of giving consent and are in need of greater safeguards and care.
4. Relevance in Offenses: In cases where an offense involves a child, Section 63 serves as a reference point to
determine the applicability of specific legal provisions that are designed to protect children. For example, offenses
such as kidnapping, abduction, or certain sexual offenses may attract enhanced penalties when committed against
a child.

It is important to note that while Section 63 provides the definition of a "Child" for the purposes of the IPC, there
are other laws and legal provisions specifically addressing the rights, protection, and welfare of children in India.
These include the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, and other relevant legislations.

Legal professionals and experts in criminal law can provide further guidance and clarification on the application
and interpretation of Section 63 of the IPC, as well as the broader legal framework for the protection of children in
India.
SECTION 64
Section 64 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) pertains to "Act done by a person bound or by mistake of fact believing
himself bound by law." Here is a detailed explanation of Section 64:

1. Act Done by a Person Bound: Section 64 states that an act done by a person who is bound by law to do it shall not be
considered an offense. It means that if a person is legally obligated or required by law to perform a particular act, they
cannot be held criminally liable for carrying out that act.
2. Mistake of Fact Believing Himself Bound by Law: This section also provides protection to individuals who, due to a
mistake of fact, believe themselves to be bound by law to perform a particular act. If a person genuinely and
mistakenly believes that they are obligated by law to do something, and they act accordingly, they may not be held
criminally liable for their actions.
3. Example: For example, if a police officer believes, based on a mistaken interpretation of the law, that they have the
authority to search a person's premises without a warrant, and they conduct the search in good faith, they may be
protected from criminal liability under Section 64.
4. Conditions for Protection: To claim protection under Section 64, certain conditions must be met. The act must be
done in good faith, in accordance with the person's legal obligation or belief. The mistake of fact must be genuine and
reasonable, meaning that a reasonable person in the same circumstances would have made the same mistake.
5. Limitations: It is important to note that Section 64 does not provide blanket immunity for all acts done by a
person bound by law or based on a mistake of fact. There may still be civil or administrative consequences for such
acts, and the specific circumstances and nature of the act may be taken into account.

Section 64 serves as a defense for individuals who, in good faith and based on a mistaken belief, act in accordance
with their legal obligations or obligations they genuinely believe to be legally binding. The applicability and
interpretation of Section 64 may vary depending on the specific facts and circumstances of each case. Legal
professionals and experts in criminal law can provide further guidance and clarification on the application of
Section 64 of the IPC based on the latest amendments and judicial interpretations.
SECTION 65
Section 65 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the concept of "Tampering with documents." Here is a detailed
explanation of Section 65:

1. Tampering with Documents: Section 65 states that whoever dishonestly or fraudulently makes, alters, destroys, or
mutilates any document with the intention of causing wrongful gain or wrongful loss shall be punished under this
section.
2. Types of Tampering: The section covers various forms of tampering with documents, including making a false
document, altering an existing document, destroying or damaging a document, and mutilating or defacing a document.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 29

3. Dishonest or Fraudulent Intent: For an act to fall under Section 65, it must be done with dishonest or fraudulent
intent. The person must have the intention to cause wrongful gain to themselves or someone else, or wrongful loss to
another person.
4. Nature of Documents: Section 65 applies to any document, which includes any written or printed matter, such as
contracts, deeds, wills, records, certificates, licenses, or any other document that has legal or evidentiary significance.
5. Punishment: The punishment for tampering with documents under Section 65 is imprisonment for up to two years,
or a fine, or both. The exact punishment may vary depending on the specific circumstances of the case and the court's
discretion.
6. Cognizable Offense: Tampering with documents under Section 65 is a cognizable offense, which means that the
police have the authority to arrest the accused without a warrant.

It is important to note that Section 65 of the IPC aims to protect the integrity and reliability of documents and to
discourage fraudulent activities related to tampering with important records or documents. Legal professionals
and experts in criminal law can provide further guidance and clarification on the application and interpretation of
Section 65 based on the latest amendments and judicial interpretations.
SECTION 73
Section 73 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with "Solitary confinement" as a form of punishment. Here is a
detailed explanation of Section 73:

1. Solitary Confinement: Section 73 allows for the imposition of solitary confinement as a punishment for certain
offenses. Solitary confinement refers to the confinement of a prisoner in a cell or separate area where they are isolated
from other prisoners and have limited social interaction.
2. Duration of Solitary Confinement: Section 73 states that solitary confinement can be imposed for a specific period
not exceeding 14 days at a time. If a person is sentenced to solitary confinement for more than 14 days, it must be in
intervals, with a break of at least one month between each period of solitary confinement.
3. Conditions and Supervision: Solitary confinement must be conducted in accordance with the rules and regulations
established by the government or prison authorities. The conditions and supervision of the confinement should be
determined with the aim of ensuring the prisoner's health and well-being.
4. Limitations on Imposition: Section 73 imposes certain limitations on the imposition of solitary confinement. It
cannot be imposed on a prisoner who is sentenced to death or who is below the age of 18, except in exceptional
circumstances as prescribed by law.
5. Judicial Discretion: The imposition of solitary confinement is subject to the discretion of the court. The court takes
into account the nature and seriousness of the offense, the conduct of the prisoner, and other relevant factors before
deciding on the appropriateness of imposing solitary confinement as a punishment.
6. International Standards: It is important to note that the use of solitary confinement as a punishment is subject to
international human rights standards. Authorities must ensure that the conditions of solitary confinement do not
amount to torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, and the rights and dignity of the prisoner are
respected.

Section 73 of the IPC provides the legal framework for the imposition and regulation of solitary confinement as a
form of punishment. It is important to consult the latest amendments, rules, and regulations, as well as legal
professionals and experts in criminal law, for specific guidance and clarification on the application and
interpretation of Section 73 based on the latest developments and judicial interpretations.
SECTION 74
Section 74 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with "Limit of solitary confinement." Here is a detailed explanation
of Section 74:

1. Duration of Solitary Confinement: Section 74 sets a limit on the duration of solitary confinement as a punishment.
According to this section, the period of solitary confinement shall not exceed three months in total.
2. Offenses Eligible for Solitary Confinement: Solitary confinement can only be imposed as a punishment for certain
offenses that are specifically provided for in the IPC or other relevant laws. The court may order solitary confinement
as part of the sentence for such offenses.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 30

3. Judicial Discretion: The court has the discretion to determine the duration of solitary confinement within the limit
prescribed by Section 74. The actual period of solitary confinement imposed may vary depending on the nature and
gravity of the offense, the conduct of the offender, and other relevant factors.
4. Limitation on Continuous Confinement: Section 74 further specifies that the period of solitary confinement should
not exceed 14 days continuously. This means that even if the total period of solitary confinement is within the three-
month limit, it must be imposed in intervals, with breaks of at least one day between each period.
5. International Human Rights Standards: While Section 74 provides the legal framework for the duration of
solitary confinement under Indian law, it is important to note that the use of solitary confinement as a punishment
is subject to international human rights standards. Authorities must ensure that the conditions and treatment of
prisoners in solitary confinement comply with these standards to protect against torture or cruel, inhuman, or
degrading treatment.

Section 74 of the IPC places a limit on the duration of solitary confinement as a punishment, aiming to strike a
balance between the need for punishment and the protection of the rights and well-being of prisoners. Legal
professionals and experts in criminal law can provide further guidance and clarification on the application and
interpretation of Section 74 based on the latest amendments and judicial interpretations, as well as international
human rights standards.
SECTION 75
Section 75 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with "Cruelty to prisoners." Here is a detailed explanation of Section
75:

1. Definition of Cruelty: Section 75 defines "cruelty" as any act committed intentionally to cause physical or mental
suffering to a prisoner under lawful custody or confinement.
2. Punishment for Cruelty: According to Section 75, whoever commits an act of cruelty towards a prisoner shall be
punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend up to one year, or with fine, or both.
3. Scope of Application: Section 75 applies to acts of cruelty committed by any person who has custody or control over
a prisoner, including prison authorities, law enforcement officials, or any person entrusted with the duty of caring for
prisoners.
4. Examples of Cruelty: Acts of cruelty can include physical abuse, torture, excessive punishment, denial of basic
necessities, emotional or psychological abuse, or any other act that causes suffering or harm to the prisoner.
5. Protection of Prisoners: Section 75 reflects the importance of protecting the rights and well-being of prisoners. It
recognizes that even though a person is lawfully detained or imprisoned, they are still entitled to be treated with
dignity and respect, and any act of cruelty towards them is punishable by law.
6. International Human Rights Standards: It is important to note that Section 75 aligns with international human
rights standards that emphasize the protection of prisoners from cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. These
standards are reflected in various international conventions and treaties, such as the United Nations Standard
Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners.

Section 75 of the IPC serves as a deterrent against acts of cruelty towards prisoners and ensures that individuals
responsible for their custody or confinement are held accountable for any mistreatment. Legal professionals and
experts in criminal law can provide further guidance and clarification on the application and interpretation of
Section 75 based on the latest amendments and judicial interpretations, as well as international human rights
standards.

UNIT II

GENERAL EXCEPTIONS

The Indian Penal Code (IPC) does have a series of general exceptions listed under Chapter IV (SECTIONS 76 to
106). These exceptions provide defenses for certain acts that would otherwise be considered offenses under the
IPC. They offer various grounds on which a person may be exempted from criminal liability for their actions.
Some of the general exceptions under the IPC include:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 31

1. **Mistake of Fact (SECTIONS 76, 79, 81, 82, 83, 84, and 87):** TheseSECTIONSprovide protection to a person who
commits an act under a genuine and reasonable belief in a set of facts that, if true, would make the act lawful.
2. **Accident (Section 80):** This exception states that an act committed by accident or misfortune, without any
criminal intent, is not an offense.
3. **Infancy (Section 82):** A child under the age of seven is considered incapable of committing an offense.

4. **Intoxication (Section 85):** A person who commits an offense under intoxication and has no control over their
actions may have a defense.

5. **Consent (SECTIONS 87 to 89):** In certain situations, consent can be a defense against criminal liability.

6. **Private Defense (Section 96 to 106):** TheseSECTIONSallow a person to use reasonable force to defend
themselves, their property, or others against certain offenses or imminent harm.

7. **Acts Not Intended to Cause Death (SECTIONS 299 and 300):** TheseSECTIONSdefine culpable homicide and
murder, respectively, and list exceptions where the act is not intended to cause death.

SECTIONS 76
In the Indian Penal Code (IPC), Section 76 provides a "General Exception" to certain acts done by a person who is
bound by law to do them, even though those acts may otherwise be considered offenses under the IPC. This section
is based on the principle that certain acts done in the discharge of official duties or legal obligations should not be
considered criminal offenses. Section 76 reads as follows:

Section 76 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

"Act done by a person bound, or by mistake of fact believing himself bound, by law. — Nothing is an offense which
is done by a person who is, or who by reason of a mistake of fact and not by reason of a mistake of law in good faith
believes himself to be, bound by law to do it."
In other words, if a person commits an act that would otherwise be an offence, but he or she does so in good faith
and believes that he or she is bound by law to do it, then he or she will not be held liable for the offence.
Explanation:
This means that if a person is required by law to perform a certain act or, due to a genuine belief in good faith,
mistakenly thinks they are obligated to do it, then they cannot be held criminally liable for that act.

Let's break down the two main aspects of this section:

1. **Act done by a person bound by law to do it:** If a person is legally obligated to perform a specific act, and they
do it in accordance with that obligation, then they cannot be charged with an offense for that act, even if it might
seem to be an offense under other circumstances.
2. **Act done by a person who mistakenly believes themselves to be bound by law:** If a person, in good faith,
believes that they are legally obligated to perform a certain act due to a mistake of fact (not a mistake of law), and
they act accordingly, they will still be protected under this section. However, it's essential to note that the mistake
must be about a factual situation, not a misunderstanding of the law itself.
It's important to understand that Section 76 is a general exception and can apply to various situations where a
person is acting under legal compulsion or a genuine belief in good faith. However, it does not provide blanket
protection for all acts committed by public officials or individuals with perceived obligations. The particular
circumstances and facts of each case will be considered when determining whether this general exception applies
or not.

There are a few things to keep in mind about this exception. First, the mistake of fact must be genuine. The person
must honestly believe that he or she is bound by law to do the act. Second, the mistake of fact must be about the
law. If the person simply makes a mistake about the facts of the situation, he or she will not be able to rely on this
exception.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 32

Here are some examples of situations where the general exception of mistake of fact may apply:
 A soldier who fires on a mob in obedience to the orders of his superior officer.
 A police officer who arrests a person on a warrant that he or she believes to be valid.
 A doctor who performs an operation on a patient without the patient's consent, but who believes that the
operation is necessary to save the patient's life.
It is important to note that the general exception of mistake of fact is not a complete defence to all offences. In
some cases, even if the person honestly believes that he or she is bound by law to do the act, he or she may still be
held liable for the offence. For example, if a person commits an act that is clearly illegal, he or she will not be able to
rely on this exception, even if he or she honestly believes that he or she is bound by law to do it.
The general exception of mistake of fact is a complex and important provision of the Indian Penal Code. It is
important to understand the scope of this exception in order to protect oneself from criminal liability.

 SECTIONS 77
Section 77: Act of Judge when acting judicially
This section deals with the act of a judge when acting judicially. It states that nothing is an offence which is done by
a judge when acting judicially in the exercise of any power which is, or which in good faith he believes to be, given
to him by law.
In other words, if a judge commits an act that would otherwise be an offence, but he or she does so in good faith
and believes that he or she is acting within his or her judicial powers, then he or she will not be held liable for the
offence.
There are a few things to keep in mind about this exception. First, the judge must be acting within his or her
judicial powers. If the judge acts outside of his or her powers, then he or she will not be able to rely on this
exception. Second, the judge must honestly believe that he or she is acting within his or her powers. If the judge
does not honestly believe that he or she is acting within his or her powers, then he or she will not be able to rely on
this exception.
Here are some examples of situations where the act of a judge when acting judicially exception may apply:
 A judge who sentences a person to death in accordance with the law.
 A judge who orders the police to arrest a person in accordance with the law.
 A judge who orders the confiscation of property in accordance with the law.
It is important to note that the act of a judge when acting judicially exception is not a complete defence to all
offences. In some cases, even if the judge honestly believes that he or she is acting within his or her judicial powers,
he or she may still be held liable for the offence. For example, if a judge sentences a person to death in violation of
the law, then he or she will not be able to rely on this exception, even if he or she honestly believes that he or she is
acting within his or her judicial powers.
The act of a judge when acting judicially exception is a complex and important provision of the Indian Penal Code.
It is important to understand the scope of this exception in order to protect oneself from criminal liability.
General Explanation to Section 77: Nothing in this section applies to cases in which the act done by the judge is not
in good faith.
This general explanation clarifies that the act of a judge when acting judicially exception does not apply to cases in
which the judge does not act in good faith. In other words, if a judge commits an act that would otherwise be an
offence and he or she does so knowingly or intentionally, then he or she will not be able to rely on this exception.
Here is an example of a case where the general explanation to Section 77 would apply:
 A judge who sentences a person to death because he or she is bribed by the person's enemy.
In this case, the judge is not acting in good faith. He or she is intentionally committing an offence. Therefore, the
judge will not be able to rely on the act of a judge when acting judicially exception.
General Exceptions to Section 77: Nothing in this section applies to cases in which the act done by the judge is not
in accordance with the procedure established by law.
This general exception clarifies that the act of a judge when acting judicially exception does not apply to cases in
which the judge does not act in accordance with the procedure established by law. In other words, if a judge
commits an act that would otherwise be an offence and he or she does not follow the correct legal procedures, then
he or she will not be able to rely on this exception.
Here is an example of a case where the general exception to Section 77 would apply:
 A judge who sentences a person to death without giving him or her a fair trial.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 33

In this case, the judge is not acting in accordance with the procedure established by law. He or she is not giving the
person a fair trial. Therefore, the judge will not be able to rely on the act of a judge when acting judicially exception.

SECTIONS 78

Section 78 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

"Act done with the aid of a person criminally responsible, by a person who is not criminally responsible for that act.
— Nothing is an offense which is done by a person who is justified by law, or who by reason of a mistake of fact and
not by reason of a mistake of law in good faith, believes himself to be justified by law, in doing it."
Section 78 of the IPC deals with situations where an act is done with the aid of a person who is criminally
responsible for that act, even though the person performing the act may not be criminally responsible. It provides
protection to the person who commits the act under certain conditions, outlined below:

1. **Act Justified by Law:** If the act is justified by law, meaning that the law permits or allows such an act under
specific circumstances, then it is not considered an offense.

2. **Mistake of Fact:** If a person performs an act in good faith, under the genuine belief that they are justified by
law due to a mistake of fact (not a mistake of law), then they are not criminally liable for that act.

The key elements in this section are justification by law and good faith belief based on a mistake of fact. It is
important to note that a mistake of law alone generally does not provide a defense under this section. However, a
mistake of fact can be a valid defense if the person reasonably believes in the existence of certain facts that would
justify the act under the law.

General Explanation to Section 78: Nothing in this section applies to cases in which the order of the court is not in
writing.
This general explanation clarifies that the act done in obedience to the order of a Court exception does not apply to
cases in which the order of the court is not in writing. In other words, if a person commits an act that would
otherwise be an offence and he or she obeys an order of the court that is not in writing, then he or she will not be
able to rely on this exception.
General Exceptions to Section 78: Nothing in this section applies to cases in which the order of the court is not
made by a person who is authorized to make such orders.
This general exception clarifies that the act done in obedience to the order of a Court exception does not apply to
cases in which the order of the court is not made by a person who is authorized to make such orders. In other
words, if a person commits an act that would otherwise be an offence and he or she obeys an order of the court
that is made by a person who is not authorized to make such orders, then he or she will not be able to rely on this
exception.
Here is an example of a case where the general explanation to Section 78 would apply:
 A police officer who arrests a person on the basis of an arrest warrant that is not in writing.
In this case, the police officer is not acting in obedience to the order of a court. The arrest warrant is not in writing.
Therefore, the police officer will not be able to rely on the act done in obedience to the order of a Court exception.
Here is an example of a case where the general exception to Section 78 would apply:
 A doctor who performs an operation on a patient on the basis of an order issued by a person who is not a
doctor.
In this case, the doctor is not acting in obedience to the order of a court. The order is made by a person who is not
authorized to make such orders. Therefore, the doctor will not be able to rely on the act done in obedience to the
order of a Court exception.

SECTIONS 79
Section 79 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
"Act done by a person justified, or by mistake of fact believing himself justified, by law.—Nothing is an offense
which is done by any person who is justified by law, or who by reason of a mistake of fact and not by reason of a
mistake of law in good faith, believes himself to be justified by law, in doing it."

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 34

Section 79 is similar to Section 78, but it focuses on acts done by a person who believes they are justified by law (in
good faith) or is, in fact, justified by law. It provides protection to such individuals from criminal liability, even
though their actions might otherwise be considered offenses under the IPC.
The key elements in this section are justification by law and good faith belief based on a mistake of fact (not a
mistake of law). If a person reasonably believes that their actions are justified by law or is actually acting within
the scope of the law, they will not be held criminally liable for their conduct.
However, it's essential to remember that this protection applies only if the belief in justification is based on a
mistake of fact and not a mistake of law. A mistake of fact means that the person genuinely believes certain facts to
be true, which, if true, would justify their actions under the law.
As with any legal matter, the specific circumstances of each case will be considered when determining whether
Section 79 applies or not. If you have any more specific questions or need further information about Section 79 of
the IPC or any other legal matter, I recommend consulting a qualified legal professional or referring to the latest
version of the Indian Penal Code.
Section 79: Act done by a person justified, or by mistake of fact believing himself, justified by law
This section deals with the act done by a person justified, or by mistake of fact believing himself, justified by law. It
states that nothing is an offence which is done by any person who is justified by law, or who by reason of a mistake
of fact and not by reason of a mistake of law, in good faith believes himself to be, justified by law, in doing it.
The General Explanation to Section 79 states that "Nothing in this section applies to cases in which the act done by
the person is not in good faith."
This general explanation clarifies that the act done by a person justified, or by mistake of fact believing himself,
justified by law exception does not apply to cases in which the person does not act in good faith. In other words, if a
person commits an act that would otherwise be an offence and he or she does so knowingly or intentionally, then
he or she will not be able to rely on this exception.
General Exceptions to Section 79: Nothing in this section applies to cases in which the act done by the person is not
of the nature of that which is justified by law.
This general exception clarifies that the act done by a person justified, or by mistake of fact believing himself,
justified by law exception does not apply to cases in which the act is not of the nature of that which is justified by
law. In other words, if a person commits an act that would otherwise be an offence and he or she does not believe
that he or she is justified in doing so, then he or she will not be able to rely on this exception.
Here is an example of a case where the general explanation to Section 79 would apply:
 A person who kills another person in self-defense, but who does so not in good faith.
In this case, the person is not acting in good faith. He or she is intentionally killing the other person. Therefore, the
person will not be able to rely on the act done by a person justified, or by mistake of fact believing himself, justified
by law exception.
Here is an example of a case where the general exception to Section 79 would apply:
 A person who steals from another person, but who believes that he or she is justified in doing so because the
other person is a thief.
In this case, the person is not justified in stealing from the other person. Stealing is not of the nature of an act that
is justified by law. Therefore, the person will not be able to rely on the act done by a person justified, or by mistake
of fact believing himself, justified by law exception.

SECTIONS 80
Section 80 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
"Accident in doing a lawful act.—Nothing is an offense which is done by accident or misfortune, and without any
criminal intention or knowledge in the doing of a lawful act in a lawful manner by lawful means and with proper
care and caution."
Section 80 provides a defense against criminal liability in situations where an act is done accidentally or by
misfortune. To claim protection under this section, the following conditions must be met:
1. **Lawful Act:** The act should be lawful in itself. In other words, it should not be inherently illegal or prohibited
by law.
2. **Accidental or Misfortune:** The act should be a result of an accident or misfortune and not an intentional or
deliberate action.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 35

3. **No Criminal Intention or Knowledge:** The person should not have any criminal intention or knowledge of the
act being likely to cause harm or result in an offense.
4. **Lawful Manner and Means:** The act should be done in a lawful manner using lawful means.
5. **Proper Care and Caution:** The person should have exercised proper care and caution while performing the
act.
If all the above conditions are satisfied, then the person performing the act is not criminally liable for any
unintended consequences that might have occurred.
It is essential to remember that Section 80 is a general exception to criminal liability and applies only to situations
where the act was genuinely accidental or the result of misfortune. If an act is done with criminal intent or
knowledge, it will not be covered under this section.
As with any legal matter, the specific circumstances of each case will be considered when determining whether
Section 80 applies or not. If you have any more specific questions or need further information about Section 80 of
the IPC or any other legal matter, I recommend consulting a qualified legal professional or referring to the latest
version of the Indian Penal Code.
Section 80: Act done by accident or misfortune, and without any criminal intention or knowledge
This section deals with the act done by accident or misfortune, and without any criminal intention or knowledge. It
states that nothing is an offence which is done by accident or misfortune, and without any criminal intention or
knowledge, in the doing of a lawful act in a lawful manner by lawful means, and with proper care and caution.
The General Explanation to Section 80 states that "Nothing in this section applies to cases in which the act done by
the person is done with criminal intention or knowledge."
This general explanation clarifies that the act done by accident or misfortune, and without any criminal intention
or knowledge exception does not apply to cases in which the person does the act with criminal intention or
knowledge. In other words, if a person commits an act that would otherwise be an offence and he or she does so
with the intention of committing an offence, then he or she will not be able to rely on this exception.
General Exceptions to Section 80: Nothing in this section applies to cases in which the act done by the person is
likely to cause death, or grievous hurt, or the curing of any grievous disease or infirmity.
This general exception clarifies that the act done by accident or misfortune, and without any criminal intention or
knowledge exception does not apply to cases in which the act is likely to cause death, or grievous hurt, or the
curing of any grievous disease or infirmity. In other words, if a person commits an act that would otherwise be an
offence and he or she knows that the act is likely to cause death, or grievous hurt, or the curing of any grievous
disease or infirmity, then he or she will not be able to rely on this exception.
Here is an example of a case where the general explanation to Section 80 would apply:
 A person who accidentally fires a gun and kills another person.
In this case, the person did not intend to kill the other person. He or she was simply handling the gun and it
accidentally went off. Therefore, the person will be able to rely on the act done by accident or misfortune, and
without any criminal intention or knowledge exception.
Here is an example of a case where the general exception to Section 80 would apply:
 A person who drives a car recklessly and hits another person, causing them grievous hurt.
In this case, the person knew that driving recklessly was likely to cause an accident. He or she therefore cannot rely
on the act done by accident or misfortune, and without any criminal intention or knowledge exception.

SECTIONS 81
Section 81 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
"Act likely to cause harm, but done without criminal intent, and to prevent other harm.—Nothing is an offense
merely by reason of its being done with the knowledge that it is likely to cause harm if it be done without any
criminal intention to cause harm, and in good faith for the purpose of preventing or avoiding other harm to a
person or property."
Section 81 provides a defense against criminal liability when an act is likely to cause harm but is done without any
criminal intent. It applies to situations where the person performing the act has knowledge that it may cause harm,
but they do it in good faith to prevent or avoid other harm to a person or property.

The key elements in this section are as follows:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 36

1. **Knowledge of Likelihood of Harm:** The person performing the act should be aware that it is likely to cause
harm.
2. **Lack of Criminal Intent:** The act should be done without any criminal intention to cause harm.
3. **Good Faith:** The act should be carried out in good faith, meaning that the person genuinely believes that their
actions are necessary to prevent or avoid other harm to a person or property.
Under Section 81, the person performing the act is not criminally liable for any harm caused by it, as long as the
conditions mentioned above are met. This provision aims to protect individuals who act in good faith to prevent
greater harm even if their actions may lead to some harm in the process.

It's important to note that Section 81 is a general exception and applies to specific situations. As with any legal
matter, the specific circumstances of each case will be considered when determining whether Section 81 applies or
not.

Section 81: Act done to avoid other harm

This section deals with the act done to avoid other harm. It states that nothing is an offence which is done in good
faith for the purpose of preventing or avoiding other harm to person or property, which is likely to be caused by
such an act.
The General Explanation to Section 81 states that "Nothing in this section applies to cases in which the act done by
the person is not in good faith."
This general explanation clarifies that the act done to avoid other harm exception does not apply to cases in which
the person does not act in good faith. In other words, if a person commits an act that would otherwise be an offence
and he or she does so knowingly or intentionally, then he or she will not be able to rely on this exception.
General Exceptions to Section 81: Nothing in this section applies to cases in which the act done by the person is
likely to cause greater harm than the harm sought to be avoided.
This general exception clarifies that the act done to avoid other harm exception does not apply to cases in which
the act is likely to cause greater harm than the harm sought to be avoided. In other words, if a person commits an
act that would otherwise be an offence and he or she knows that the act is likely to cause greater harm than the
harm sought to be avoided, then he or she will not be able to rely on this exception.
Here is an example of a case where the general explanation to Section 81 would apply:
 A person who pushes another person out of the way of a moving car, even though it means pushing the person
into a fire.
In this case, the person is acting in good faith to prevent the other person from being hit by the car. Even though
the person is pushing the other person into a fire, the person believes that this is the lesser of two evils. Therefore,
the person will be able to rely on the act done to avoid other harm exception.
Here is an example of a case where the general exception to Section 81 would apply:
 A person who shoots another person to prevent him or her from killing someone else.
In this case, the person is acting in good faith to prevent a murder. However, the person knows that shooting the
other person is likely to kill him or her. Therefore, the person will not be able to rely on the act done to avoid other
harm exception.
 SECTIONS 82
Section 82 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
"Act of a child under seven years of age.—Nothing is an offense which is done by a child under seven years of age."
Section 82 provides an absolute defense to criminal liability for children who are under the age of seven years.
According to this section, a child below the age of seven cannot be held criminally responsible for any act, no
matter how serious the act might be.
The rationale behind this provision is that young children are presumed to be incapable of forming the necessary
criminal intent to commit offenses. As a result, the law recognizes that they lack the mental capacity to understand
the consequences of their actions and, therefore, cannot be held legally accountable for any offenses.
It's important to note that Section 82 provides an exception only for children below the age of seven. For children
between the ages of seven and twelve, there is a different provision under Section 83 of the IPC. Section 83 states
that a child between the ages of seven and twelve may be considered incapable of committing an offense if it is
proven that they lacked the maturity and understanding to know the nature and consequences of their actions at
the time of the offense.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 37

The intention behind these provisions is to balance the need for accountability while recognizing the limited
capacity of young children to understand the implications of their behavior.
Section 82: Act of a person of unsound mind
This section deals with the act of a person of unsound mind. It states that nothing is an offence which is done by a
person who, at the time of doing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act,
or that he is doing what is wrong.
The General Explanation to Section 82 states that "Nothing in this section applies to cases in which the act done by
the person is done intentionally or knowingly."
This general explanation clarifies that the act of a person of unsound mind exception does not apply to cases in
which the person does the act intentionally or knowingly. In other words, if a person commits an act that would
otherwise be an offence and he or she does so with the intention of committing an offence, then he or she will not
be able to rely on this exception.
General Exceptions to Section 82: Nothing in this section applies to cases in which the act done by the person is
likely to cause harm to the person or property of another.
This general exception clarifies that the act of a person of unsound mind exception does not apply to cases in which
the act is likely to cause harm to the person or property of another. In other words, if a person commits an act that
would otherwise be an offence and he or she knows that the act is likely to cause harm to the person or property of
another, then he or she will not be able to rely on this exception.
Here is an example of a case where the general explanation to Section 82 would apply:
 A person who, due to a mental illness, believes that he is being attacked by a bear and stabs another person.
In this case, the person is not acting intentionally or knowingly. He or she is acting on the basis of a delusion caused
by his or her mental illness. Therefore, the person will be able to rely on the act of a person of unsound mind
exception.
Here is an example of a case where the general exception to Section 82 would apply:
 A person who, due to a mental illness, sets fire to his or her house.
In this case, the person knows that setting fire to his or her house is likely to cause harm to the property of others.
Therefore, the person will not be able to rely on the act of a person of unsound mind exception.

SECTIONS 83
Section 83 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
"Act of a child above seven and under twelve of immature understanding.—Nothing is an offense which is done by a
child above seven years of age and under twelve, who has not attained sufficient maturity of understanding to
judge of the nature and consequences of his conduct on that occasion."
Section 83 provides an exception to criminal liability for children between the ages of seven and twelve years.
According to this section, if a child within this age group commits an act, it will not be considered an offense if it is
established that the child has not attained sufficient maturity of understanding to comprehend the nature and
consequences of their conduct at the time of the offense.
The intention behind Section 83 is to recognize that children in this age group may not fully understand the
implications of their actions and, therefore, should not be held criminally responsible in the same way as adults.
This provision acknowledges the developmental differences between children and adults and aims to strike a
balance between accountability and the recognition of a child's limited capacity to comprehend the legal
implications of their behaviour.
It's important to note that the burden of proving that a child falls within the scope of Section 83 lies with the
accused or their legal representatives. Evidence may be presented to demonstrate that the child's understanding
and maturity were insufficient at the time of the offense.
Section 83: Act of a child under seven years of age
This section deals with the act of a child under seven years of age. It states that nothing is an offence which is done
by a child under seven years of age.
The General Explanation to Section 83 states that "Nothing in this section applies to cases in which the act done by
the child is done intentionally or knowingly."
This general explanation clarifies that the act of a child under seven years of age exception does not apply to cases
in which the child does the act intentionally or knowingly. In other words, if a child commits an act that would

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 38

otherwise be an offence and he or she does so with the intention of committing an offence, then he or she will not
be able to rely on this exception.
General Exceptions to Section 83: Nothing in this section applies to cases in which the child has attained the age of
seven years but is still incapable of understanding the nature of the act.
This general exception clarifies that the act of a child under seven years of age exception does not apply to cases in
which the child has attained the age of seven years but is still incapable of understanding the nature of the act. In
other words, if a child commits an act that would otherwise be an offence and he or she has attained the age of
seven years but is still incapable of understanding the nature of the act, then he or she will not be able to rely on
this exception.
Here is an example of a case where the general explanation to Section 83 would apply:
 A child of six years old throws a stone at a window and breaks it.
In this case, the child is not acting intentionally or knowingly. He or she is simply playing and does not understand
the consequences of his or her actions. Therefore, the child will be able to rely on the act of a child under seven
years of age exception.
Here is an example of a case where the general exception to Section 83 would apply:
 A child of eight years old sets fire to a building.
In this case, the child has attained the age of seven years and is therefore capable of understanding the nature of
the act. Therefore, the child will not be able to rely on the act of a child under seven years of age exception.

SECTIONS 84

Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

"Act of a person of unsound mind.—Nothing is an offense which is done by a person who, at the time of doing 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."
Section 84 provides a defense against criminal liability for persons who commit acts while being of unsound mind.
According to this section, if a person, at the time of committing the act, is incapable of understanding the nature of
the act or that what they are doing is either wrong or contrary to the law due to unsoundness of mind, then they
cannot be held criminally responsible for the offense.
The key elements in this section are as follows:

1. **Unsoundness of Mind:** The person committing the act must be of unsound mind at the time of the offense.
Unsoundness of mind refers to mental illness or mental disorder that affects the person's ability to understand the
nature of their actions.

2. **Incapable of Knowing the Nature of the Act:** The person should be incapable of knowing the nature of the act
they are committing. This means they do not understand the significance or implications of their actions.
3. **Incapable of Knowing What is Wrong or Contrary to Law:** Additionally, the person must be unable to
comprehend that what they are doing is either morally wrong or contrary to the law.

If all the above conditions are satisfied, then the person committing the act is not criminally liable for the offense,
and Section 84 provides a defense against any criminal prosecution.
It is important to note that Section 84 focuses on the mental state of the accused at the time of the offense. If a
person is found to be of unsound mind, the legal proceedings may differ, and they may be subjected to appropriate
mental health evaluations and treatment rather than criminal punishment.

Additional Note
Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the act done by a person incapable of judgment by reason of
intoxication caused against his will. It states that nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at the time
of doing it, is by reason of intoxication, incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is
wrong, and is not voluntarily intoxicated.
In other words, this section provides a defence for a person who commits an act that would otherwise be an
offence if the person was intoxicated at the time of the act and was not voluntarily intoxicated.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 39

There are two key elements to this defence:

 The person must have been intoxicated at the time of the act.
 The person must not have been voluntarily intoxicated.
Intoxication can be caused by alcohol, drugs, or other substances. To be considered involuntary, the intoxication
must have been caused against the person's will. For example, if a person is forced to drink alcohol or take drugs,
then the intoxication would be considered involuntary.
If a person can prove that they were intoxicated at the time of the act and that the intoxication was involuntary,
then they will not be held liable for the offence. However, it is important to note that this defence is not available to
all offences. For example, it cannot be used as a defence for murder or rape.
Here are some examples of cases where the defence of intoxication caused against the will may be available:
 A person is given a drugged drink without their knowledge and then commits an offence.
 A person is forced to take drugs by a gang and then commits an offence.
 A person has a medical condition that causes them to become intoxicated without their knowledge and then
commits an offence.
It is important to note that the defence of intoxication caused against the will is a complex one. If you have been
charged with an offence and you believe that you may be able to rely on this defence, you should seek legal advice
from an experienced criminal lawyer.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 84 of the IPC:
 The defence of intoxication caused against the will is not available to a person who voluntarily consumes
intoxicating substances knowing that they are likely to become intoxicated and commit an offence.
 The defence of intoxication caused against the will is not available to a person who is intoxicated due to their
own negligence. For example, a person who drinks alcohol knowing that they will be driving is not able to rely
on this defence if they then commit an offence while driving.
 The defence of intoxication caused against the will is not available to a person who is intoxicated due to their
own recklessness. For example, a person who drinks alcohol knowing that they have a medical condition that
makes them more likely to become intoxicated is not able to rely on this defence if they then commit an
offence while intoxicated.

SECTIONS 85

Section 85 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

"Act of a person incapable of judgment by reason of intoxication caused against his will.—Nothing is an offense
which is done by a person who, at the time of doing it, is, by reason of intoxication, incapable of knowing the nature
of the act or that he is doing what is either wrong, or contrary to law: provided that the thing which intoxicated him
was administered to him without his knowledge or against his will."

Elements of Section 85:

1. **Intoxication:** For Section 85 to apply, the person must be intoxicated at the time of committing the act.
Intoxication refers to a state where a person's mental faculties and judgment are impaired due to the influence of
alcohol, drugs, or any other intoxicating substance.
2. **Incapability of Judgment:** The intoxication should be of such a degree that the person is incapable of
exercising sound judgment and understanding the consequences of their actions. In other words, they must be
unable to comprehend the nature of the act they are committing.
3. **Ignorance of Nature of Act or Wrongfulness:** Due to intoxication, the person must be unaware of the nature
of the act they are committing. This means they do not understand the significance or implications of their actions.
Additionally, they should be incapable of realizing that what they are doing is morally wrong or contrary to the law.
4. **Intoxication Caused Against Will:** For Section 85 to be a valid defense, the intoxication should have been
involuntary. This means that the substance that caused the intoxication must have been administered to the person
without their knowledge or against their will. If the person voluntarily consumed alcohol or drugs, they cannot use
this defense.
Application of Section 85:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 40

Section 85 is a general exception to criminal liability, meaning that it provides a defense to individuals who meet
the specified criteria. If a person is found to be intoxicated to the extent that they are incapable of knowing the
nature of the act or that it is wrong or contrary to the law, and if the intoxication was involuntary, they cannot be
held criminally liable for the offense committed during that state of intoxication.
It's important to note that voluntary intoxication, where a person willingly consumes alcohol or drugs and later
commits an offense, generally cannot be used as a defense under Section 85. In such cases, the principle of personal
responsibility applies, and the person may still be held accountable for their actions.

SECTIONS 86
Section 86 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

"Offense requiring a particular intent or knowledge committed by one who is intoxicated.—In cases where an act
done is not an offense unless done with a particular knowledge or intent, a person who does the act in a state of
intoxication shall be liable to be dealt with as if he had the same knowledge as he would have had if he had not
been intoxicated, unless the thing which intoxicated him was administered to him without his knowledge or
against his will."
Elements of Section 86:
1. **Offense Requiring Specific Intent or Knowledge:** Section 86 applies to offenses that require a particular state
of mind, such as a specific intent or knowledge, for the act to be considered criminal. In such cases, the prosecution
must prove that the accused had a certain mental element or mental state while committing the offense.
2. **Act Committed While Intoxicated:** For Section 86 to apply, the person must have committed the act while
being intoxicated. Intoxication refers to a state where a person's mental faculties and judgment are impaired due to
the influence of alcohol, drugs, or any other intoxicating substance.
3. **Liability as if Not Intoxicated:** Despite being intoxicated, Section 86 holds the person liable for the act
committed as if they had the same knowledge or intent as they would have had if they were not intoxicated. This
means that their state of mind is disregarded, and they are treated as if they possessed the specific intent or
knowledge required for the offense.
Exception - Involuntary Intoxication:
Section 86 includes an exception, stating that if the thing which intoxicated the person was administered to them
without their knowledge or against their will, then Section 86 does not apply. In such cases of involuntary
intoxication, the person cannot be held liable for the act committed under the influence of the substance.
The exception of involuntary intoxication protects individuals who might have been unknowingly drugged or
forcibly given intoxicating substances. It recognizes that the person did not voluntarily put themselves in the
intoxicated state and, therefore, should not be held criminally responsible for any acts committed while under the
influence of the substance.

Application of Section 86:

Section 86 is a general exception to criminal liability and provides a defense to individuals who meet the specified
criteria. It is applicable to offenses where the accused's state of mind is an essential element for determining
criminal liability. By disregarding the intoxication and treating the person as if they possessed the necessary intent
or knowledge, Section 86 prevents individuals from escaping criminal responsibility by claiming intoxication.
However, the exception of involuntary intoxication ensures that individuals who were intoxicated against their will
are not unfairly held liable for their actions while under the influence.

SECTIONS 87
Section 87 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
"Act not intended to cause death, done by consent in good faith for person's benefit.—Nothing which is not
intended to cause death is an offense by reason of any harm which it may cause, or be intended by the doer to
cause, or be known by the doer to be likely to cause, to any person for whose benefit it is done in good faith, and
who has given a consent, whether express or implied, to suffer that harm, or to take the risk of that harm."

Elements of Section 87:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 41

1. **Absence of Intent to Cause Death:** Section 87 applies only to acts that are not intended to cause death. If the
act is intended to cause death, this section does not provide a defense.
2. **Act Done in Good Faith:** For this section to be applicable, the act must be done in good faith. Good faith
implies that the person performing the act believes it to be in the best interest of the person for whom the act is
done. The doer must have a genuine and honest intention to benefit the other person.
3. **Consent of the Person Benefitted:** The person for whom the act is done must give consent to suffer any harm
that may result from the act, or they must agree to take the risk of such harm. Consent may be either express or
implied.

Application of Section 87
Section 87 is a general exception to criminal liability, providing a defense to individuals who meet the specified
criteria. It aims to protect those who act in good faith to benefit others, even if some harm may arise as a
consequence of the act. The section acknowledges that certain actions may cause harm to others, but if those
actions are done in good faith for the benefit of the person involved, and with their consent, they should not be
considered offenses.
For example, if a doctor performs a medical procedure on a patient to improve their health, and the patient gives
their informed consent for the procedure, any harm or injury resulting from the procedure may not be treated as a
criminal offense under Section 87. The key consideration here is that the doctor acted in good faith, believing the
procedure would benefit the patient, and the patient consented to the treatment despite being aware of potential
risks.
It's important to note that Section 87 applies specifically to acts not intended to cause death and where the harm is
suffered by the person with their consent. It does not provide protection for acts intended to cause death or harm
done without the person's consent.

 SECTIONS 88

Section 88 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

"Act not intended to cause death, done by consent in good faith for person's benefit.—Nothing which is not
intended to cause death is an offense by reason of any harm which it may cause, or be intended by the doer to
cause, or be known by the doer to be likely to cause, to any person for whose benefit it is done in good faith, and
who has given a consent, whether express or implied, to suffer that harm, or to take the risk of that harm."

Elements of Section 88:

1. **Absence of Intent to Cause Death:** Section 88 applies only to acts that are not intended to cause death. If the
act is intended to cause death, this section does not provide a defense.
2. **Act Done in Good Faith:** For this section to be applicable, the act must be done in good faith. Good faith
implies that the person performing the act believes it to be in the best interest of the person for whom the act is
done. The doer must have a genuine and honest intention to benefit the other person.
3. **Consent of the Person Benefitted:** The person for whom the act is done must give consent to suffer any harm
that may result from the act, or they must agree to take the risk of such harm. Consent may be either express or
implied.
4. **Incapable of Giving Consent:** The person for whom the act is done is incapable of giving consent due to a
mental disorder or being in a state of unconsciousness.

Application of Section 88:

Section 88 is a general exception to criminal liability, providing a defense to individuals who meet the specified
criteria. It aims to protect those who act in good faith to benefit others, even if some harm may arise as a
consequence of the act. The section acknowledges that certain actions may cause harm to others, but if those
actions are done in good faith for the benefit of a person who cannot give consent, they should not be considered
offenses.
For example, if a doctor performs a life-saving medical procedure on an unconscious patient to save their life, any
harm or injury resulting from the procedure may not be treated as a criminal offense under Section 88. The key

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 42

consideration here is that the doctor acted in good faith, believing the procedure would benefit the patient, and the
patient could not give consent due to being unconscious.

 SECTIONS 89

Section 89 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

"Act done in good faith for the benefit of a person without consent.—Nothing which is done in good faith for the
benefit of a person under twelve years of age, or of unsound mind, by or by consent, either express or implied, of
the guardian or other person having lawful charge of that person, is an offense by reason of any harm which it may
cause, or be intended by the doer to cause or be known by the doer to be likely to cause to that person: Provided—
First: That this exception shall not extend to the intentional causing of death, or to the attempting to cause death;
Secondly: That this exception shall not extend to the doing of anything which the person doing it knows to be likely
to cause death for any purpose other than the preventing of death or grievous hurt; Thirdly: That this exception
shall not extend to the voluntary causing of hurt, or to the attempting to cause hurt, for any purpose other than the
preventing of death or hurt; Fourthly: That this exception shall not extend to the abetment of any offense, to the
committing of which offense it would not extend."

Elements of Section 89:

1. **Act Done in Good Faith for the Benefit of a Person:** Section 89 applies to acts that are done in good faith, with
a genuine and honest intention to benefit a person.
2. **Person Under Twelve Years of Age or Unsound Mind:** This section applies when the act is done for the benefit
of a person who is either under the age of twelve years or of unsound mind.
3. **Consent of Guardian or Lawful Charge:** The act is done with the consent, either express or implied, of the
guardian or another person who has lawful charge of the person under twelve years of age or of unsound mind.
Application of Section 89:
Section 89 is a general exception to criminal liability, providing a defense to individuals who meet the specified
criteria. It aims to protect those who act in good faith to benefit vulnerable individuals, such as children under
twelve years of age or persons of unsound mind, when obtaining consent may be impracticable due to the
emergency situation.
For example, if a guardian or caregiver of a child under twelve years of age administers necessary medical
treatment to save the child's life in an emergency, the harm caused or intended by the act may not be treated as a
criminal offense under Section 89. The key consideration here is that the act was done in good faith and with the
consent (express or implied) of the lawful guardian or caregiver, for the benefit of the child.
It's important to note that Section 89 has certain limitations and exceptions. For instance, it does not extend to acts
that intentionally cause death or grievous hurt, or acts done with knowledge that they are likely to cause death or
hurt for any purpose other than the prevention of death or grievous hurt.
 SECTIONS 90
Section 90 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
"Consent known to be given under fear or misconception.—A consent is not such a consent as it intended by any
section of this Code if the consent is given by a person under fear of injury or under a misconception of fact and if
the person doing the act knows, or has reason to believe, that the consent was given in consequence of such fear or
misconception; or Consent of insane person—If the consent is given by a person who, from unsoundness of mind,
or intoxication, is unable to understand the nature and consequence of that to which he gives his consent; or
Consent of child—Unless the contrary appears from the context, if the consent is given by a person who is under
twelve years of age."
Elements of Section 90:
1. **Consent Given Under Fear or Misconception:** Section 90 addresses cases where a person gives consent to an
act under the influence of fear of injury or due to a misconception of fact.
2. **Knowledge of the Person Doing the Act:** For Section 90 to apply, the person performing the act must know or
have reason to believe that the consent was given as a result of fear or misconception.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 43

3. **Consent by Person Unable to Understand the Nature and Consequence:** This section also covers cases where
consent is given by a person who is unable to understand the nature and consequences of the act due to
unsoundness of mind or intoxication.

4. **Consent by a Child Under Twelve Years of Age:** Section 90 deems that the consent of a person under the age
of twelve years is not valid consent unless the contrary appears from the context.
Application of Section 90:
Section 90 is a general exception to criminal liability, providing a defense to individuals who meet the specified
criteria. It aims to protect individuals from being exploited or harmed when they give consent under duress, fear, or
misconception, or when they are unable to understand the nature and consequences of their consent due to
unsoundness of mind or intoxication.
For example, if a person obtains consent for a certain action from another person by threatening them with
physical harm, the consent obtained under fear would not be valid under Section 90. Similarly, if a person
mistakenly believes that they have received consent from another person, but that person is unable to understand
the nature and consequences of their consent due to mental incapacity, the consent would not be valid under
Section 90.

It's essential for individuals to obtain genuine and voluntary consent from others, free from any undue influence,
fear, or misconception, to ensure that their actions are legally permissible.

SECTIONS 91
Section 91 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
"Exemption of acts done in good faith under authority for the benefit of a person without consent.—Nothing is an
offense by reason of any harm which it may cause to a person for whose benefit it is done in good faith, even
without that person's consent, if the circumstances are such that it is impossible for that person to signify consent,
or if that person is incapable of giving consent, and has no guardian or other person in lawful charge of him from
whom it is possible to obtain consent in time for the thing to be done with benefit."

Elements of Section 91:

1. **Act Done in Good Faith for the Benefit of a Person:** Section 91 applies to acts that are done in good faith, with
a genuine and honest intention to benefit a person.
2. **Exemption from Criminal Liability:** This section provides an exemption from criminal liability for acts that
may cause harm to a person for whose benefit they are done, even without that person's consent.
3. **Impossibility of Obtaining Consent:** Section 91 applies when circumstances make it impossible for the
person to signify consent or when the person is incapable of giving consent.
4. **Absence of Guardian or Person in Lawful Charge:** Additionally, Section 91 applies when the person for whose
benefit the act is done has no guardian or other person in lawful charge from whom consent can be obtained in
time for the act to be done with benefit.
Application of Section 91:
Section 91 is a general exception to criminal liability, providing a defense to individuals who meet the specified
criteria. It aims to protect those who act in good faith to benefit others when it is practically impossible to obtain
consent from the person who will benefit from the act.
For example, if a doctor performs life-saving medical treatment on an unconscious person found in a critical
condition, without obtaining their consent, the act may not be treated as a criminal offense under Section 91. The
key consideration here is that the act was done in good faith and for the benefit of the person who was incapable of
giving consent due to their unconscious state.
It's important to note that Section 91 applies to situations where obtaining consent is practically impossible due to
the urgency of the circumstances or the person's incapacity to give consent. However, it does not justify acts done
with malicious intent or for personal gain under the guise of benefiting the person.

SECTIONS 92

Section 92 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 44

"Act done in good faith for the benefit of a person without consent.—Nothing is an offense by reason of any harm
which may be caused to a person for whose benefit it is done in good faith, even without that person's consent, if
the circumstances are such that it is a necessity to do the thing for the benefit of the person concerned."

Elements of Section 92:

1. **Act Done in Good Faith for the Benefit of a Person:** Section 92 applies to acts that are done in good faith, with
a genuine and honest intention to benefit a person.
2. **Exemption from Criminal Liability:** This section provides an exemption from criminal liability for acts that
may cause harm to a person for whose benefit they are done, even without that person's consent.
3. **Necessity to Benefit the Person:** Section 92 applies when the circumstances necessitate doing the act for the
benefit of the person concerned.

Application of Section 92:

Section 92 is a general exception to criminal liability, providing a defense to individuals who meet the specified
criteria. It aims to protect those who act in good faith to benefit others when doing so becomes a necessity for the
benefit of the person concerned.
For example, if a person, in an emergency situation, administers life-saving medical treatment to another person
who is unconscious and unable to give consent, the act may not be treated as a criminal offense under Section 92.
The key consideration here is that the act was done in good faith and was necessary to benefit the person's health
and well-being.
It's important to note that Section 92 applies specifically to acts done in good faith and necessity for the benefit of
the person concerned. However, it does not justify acts done with malicious intent or for personal gain under the
guise of benefiting the person.

SECTIONS 93
Section 93 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
"Communication made in good faith.—Communication made in good faith is not an offense by reason of any harm
to the person to whom it is made, if it is made for the benefit of that person. Explanation: Nothing in this section is
intended to excuse or justify an offense affecting life, liberty, or property."

Elements of Section 93:

1. **Communication Made in Good Faith:** Section 93 applies to communications that are made in good faith, with
a genuine intention to benefit a person.
2. **Exemption from Criminal Liability:** This section provides an exemption from criminal liability for
communications that may cause harm to the person to whom they are made if they are made for the benefit of that
person.
Application of Section 93:
Section 93 is a general exception to criminal liability, providing a defense to individuals who meet the specified
criteria. It aims to protect those who communicate information in good faith for the benefit of others, even if the
communication may cause harm to the person to whom it is made.
For example, if a doctor communicates a medical diagnosis and treatment plan to a patient's lawful guardian for
the patient's benefit, and the patient experiences emotional distress upon hearing the diagnosis, the
communication may not be treated as a criminal offense under Section 93. The key consideration here is that the
communication was made in good faith and for the benefit of the person's health and well-being.
However, it's important to note that Section 93 specifically states that nothing in this section is intended to excuse
or justify an offense affecting life, liberty, or property. This means that certain serious offenses, such as those
involving harm to life, liberty, or property, cannot be exempted from criminal liability under Section 93, even if the
communication was made in good faith.

 SECTIONS 94
Section 94 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 45

"Act to which a person is compelled by threats.—Except murder, and offenses against the State punishable with
death, nothing is an offense which is done by a person who is compelled to do it by threats, which, at the time of
doing it, reasonably cause the apprehension that instant death to that person will otherwise be the consequence:
Provided the person doing the act did not of his own accord or from a reasonable apprehension of harm to himself,
voluntarily cause the death of the person to whom the threat is made, nor, in cases in which harm through accident
is not excluded by the threats, harm to that person beyond that which was caused by the act so done by him."

Elements of Section 94:

1. **Act Done Under Compulsion of Threats:** Section 94 applies to acts that are done by a person who is
compelled to do it by threats.
2. **Threats Reasonably Causing Apprehension of Instant Death:** The threats must reasonably cause the
apprehension that instant death to the person will otherwise be the consequence of not doing the act.
3. **Exemption from Criminal Liability:** This section provides an exemption from criminal liability for acts done
under such compulsion of threats.
4. **Exception for Murder and Offenses Punishable with Death:** Section 94 does not apply to murder or offenses
against the State punishable with death.

Application of Section 94:

Section 94 is a general exception to criminal liability, providing a defense to individuals who meet the specified
criteria. It aims to protect those who act under compulsion of threats, where the threats reasonably cause the
apprehension of instant death if the act is not performed.
For example, if a person is compelled by threats to commit a theft, and failure to commit the theft would reasonably
result in their instant death, the act of theft may not be treated as a criminal offense under Section 94. The key
consideration here is that the person committed the act under the compulsion of threats that put them in fear of
immediate death if they did not comply.
However, it's important to note that Section 94 has certain limitations. It does not apply to murder or offenses
against the State punishable with death. Additionally, if the person, under the compulsion of threats, voluntarily
causes the death of the person making the threats, Section 94 does not provide protection. Furthermore, if harm to
the person is not excluded by the threats, the person doing the act will not be exempted from criminal liability for
harm beyond that which was caused by the act done under compulsion.

SECTIONS 95
Section 95 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
"Act causing slight harm.—Nothing is an offense by reason that it causes, or that it is intended to cause, or that it is
known to be likely to cause, any harm, if that harm is so slight that no person of ordinary sense and temper would
complain of such harm."

Elements of Section 95:

1. **Act Causing Slight Harm:** Section 95 applies to acts that cause slight harm.
2. **Exemption from Criminal Liability:** This section provides an exemption from criminal liability for acts that
cause slight harm, regardless of whether the act was intended to cause such harm or known to be likely to cause it.
3. **Harm So Slight That No Complaint is Expected:** The harm caused by the act must be so slight that no person
of ordinary sense and temper would complain of such harm.

Application of Section 95:

Section 95 is a general exception to criminal liability, providing a defense to individuals who meet the specified
criteria. It aims to protect those who act in good faith and with consent, even if the act causes slight harm that
would not be a cause for complaint by a person of ordinary sense and temper.
For example, if a person gives a friend a playful pat on the back, and the friend suffers a slight and temporary
discomfort due to the impact, the act may not be treated as a criminal offense under Section 95. The key
consideration here is that the harm caused by the act is so minor that it would not be expected to warrant a
complaint from a reasonable person.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 46

However, it's important to note that Section 95 has its limitations. It does not apply to acts that cause death,
grievous hurt, or significant harm. If the harm caused by the act is more than slight and goes beyond what a person
of ordinary sense and temper would tolerate without complaint, Section 95 may not provide a defense against
criminal liability.

SECTIONS 96
Section 96 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
"Things done in private defense.—Nothing is an offense which is done in the exercise of the right of private
defense."
Elements of Section 96:
1. **Exercise of the Right of Private Defense:** Section 96 applies to acts that are done in the exercise of the right of
private defense.
2. **Exemption from Criminal Liability:** This section provides an exemption from criminal liability for acts done
in self-defense or defense of others.
Application of Section 96:
Section 96 is a general exception to criminal liability, providing a defense to individuals who meet the specified
criteria. It aims to protect individuals who act in self-defense or in defense of others to protect themselves or
others from harm.
The right of private defense is a legal right recognized under the Indian Penal Code and allows a person to use
reasonable force to protect themselves, their property, or others from an imminent threat of harm or danger.
However, it is essential to note that the exercise of the right of private defense has certain limitations:
1. **Proportionate Force:** The force used in self-defense or defense of others should be proportionate to the
threat faced. It means that only the amount of force necessary to repel the attack or threat should be used.
2. **No Excessive Force:** The right of private defense does not justify the use of excessive force beyond what is
necessary to repel the threat. The force used should not cause more harm than what is required to protect oneself
or others.
3. **No Continuing Threat:** The right of private defense ceases when the threat has ended. Once the threat is no
longer imminent, the person should not continue to use force.
As of my last update in September 2021, Section 96 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) is a general exception to
criminal liability. It deals with situations where an act is done in good faith for the benefit of the person or others,
causing harm, and it is done with the person's consent. Let me provide you with the relevant information:
For example, if a person is physically attacked by someone with the intent to cause harm, and the person uses
reasonable force to defend themselves and repel the attack, the act may not be treated as a criminal offense under
Section 96. The key consideration here is that the act was done in the exercise of the right of private defense to
protect oneself from harm.
It's important to note that the right of private defense is not unlimited. It must be exercised reasonably, and the
force used should not exceed what is necessary to repel the threat. Additionally, the right of private defense does
not extend to causing death or grievous hurt unless there is a reasonable apprehension of death or grievous hurt.
SECTIONS 97

Section 97 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

"Right of private defense of the body and of property.—Every person has a right, subject to the restrictions
contained in section 99, to defend— First: His own body, and the body of any other person, against any offense
affecting the human body; Secondly: The property, whether movable or immovable, of himself or of any other
person, against any act which is an offense falling under the definition of theft, robbery, mischief or criminal
trespass, or which is an attempt to commit theft, robbery, mischief, or criminal trespass."

Elements of Section 97:

1. **Right of Private Defense:** Section 97 recognizes the right of every person to defend their own body or the
body of any other person, and to defend their property or the property of any other person.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 47

2. **Subject to Restrictions in Section 99:** The right of private defense is subject to the restrictions specified in
Section 99 of the IPC.

Application of Section 97:

Section 97 establishes the legal right of private defense, which allows individuals to use reasonable force to protect
their own body, the body of others, and their property or the property of others from certain offenses. The right of
private defense arises when there is a reasonable apprehension of harm or threat, and there is no time to seek
protection from law enforcement authorities.

For example, if a person is physically attacked by someone attempting to steal their belongings, the person has the
right to use reasonable force to defend themselves and prevent the theft. Similarly, if a person witnesses an
assailant attacking another person, they have the right to intervene and use reasonable force to protect the victim.

However, it's important to note that the right of private defense is not unlimited. Section 99 of the IPC sets out
certain restrictions on the exercise of this right. According to Section 99, the right of private defense does not
extend to causing more harm than is necessary to repel the attack. The force used in self-defense should be
proportionate to the threat faced. The right of private defense also does not extend to causing death, except in
certain exceptional circumstances.

SECTIONS 98

Section 98 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

"Right of private defense against the act of a person of unsound mind, etc.—When an act, which would otherwise
be a certain offense, is not that offense, by reason of the youth, the want of maturity of understanding, the
unsoundness of mind or the intoxication of the person doing that act, or by reason of any misconception on the
part of that person, every person has the same right of private defense against that act which he would have if the
act were that offense."

Elements of Section 98:

1. **Act Not an Offense Due to Incapacity:** Section 98 applies when an act would otherwise be considered an
offense, but it is not treated as an offense because the person doing the act is of a certain category: young, lacks
maturity of understanding, of unsound mind, or intoxicated, or due to any misconception on the part of that
person.

2. **Right of Private Defense:** When the act is not treated as an offense due to the reasons mentioned above, every
person has the same right of private defense against that act as they would have if the act were treated as an
offense.

Application of Section 98:

Section 98 of the IPC provides a legal defense to individuals who act in self-defense or defense of others when
confronted by a person whose act would otherwise be an offense, but due to certain conditions or incapacity (such
as being young, mentally unsound, intoxicated, etc.), it is not considered as an offense.

For instance, if a person with a mental disorder, due to their condition, behaves in a way that would ordinarily be
considered an offense but is not held criminally liable, others still have the right to exercise their right of private
defense against such acts. This means they can use reasonable force to protect themselves or others from the
actions of the person with the mental disorder, just as they would have if the act was considered an offense.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 48

It's important to note that the right of private defense has its limitations, even in cases covered under Section 98.
The force used must be reasonable and proportionate to the threat faced, and the right of private defense does not
extend to causing death, except in certain exceptional circumstances.

SECTIONS 99
Section 99 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

"Acts against which there is no right of private defense.—There is no right of private defense against an act which
does not reasonably cause the apprehension of death or of grievous hurt, if done, or attempted to be done, by a
public servant acting in good faith under color of his office, though that act may not be strictly justifiable by law.
There is no right of private defense against an act which does not reasonably cause the apprehension of death or of
grievous hurt, if done, or attempted to be done, by the direction of a public servant acting in good faith under color
of his office, though that direction may not be strictly justifiable by law. There is no right of private defense in cases
in which there is time to have recourse to the protection of the public authorities."

Elements of Section 99:

1. **No Right of Private Defense:** Section 99 specifies situations where there is no right of private defense
available to individuals.
2. **Acts Not Causing Apprehension of Death or Grievous Hurt:** The right of private defense is not available
against acts that do not reasonably cause the apprehension of death or grievous hurt.
3. **Acts by Public Servant Acting in Good Faith under Color of Office:** The right of private defense is not available
against acts done, or attempted to be done, by a public servant acting in good faith under the color of his office,
even if the act may not be strictly justifiable by law.
4. **Acts by Direction of a Public Servant Acting in Good Faith under Color of Office:** The right of private defense
is not available against acts done, or attempted to be done, by the direction of a public servant acting in good faith
under the color of his office, even if the direction may not be strictly justifiable by law.
5. **No Right of Private Defense When Time to Seek Protection of Public Authorities:** The right of private defense
is not available in cases where there is sufficient time to seek protection from the public authorities.
Application of Section 99:
Section 99 of the IPC provides important restrictions on the exercise of the right of private defense. It aims to
prevent situations where individuals may misuse the right of private defense against public servants acting in good
faith under the color of their office or against actions taken by public servants, even if those actions are not strictly
justifiable by law.

Furthermore, the right of private defense is not available in cases where there is ample time to seek protection
from the public authorities. This means that if a person is faced with a threat that does not reasonably cause the
apprehension of death or grievous hurt, or if there is sufficient time to involve law enforcement or other public
authorities to handle the situation, the right of private defense may not apply.
It's important to remember that the right of private defense must be exercised reasonably and proportionately to
the threat faced. The use of force in self-defense or defense of others should be necessary and not excessive.
As with any legal matter, the specific circumstances of each case will be considered when determining whether the
right of private defense applies or not. If you have any more specific questions or need further information about
Section 99 of the IPC or any other legal matter, I recommend consulting a qualified legal professional or referring to
the latest version of the Indian Penal Code.

SECTIONS 100
Section 100 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

"When the right of private defense of the body extends to causing death.—The right of private defense of the body
extends, under the restrictions mentioned in the last preceding section [Section 99], to the voluntary causing of
death or of any other harm to the assailant, if the offense, which occasions the exercise of the right, be of any of the
descriptions hereinafter enumerated, namely:—

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 49

Firstly.—Such an assault as may reasonably cause the apprehension that death will otherwise be the consequence
of such assault;
Secondly.—Such an assault as may reasonably cause the apprehension that grievous hurt will otherwise be the
consequence of such assault;
Thirdly.—An assault with the intention of committing rape;
Fourthly.—An assault with the intention of gratifying unnatural lust;
Fifthly.—An assault with the intention of kidnapping or abducting;
Sixthly.—An assault with the intention of wrongfully confining a person, under circumstances which may
reasonably cause him to apprehend that he will be unable to have recourse to the public authorities for his release."
Elements of Section 100:
1. **Right of Private Defense Extending to Causing Death:** Section 100 specifies situations where the right of
private defense of the body extends to causing death or any other harm to the assailant.
2. **Offenses Enabling the Exercise of Right:** The right of private defense extends to causing death when the
offense that occasions the exercise of the right falls under any of the enumerated descriptions in the section.
3. **Assaults Reasonably Causing Apprehension:** The right of private defense extends to causing death when
faced with certain assaults that reasonably cause the apprehension that death or grievous hurt will be the
consequence of such assault.
Application of Section 100:
Section 100 of the IPC outlines situations in which the right of private defence of the body extends to causing death
or other harm to the assailant. It provides individuals with a legal basis to use deadly force in self-defence or in
defence of others under specific circumstances.
The enumerated descriptions in Section 100 include:
1. An assault that reasonably causes the apprehension that death will be the consequence of such assault.
2. An assault that reasonably causes the apprehension that grievous hurt will be the consequence of such assault.
3. An assault with the intention of committing rape.
4. An assault with the intention of gratifying unnatural lust.
5. An assault with the intention of kidnapping or abducting.
6. An assault with the intention of wrongfully confining a person, under circumstances that may reasonably cause
him to apprehend that he will be unable to have recourse to the public authorities for his release.
It's important to note that even when the right of private defence extends to causing death, the use of such force
must still be proportionate to the threat faced. The right of private defense does not give individuals unlimited
authority to take life without reasonable cause.

SECTIONS 101

Section 101 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

"Exceeding right of private defense.—In cases where the right of private defense of the body extends to causing death,
the right does not extend to the voluntary causing of death, unless the offense which occasions the exercise of the right
be of any of the descriptions hereinafter enumerated, namely:—
Firstly.—Such an assault as may reasonably cause the apprehension that grievous hurt will otherwise be the
consequence of the assault;
Secondly.—An assault with the intention of committing rape;
Thirdly.—An assault with the intention of gratifying unnatural lust;
Fourthly.—An assault with the intention of kidnapping or abducting;
Fifthly.—An assault with the intention of wrongfully confining a person under circumstances which may reasonably
cause him to apprehend that he will be unable to have recourse to the public authorities for his release."

Elements of Section 101:

1. **Excessive Use of Force in Private Defense:** Section 101 deals with cases where the right of private defense of the
body extends to causing death, but the force used exceeds what is reasonably necessary in the situation.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 50

2. **Right of Private Defense Limited to Specific Offenses:** The right of private defense to cause death applies only in
situations where the offense that occasions the exercise of the right falls under the enumerated descriptions in the
section.
Application of Section 101:
Section 101 of the IPC provides an important limitation on the right of private defense, specifically when it comes to
causing death. It states that in cases where the right of private defense extends to causing death, the right does not
extend to voluntarily causing death unless the offense that occasions the exercise of the right falls under specific
descriptions.
The enumerated descriptions in Section 101 include:
1. An assault that reasonably causes the apprehension that grievous hurt will be the consequence of the assault.
2. An assault with the intention of committing rape.
3. An assault with the intention of gratifying unnatural lust.
4. An assault with the intention of kidnapping or abducting.
5. An assault with the intention of wrongfully confining a person under circumstances that may reasonably cause him
to apprehend that he will be unable to have recourse to the public authorities for his release.
This means that in cases other than those listed above, the right of private defense does not extend to intentionally
causing death. In such situations, the individual exercising the right of private defense must be cautious not to use
excessive force that goes beyond what is necessary to repel the threat.SECTIONS 102
Section 102 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
"Right of private defense of body extends to causing death.—The right of private defense of the body extends, under
the restrictions mentioned in Section 99, to the voluntary causing of death or of any other harm to the assailant, if the
offense, which occasions the exercise of the right, be of any of the descriptions hereinafter enumerated, namely:—
Firstly.—Such an assault as may reasonably cause the apprehension that death will otherwise be the consequence of
such assault;
Secondly.—Such an assault as may reasonably cause the apprehension that grievous hurt will otherwise be the
consequence of such assault;
Thirdly.—An assault with the intention of committing rape;
Fourthly.—An assault with the intention of gratifying unnatural lust;
Fifthly.—An assault with the intention of kidnapping or abducting;
Sixthly.—An assault with the intention of wrongfully confining a person, under circumstances which may reasonably
cause him to apprehend that he will be unable to have recourse to the public authorities for his release."
Elements of Section 102:
1. **Commencement of Right of Private Defense:** Section 102 specifies the circumstances under which the right of
private defense of the body extends to causing death or any other harm to the assailant.
2. **Right of Private Defense of Body Extends to Causing Death:** The right of private defense of the body extends to
causing death or any other harm to the assailant in certain situations.
3. **Enumerated Descriptions of Offenses:** The right of private defense extends to causing death when the offense
that occasions the exercise of the right falls under the enumerated descriptions in the section.

Application of Section 102:

Section 102 of the IPC reiterates the situations in which the right of private defense of the body extends to causing
death. As mentioned earlier, this right applies in cases where the offense that occasions the exercise of the right falls
under the enumerated descriptions in the section.
The enumerated descriptions in Section 102 include:
1. An assault that reasonably causes the apprehension that death will be the consequence of such assault.
2. An assault that reasonably causes the apprehension that grievous hurt will be the consequence of the assault.
3. An assault with the intention of committing rape.
4. An assault with the intention of gratifying unnatural lust.
5. An assault with the intention of kidnapping or abducting.
6. An assault with the intention of wrongfully confining a person under circumstances that may reasonably cause him
to apprehend that he will be unable to have recourse to the public authorities for his release.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 51

This means that in these situations, a person has the right to use necessary force, including causing death if required,
to defend their own body or the body of others from the threat of harm. However, it's important to remember that the
right of private defense must still be exercised reasonably and proportionately to the threat faced.

SECTIONS 103

Section 103 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

"The right of private defense of the body extends, under the restrictions mentioned in Section 99, to the voluntary
causing of death or of any other harm to the assailant if the offense which occasions the exercise of the right be of any
of the descriptions hereinafter enumerated, namely:—
Firstly.—Such an assault as may reasonably cause the apprehension that death will otherwise be the consequence of
such assault;
Secondly.—Such an assault as may reasonably cause the apprehension that grievous hurt will otherwise be the
consequence of such assault;
Thirdly.—An assault with the intention of committing rape;
Fourthly.—An assault with the intention of gratifying unnatural lust;
Fifthly.—An assault with the intention of kidnapping or abducting;
Sixthly.—An assault with the intention of wrongfully confining a person under circumstances which may reasonably
cause him to apprehend that he will be unable to have recourse to the public authorities for his release.
The right of private defense of property extends, under the restrictions mentioned in Section 99, to the voluntary
causing of death or of any other harm to the wrong-doer, if the offense, the committing of which, or attempting to
commit which, occasions the exercise of the right, be an offense of any of the descriptions hereinafter enumerated,
namely:—
Firstly.—Robbery;
Secondly.—House-breaking by night;
Thirdly.—Mischief by fire committed on any building, tent or vessel, which building, tent or vessel is used as a human
dwelling, or as a place for the custody of property;
Fourthly.—Theft, mischief, or house-trespass, under such circumstances as may reasonably cause apprehension that
death or grievous hurt will be the consequence, if such right of private defense is not exercised."
Elements of Section 103:
1. **Right of Private Defense of the Body:** Section 103 addresses the right of private defense of the body and the right
to defend property under specific circumstances.
2. **Right to Cause Death or Harm:** The right of private defense extends to the voluntary causing of death or any
other harm to the assailant or wrong-doer in certain situations.
3. **Enumerated Descriptions of Offenses:** The right of private defense extends to causing death or harm when the
offense that occasions the exercise of the right falls under the enumerated descriptions in the section.
Application of Section 103:
Section 103 of the IPC defines the right of private defense concerning the body and property. It allows individuals to
use necessary force, including causing death or harm, to protect themselves or their property under specific
circumstances.

For the right of private defense of the body, the enumerated descriptions include the situations where the offense
committed or attempted by the assailant involves:
1. Reasonable apprehension of death.
2. Reasonable apprehension of grievous hurt.
3. Assault with the intention of committing rape.
4. Assault with the intention of gratifying unnatural lust.
5. Assault with the intention of kidnapping or abducting.
6. Assault with the intention of wrongfully confining a person under circumstances that may reasonably cause him to
apprehend that he will be unable to have recourse to the public authorities for his release.

For the right of private defense of property, the enumerated descriptions include the situations where the offense
committed or attempted by the wrong-doer involves:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 52

1. Robbery.
2. House-breaking by night.
3. Mischief by fire committed on any building, tent, or vessel used as a human dwelling or for the custody of property.
4. Theft, mischief, or house-trespass under circumstances that may reasonably cause apprehension that death or
grievous hurt will be the consequence if such right of private defense is not exercised.
It's important to remember that the right of private defense must still be exercised reasonably and proportionately to
the threat faced, as mentioned in Section 99 of the IPC.

SECTIONS 104
Section 104 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

"Right of private defense against a person who voluntarily accepts the aid.—If the offense, be not of any of the
descriptions enumerated in Section 100, and the offense is committed under such circumstances that the person
giving the assistance may apprehend death or grievous hurt, or, reasonably apprehends that he can not otherwise
prevent the commission of the offense, the right of private defense extends to the voluntary causing of death to the
assailant, but in such cases, the person giving the assistance is liable to be punished under the provisions of this Code
for a offense committed by him, in excess of the right of private defense."
Elements of Section 104:
1. **Right of Private Defense Against a Person Providing Aid:** Section 104 addresses situations where a person
voluntarily provides aid or assistance to the assailant in committing an offense.
2. **Offense Not Enumerated in Section 100:** The right of private defense under Section 104 applies when the
offense committed is not of any of the descriptions enumerated in Section 100, which specifies offenses where the
right of private defense extends to causing death.
3. **Reasonable Apprehension of Death or Grievous Hurt:** The right of private defense extends to causing death to
the assailant if the person providing assistance reasonably apprehends that death or grievous hurt may occur if the
offense is not prevented.
Application of Section 104:
Section 104 of the IPC deals with a specific scenario where a person voluntarily provides aid or assistance to another
person who is committing an offense. In such cases, the right of private defense extends to causing death to the
assailant if the person providing assistance reasonably apprehends that death or grievous hurt may occur if the
offense is not prevented.
However, it's important to note that the right of private defense under Section 104 applies only when the offense
committed is not one of the descriptions listed in Section 100. As mentioned earlier, Section 100 deals with offenses
like assault, rape, unnatural lust, kidnapping, wrongful confinement, etc., where the right of private defense may
extend to causing death.
Additionally, Section 104 states that the person giving the assistance is liable to be punished under the provisions of
the Indian Penal Code for an offense committed by him in excess of the right of private defense. This means that if the
person providing assistance uses force that goes beyond what is reasonably necessary to prevent the offense, they may
be held accountable for their actions.

SECTIONS 105

Section 105 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

"When such right extends to causing any harm other than death.—The right of private defense of property extends,
under the restrictions mentioned in Section 99, to the voluntary causing of any harm other than death or of any other
harm to the wrong-doer, if the offense, the committing of which, or the attempting to commit which, occasions the
exercise of the right, be an offense of any of the descriptions hereinafter enumerated, namely:—
Firstly.—Robbery;
Secondly.—House-breaking by night;
Thirdly.—Mischief by fire committed on any building, tent or vessel, which building, tent or vessel is used as a human
dwelling, or as a place for the custody of property;
Fourthly.—Theft, mischief, or house-trespass, under such circumstances as may reasonably cause apprehension that
death or grievous hurt will be the consequence, if such right of private defense is not exercised.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 53

The right of private defense of property against theft continues till the offender has effected his retreat with the
property or either the assistance of the public authorities is obtained, or the property has been recovered."

Elements of Section 105:

1. **Commencement and Continuation of Right of Private Defense:** Section 105 specifies the circumstances under
which the right of private defense of property extends to causing any harm other than death.
2. **Right to Cause Harm to Wrong-Doer:** The right of private defense of property allows individuals to cause harm
other than death to the wrong-doer under specific circumstances.
3. **Enumerated Descriptions of Offenses:** The right of private defense extends to causing harm other than death
when the offense that occasions the exercise of the right falls under the enumerated descriptions in the section.
4. **Continuation of Right of Defense Against Theft:** The right of private defense of property against theft continues
until certain conditions are met.
Application of Section 105:
Section 105 of the IPC addresses the right of private defense of property and the extent to which individuals can use
force to protect their property under specific circumstances.
The enumerated descriptions in Section 105 include:
1. Robbery.
2. House-breaking by night.
3. Mischief by fire committed on any building, tent, or vessel used as a human dwelling or for the custody of property.
4. Theft, mischief, or house-trespass under circumstances that may reasonably cause apprehension that death or
grievous hurt will be the consequence if such right of private defense is not exercised.
This means that if an offense falls under any of the above descriptions, a person has the right to use necessary force,
which may cause harm other than death, to protect their property from the wrong-doer.
Furthermore, the right of private defense of property against theft continues until:
1. The offender has retreated with the property, or
2. Assistance of the public authorities is obtained, or
3. The property has been recovered.

SECTIONS 106
Section 106 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
"Right of private defense against deadly assault when there is risk of harm to innocent person.—If in the exercise of
the right of private defense against an assault which reasonably causes the apprehension of death, the defender be so
situated that he cannot effectually exercise that right without risk of harm to an innocent person, his right of private
defense extends to the running of that risk."
Elements of Section 106:
1. **Right of Private Defense Against Deadly Assault:** Section 106 addresses situations where a person is facing a
deadly assault, and there is a reasonable apprehension of death or grievous hurt.
2. **Risk of Harm to Innocent Person:** The right of private defense extends even if the defender cannot effectively
exercise that right without risking harm to an innocent person.
Application of Section 106:

Section 106 of the IPC provides an important legal provision in cases where a person is facing a deadly assault, and
there is a reasonable apprehension of death or grievous hurt. In such situations, the person has the right of private
defense, even if exercising that right could potentially lead to harm to an innocent person.
This means that if the defender is in a situation where they cannot effectively defend themselves without risking harm
to someone who is not involved in the altercation, they are still justified in using necessary force to protect themselves
from the deadly assault.
It's important to note that the right of private defense must still be exercised reasonably and proportionately to the
threat faced. The use of force should be necessary and not excessive. Section 106 acknowledges that in certain
situations, the defender may be forced to make difficult decisions to protect themselves and others from imminent
harm.
ABETMENT

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 54

Abetment is a legal term used to describe the act of encouraging, instigating, assisting, or aiding another person to
commit a crime or an offense. It is an essential concept in criminal law, as it involves individuals who are not directly
involved in committing the crime but play a significant role in facilitating or encouraging the commission of the
offense by another person. Abetment can be considered a crime in itself, and individuals found guilty of abetting a
crime can be held liable and punished accordingly.
In the Indian Penal Code (IPC), abetment is dealt with under Chapter V,SECTIONS107 to 120. Let's look at the
keySECTIONSrelated to abetment:

Section 107 of the IPC:

This section defines what constitutes abetment. According to Section 107:
"A person abets the doing of a thing, who—
Firstly.—Instigates any person to do that thing; or
Secondly.—Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or
illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or
Thirdly.—Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing."

Section 108 of the IPC:

This section explains the nature of the abettor's liability. It states that the abettor is punishable to the same extent as
the person who actually commits the offense. In other words, the punishment for abetment is the same as that for the
actual offense.

Section 109 of the IPC:

This section specifies the punishment for abetment if the offense abetted is not committed. It states that an abettor
can still be punished even if the offense he or she abetted was not committed, as long as they had the intention to aid
the commission of the offense.

Section 110 of the IPC:

This section defines the liability of an abettor when the person abetted is incapable of committing the offense. It states
that if the person who was encouraged or instigated to commit the offense is incapable of committing it, the abettor
can still be held liable for the abetment.

Section 113 of the IPC:

This section deals with the presumption of abetment when a person is present at the scene of an offense. It states that
if a person is present when an offense is committed and he or she does not intervene to prevent it, it may be presumed
that the person has abetted the offense.

This section deals with the presumption of abetment of suicide. It states that if a person abets the commission of
suicide by another person, the abettor can be punished with imprisonment or a fine or both.
It's important to understand that abetment, like any other criminal offense, requires the fulfillment of specific
elements and intent. Each case is examined on its merits, and the circumstances and evidence play a significant role in
determining whether abetment has occurred and the extent of the abettor's liability.

SECTIONS 107
Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) defines the term "abetment" and provides an explanation of what
constitutes abetment in the context of criminal law. Abetment refers to the act of encouraging, instigating, aiding, or
assisting another person to commit a crime or an offense. Let's examine the elements of Section 107:

Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

"A person abets the doing of a thing, who—
Firstly.—Instigates any person to do that thing; or
Secondly.—Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or
illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 55

Thirdly.—Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing."
Elements of Section 107:
1. **Instigation (Firstly):** The first element of abetment involves instigating any person to commit the offense.
Instigation refers to actively urging, provoking, or encouraging someone to commit a criminal act.
2. **Engaging in Conspiracy (Secondly):** The second element pertains to engaging with one or more other persons in
a conspiracy to commit the offense. A conspiracy involves an agreement between two or more individuals to commit a
crime, and if an act or illegal omission takes place in furtherance of that conspiracy and with the intention of
committing the offense, it can be considered abetment.
3. **Intentional Aid (Thirdly):** The third element relates to intentionally aiding the commission of the offense. This
can be through any act or illegal omission that assists the person in committing the crime.
Application of Section 107:
Section 107 clarifies that abetment involves various actions that facilitate the commission of an offense. Whether it is
instigating someone, engaging in a conspiracy, or providing intentional aid, all these acts can be classified as abetment
if they result in the commission of the crime.
Abetment is a significant offense in itself, and individuals found guilty of abetting a crime can be held liable and
punished as if they had committed the offense directly. The punishment for abetment is the same as that for the actual
offense.
It is important to note that abetment is a complex legal concept, and each case is assessed based on its specific facts
and circumstances. The prosecution needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused's actions fulfill the
elements of abetment as defined in Section 107.

 SECTIONS 108
Section 108 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
"Abettor.—A person abets an offense, who abets either the commission of an offense or the commission of an act which
would be an offense, if committed by a person capable by law of committing an offense with the same intention or
knowledge as that of the abettor."
Elements of Section 108:
1. **Abetment of an Offense:** Section 108 states that a person is considered an abettor when they abet either the
commission of an offense or the commission of an act that would be an offense if committed by a person capable, by
law, of committing the offense, with the same intention or knowledge as that of the abettor.
2. **Same Intention or Knowledge:** The abettor must have the same intention or knowledge as the person who
actually commits the offense or the act that would be an offense. This means that the abettor should share the mental
state of the principal offender.
Application of Section 108:
Section 108 clarifies the liability of abettors in relation to the offense they abet. An abettor, who encourages, instigates,
aids, or assists in the commission of a crime, is considered to be equally responsible as the person who actually
commits the offense.
For example, if A instigates B to commit theft and B carries out the theft as a result of A's instigation, both A (the
abettor) and B (the principal offender) can be held liable and punished for the crime of theft. The punishment for the
abettor will be the same as that for the principal offender.
It's important to note that the punishment for abetment varies depending on the nature of the offense abetted. The
penalty may range from a fine to imprisonment or both, as prescribed by the relevant provisions of the IPC.

 SECTIONS 109

Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

"Punishment of abetment if the act abetted is committed in consequence and where no express provision is made for
its punishment.—Whoever abets any offense shall, if the act abetted is committed in consequence of the abetment, and
no express provision is made by this Code for the punishment of such abetment, be punished with the punishment
provided for the offense."
Elements of Section 109:
1. **Abetment of an Offense:** Section 109 applies when a person abets any offense, meaning they encourage,
instigate, aid, or assist in the commission of a crime.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 56

2. **Act Committed in Consequence of Abetment:** For Section 109 to be applicable, the act abetted must be
committed in consequence of the abetment. This means that the offense or criminal act must be a direct result of the
abetment.
3. **No Express Provision for Abetment Punishment:** Section 109 is relevant when no specific provision is made in
the IPC for the punishment of the abetment of the particular offense.
Application of Section 109:
Section 109 of the IPC addresses situations where the abettor's intentions are to facilitate the commission of an
offense, but for some reason, the offense is not completed or committed. Despite the non-completion of the offense,
the abettor can still be held liable and punished.
The punishment for the abettor in such cases is the same as that provided for the offense that was abetted. This means
that the abettor will face the same punishment that the principal offender would have received had they successfully
committed the offense.
For example, if A instigates B to commit robbery, but B is arrested before the robbery can take place, A (the abettor)
can still be punished for abetment of robbery, and the punishment will be the same as for robbery.
It's important to remember that the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the abettor had the
intention to aid the commission of the offense and that the act was committed in consequence of the abetment.
SECTIONS 110
Section 110 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
"Liability of abettor when one act abetted and different act done.—When an act is abetted and a different act is done,
the abettor is liable for the act done, in the same manner and to the same extent as if he had directly abetted it."
Elements of Section 110:
1. **Abetment of an Act:** Section 110 applies when a person abets a specific act or offense, intending to encourage or
facilitate its commission by another person.
2. **Different Act Done:** Despite the abetment, a different act is actually committed by the person who was
encouraged or instigated. In other words, the person abetted is incapable of committing the exact offense that was
originally intended to be committed.
3. **Liability of the Abettor:** Section 110 makes it clear that the abettor is still liable for the act that is actually done
by the person abetted, even if it is different from the intended offense.
Application of Section 110:
Section 110 of the IPC addresses situations where the abettor's intention was to encourage the commission of a
specific offense, but the person who was abetted ends up committing a different offense. In such cases, the abettor is
held liable for the act actually committed by the person abetted, as if the abettor had directly abetted that particular
act.
For example, if A instigates B to commit theft, but B, due to some unforeseen circumstances, ends up causing hurt to
someone during the attempt, A (the abettor) can still be held liable for the act of causing hurt, even though the original
intent was to commit theft.
It's important to note that the abettor's liability under Section 110 is determined by the act actually committed by the
person who was abetted. The abettor will be treated as if they had directly abetted the act that was actually done.

 SECTIONS 111

Section 111 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

"When an act is abetted and a different act is done, the abettor is liable for the act done, in the same manner and to the
same extent as if he had directly abetted it."
Elements of Section 111:

1. **Abetment of an Act:** Section 111 applies when a person abets a specific act or offense, intending to encourage or
facilitate its commission by another person.
2. **Different Act Done:** Despite the abetment, a different act is actually committed by the person who was
encouraged or instigated. In other words, the person abetted ends up committing an act that is different from the
intended offense.
3. **Liability of the Abettor:** Section 111 states that the abettor is held liable for the act actually done by the person
abetted, in the same manner and to the same extent as if the abettor had directly abetted that particular act.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 57

Application of Section 111:

Section 111 of the IPC addresses situations where the abettor's intention was to encourage the commission of a
specific offense, but the person who was abetted ends up committing a different offense. In such cases, the abettor is
treated as if they had directly abetted the act that was actually done.
For example, if A instigates B to commit theft, but B, due to some unforeseen circumstances, ends up causing hurt to
someone during the attempt, A (the abettor) can still be held liable for the act of causing hurt, even though the original
intent was to commit theft.
Section 111 is closely related to Section 110 of the IPC, which also deals with abettors' liability when the act abetted
and the act done are different. BothSECTIONSemphasize that the abettor can be held responsible for the act actually
committed by the person abetted, even if it was not the specific offense that was initially intended.

SECTIONS 112
Section 112 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
"If an act is abetted with the intention on the part of the abettor of causing a particular effect, and an act for which the
abettor is liable in consequence of the abetment, causes a different effect from that intended by the abettor, the abettor
is liable for the effect caused, in the same manner and to the same extent as if he had abetted the act with the intention
of causing that effect, provided he knew that the act abetted was likely to cause that effect."
Elements of Section 112:
1. **Abetment of an Act:** Section 112 applies when a person abets a specific act or offense, intending to encourage or
facilitate its commission by another person.
2. **Different Effect Caused:** Despite the abetment, a different effect is caused by the act actually committed by the
person who was abetted. In other words, the person abetted ends up causing an effect that is different from the
intended consequence of the abetment.
3. **Liability of the Abettor:** Section 112 states that the abettor is liable for the effect actually caused by the act, in
the same manner and to the same extent as if the abettor had abetted the act with the intention of causing that specific
effect.
4. **Knowledge of Likely Effect:** The abettor's liability under Section 112 is contingent on whether the abettor knew
that the act abetted was likely to cause the specific effect that occurred.

Application of Section 112:

Section 112 of the IPC addresses situations where the abettor's intention was to encourage the commission of a
specific act with the intention of causing a particular effect. However, due to unforeseen circumstances or any other
reason, the person who was abetted ends up causing a different effect.
In such cases, the abettor is held liable for the effect actually caused by the act, as if they had abetted the act with the
intention of causing that specific effect, provided they knew that the act abetted was likely to cause that effect.
Section 112 is essential in cases where the act abetted and the effect actually caused are both offenses. It ensures that
the abettor can be held accountable for the actual consequences of the act, even if they differ from the intended
consequence.

SECTIONS 113
Section 113 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872:
"Presumption as to abetment of suicide by a married woman.—When the question is whether the commission of
suicide by a woman had been abetted by her husband or any relative of her husband and it is shown that she had
committed suicide within a period of seven years from the date of her marriage and that her husband or such relative
of her husband had subjected her to cruelty, the court may presume, having regard to all the other circumstances of
the case, that such suicide had been abetted by her husband or by such relative of her husband."

Elements of Section 113:

1. **Death by Suicide of a Married Woman:** Section 113 applies when the question is whether the commission of
suicide by a married woman had been abetted by her husband or any relative of her husband.
2. **Time Period of Seven Years from Marriage:** For this presumption to be applicable, it must be shown that the
woman committed suicide within seven years from the date of her marriage.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 58

3. **Subjected to Cruelty:** Another essential element is that it must be shown that the woman had been subjected to
cruelty by her husband or any relative of her husband.
Application of Section 113:
Section 113 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 creates a legal presumption in cases where a married woman commits
suicide within seven years of her marriage and evidence indicates that she had been subjected to cruelty by her
husband or any relative of her husband.
Under this presumption, the court may infer that the suicide was abetted by the husband or the relative unless other
evidence is presented to contradict this presumption. The court will take into account all the other circumstances of
the case before drawing a conclusion.
It's important to note that this is a rebuttable presumption, meaning the accused (husband or relative) can present
evidence to disprove or challenge the presumption. The court will evaluate all the evidence and circumstances before
arriving at a final decision.
As with any legal matter, the specific details and evidence presented in each case will be taken into consideration by
the court. If you have any more specific questions or need further information about Section 113 of the Indian
Evidence Act, 1872, or any other legal matter, I recommend consulting a qualified legal professional or referring to the
latest version of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
SECTIONS 114
Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872:
"114. Court may presume existence of certain facts.—The court may presume the existence of any fact which it thinks
likely to have happened, regard being had to the common course of natural events, human conduct, and public and
private business, in their relation to the facts of the particular case."
Elements of Section 114:
1. **Presumption of Certain Facts:** Section 114 allows the court to presume the existence of any fact that the court
thinks likely to have happened.
2. **Common Course of Natural Events, Human Conduct, and Business:** The court can make such presumptions by
considering the common course of natural events, human conduct, and public and private business, as they relate to
the specific facts of the case.
Application of Section 114:
Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is a general provision that empowers the court to draw inferences or
presumptions based on its understanding of how natural events, human behavior, and business transactions
commonly occur. It allows the court to make logical deductions based on established patterns of human conduct and
the ordinary course of events.
The court's power to draw presumptions under Section 114 is particularly helpful when direct evidence of a fact is not
available or when certain facts are difficult to prove independently. By using common sense and reasoning, the court
may presume the existence of certain facts to reach a conclusion in a particular case.
It's essential to note that the presumption created under Section 114 is rebuttable, meaning that the opposing party
can provide evidence to counter or challenge the presumed fact. The court will weigh the available evidence and
arguments before arriving at a final decision.

SECTIONS 115
Section 115 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872:
"Estoppel of tenant and licensee.—When one person has by his declaration, act or omission, intentionally caused or
permitted another person to believe a thing to be true and to act upon that belief, neither he nor his representative
shall be allowed, in any suit or proceeding between himself and such person or his representative, to deny the truth of
that thing."
Elements of Section 115:

1. **Declaration, Act, or Omission Leading to Belief:** Section 115 applies when one person intentionally causes or
permits another person to believe a particular thing to be true through their declaration, act, or omission.
2. **Acting upon the Belief:** The other person relies on that belief and acts upon it.
3. **Estoppel as a Bar to Denying the Truth:** Once the first person's declaration, act, or omission has induced the
second person to believe the thing to be true and act upon it, neither the first person nor his representative can later
deny the truth of that thing in any legal proceeding between themselves and the second person or his representative.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 59

Application of Section 115:

Section 115 embodies the principle of estoppel, which is a legal doctrine that prevents a party from denying the truth
of certain statements or facts if their prior conduct or representations induced another party to rely on those
statements or facts and act upon them.
For example, if a landlord tells a tenant that the property they are renting is suitable for running a specific type of
business, and the tenant relies on this representation and starts the business, the landlord cannot later deny that the
property is suitable for the business in a legal proceeding between them, based on the principle of estoppel.
Similarly, if a licensor allows a licensee to occupy and use certain premises for a specific purpose and the licensee
invests money to set up their business based on that permission, the licensor cannot later deny the right of the
licensee to use the premises for that purpose in a legal dispute.
The principle of estoppel prevents parties from taking contradictory positions and is aimed at ensuring fairness and
preventing injustice when someone has been misled or induced to rely on certain representations or conduct.

SECTIONS 116
Section 116 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872:
"Estoppel of acceptor.—The acceptor of a bill of exchange, or other negotiable instrument, is bound to admit the
existence of the drawer, the genuineness of his signature, and his capacity and authority to draw the instrument."
Elements of Section 116:
1. **Acceptor of a Negotiable Instrument:** Section 116 applies to the person who accepts a negotiable instrument,
such as a bill of exchange or a promissory note.
2. **Obligation to Admit Specific Facts:** The acceptor of the instrument is obligated to admit three specific facts
related to the instrument's drawer:
a) The existence of the drawer.
b) The genuineness of the drawer's signature on the instrument.
c) The drawer's capacity and authority to draw the instrument.
Application of Section 116:
Section 116 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 incorporates the principle of estoppel concerning negotiable
instruments. When a person accepts a bill of exchange or another negotiable instrument, they are legally bound to
admit the existence of the drawer (the person who issued the instrument), the genuineness of the drawer's signature
on the instrument, and the drawer's capacity and authority to draw the instrument.
This means that once the acceptor has accepted the instrument, they cannot later deny or challenge these specific facts
in any legal proceeding related to the instrument. The purpose of this provision is to provide certainty and security in
commercial transactions involving negotiable instruments.
For example, if A accepts a bill of exchange drawn by B, A is estopped from denying the existence of B, the genuineness
of B's signature on the bill, and B's capacity and authority to draw the bill. A cannot later claim that B does not exist or
that B's signature is forged when dealing with disputes related to the bill.
The principle of estoppel under Section 116 ensures that once a negotiable instrument is accepted, the acceptor is
legally bound by the facts related to the drawer mentioned in the section, and they cannot take a contradictory
position in legal proceedings.

SECTIONS 117
Section 117 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872:
"Estoppel of a party to a suit, proceeding or transaction.—Parties to a suit or proceeding or to a transaction are
respectively incompetent to testify therein except as provided in [SECTIONS 118 and 119]."
Elements of Section 117:
1. **Estoppel of a Party:** Section 117 applies to parties involved in a suit, proceeding, or transaction.
2. **Incompetence to Testify:** The section states that parties to such a suit, proceeding, or transaction are
incompetent to testify (give evidence) therein.
3. **Exceptions:** The section referencesSECTIONS118 and 119 of the Indian Evidence Act, which provide certain
exceptions to the general rule of incompetence to testify for parties.
Application of Section 117:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 60

Section 117 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 deals with the concept of estoppel in civil cases. It renders parties
involved in a suit, proceeding, or transaction as incompetent to testify in such legal proceedings. This means that
parties cannot give evidence in a case in which they are directly involved.
The rationale behind this provision is to prevent parties from benefiting or suffering from their own testimony. By
making parties incompetent to testify, the law seeks to ensure fairness and prevent biased or self-serving testimony
that could influence the outcome of the case.
However, it's important to note that there are exceptions to this rule of incompetency to testify.SECTIONS118 and 119
of the Indian Evidence Act provide certain circumstances in which parties can give evidence in their own cases.
- **Section 118:** This section allows a party to a suit to testify if they are not personally interested in the outcome of
the case.
- **Section 119:** This section allows a party to a suit to testify if the party is the plaintiff or defendant in a criminal
proceeding, or if the party is the plaintiff or defendant in a civil proceeding, and their adversary has also given
evidence on the same issue.

SECTIONS 118
Section 118 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872:
"Who may testify.—All persons shall be competent to testify unless the court considers that they are prevented from
understanding the questions put to them, or from giving rational answers to those questions, by tender years, extreme
old age, disease, whether of body or mind, or any other cause of the same kind."
Elements of Section 118:

1. **Competency to Testify:** Section 118 establishes the general rule that all persons are competent to testify as
witnesses in legal proceedings.

2. **Exceptions to Competency:** The section provides specific exceptions that can prevent a person from being
competent to testify. These exceptions include:
- Tender years (very young age)
- Extreme old age
- Disease, whether of body or mind
- Any other cause of the same kind that prevents the person from understanding the questions put to them or giving
rational answers to those questions.
Application of Section 118:
Section 118 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 sets forth the principle that, in general, all individuals are competent to
testify as witnesses in legal proceedings. This means that any person, regardless of age or other factors, can be called
as a witness and provide evidence if they possess knowledge about the relevant facts of the case.
However, the section also acknowledges certain exceptions to this general rule. If the court determines that a person's
ability to understand the questions or provide rational answers is impaired due to tender years (very young age),
extreme old age, disease (whether physical or mental), or any other cause of a similar nature, the person may be
deemed incompetent to testify as a witness.
The purpose of these exceptions is to ensure that witnesses can provide reliable and meaningful testimony. If a
person's capacity to understand the questions or give coherent answers is significantly compromised, their testimony
might not be considered credible or useful to the legal proceedings.

SECTIONS 119

Section 119 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872:

"119. Witness not excused from answering on the ground that the answer will criminate.—If any witness under
examination by one party gives answers tending to criminate himself, the opposite party may cross-examine him
thereupon, but if he afterwards gives evidence in the same suit or proceeding, the answers so given by him may be
used against him in such suit or proceeding:

Provided that the promise made to such witness shall be first fully set forth to him."
Elements of Section 119:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 61

1. **Answers Tending to Criminate:** Section 119 comes into play when a witness, while being examined by one party
(the examining party), gives answers that tend to criminate himself or herself. In other words, the witness's responses
might suggest their own involvement in some illegal or wrongful activity.
2. **Cross-Examination:** The opposite party (the other party in the legal proceedings) has the right to cross-examine
the witness on the answers that tend to criminate himself or herself. Cross-examination is the process in which the
opposing party asks questions to clarify or challenge the witness's previous responses.
3. **Use of Answers as Evidence:** If the witness later gives evidence in the same suit or proceeding, the answers that
tend to criminate himself or herself can be used against the witness in that suit or proceeding.
4. **Disclosure of Promise:** Before using the witness's answers against him or her, any promise or assurance made to
the witness in connection with the answers must be fully disclosed to the witness.
Application of Section 119:
Section 119 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 addresses the situation where a witness, while being examined by one
party, provides answers that may implicate themselves in illegal or wrongful conduct. It allows the opposing party to
cross-examine the witness on those answers.
Additionally, if the same witness gives evidence later in the same suit or proceeding, the answers that tend to
criminate themselves can be used against them as evidence. This means that the witness cannot later deny or retract
the answers given during the examination.
However, before the answers are used against the witness, any promise or assurance made to the witness in
connection with those answers must be fully disclosed to the witness. This ensures fairness and transparency in the
proceedings.
The purpose of Section 119 is to strike a balance between allowing a witness to speak freely and protecting their
interests. It prevents a witness from benefiting from self-incriminating statements while allowing for cross-
examination to clarify or challenge the witness's responses.

SECTIONS 120
Section 120 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 120 of the Indian Penal Code defines criminal conspiracy as an agreement between two or more persons to do
or cause to be done an illegal act, or an act which is not illegal by illegal means. It states that when two or more
persons agree to do or cause to be done an illegal act, or an act which is not illegal by illegal means, such an agreement
is designated a criminal conspiracy.
Elements of criminal conspiracy
The following are the elements of criminal conspiracy under Section 120 of the IPC:
 Two or more persons: There must be at least two persons involved in the conspiracy.
 Agreement: There must be an agreement between the parties to commit the offence. The agreement can be
express or implied.
 Illegal act: The agreement must be to commit an illegal act. An illegal act is an act that is prohibited by law.
 Illegal means: The agreement must be to commit the illegal act by illegal means. Illegal means are means that
are prohibited by law.
 Communication: The agreement must be communicated to each of the parties to the conspiracy.
 Intention to commit the offence: The parties to the conspiracy must have the intention to commit the offence.
 Consciousness of the illegality of the act: The parties to the conspiracy must be aware that the act they are
conspiring to commit is illegal.
Application of Section 120
Section 120 of the IPC applies to all illegal acts, whether they are punishable by the IPC or by any other law. The
section also applies to acts that are not illegal, but which are committed by illegal means.
For example, if two persons agree to rob a bank, they will be guilty of criminal conspiracy even if the robbery is not
actually committed. Similarly, if two persons agree to bribe a government official, they will be guilty of criminal
conspiracy even if the bribe is not actually paid.
Punishment for criminal conspiracy
The punishment for criminal conspiracy under Section 120 of the IPC is:
 Imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 62

 If the conspiracy is to commit an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for a
term which may extend to ten years, and also with fine.
Conclusion
Criminal conspiracy is a serious offence that can carry a significant punishment. If you are accused of criminal
conspiracy, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer.
In addition to the above, here are some other things to keep in mind about criminal conspiracy:
 The agreement to commit the offence can be made in any form, verbal or written.
 The agreement does not need to be complete or detailed. It is enough that the parties have reached an
understanding that they will commit the offence together.
 The agreement does not need to be carried out in order for a person to be convicted of criminal conspiracy. It
is enough that the agreement is made.

CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY
Section 120A of the Indian Penal Code
Section 120A of the Indian Penal Code defines criminal conspiracy as an agreement between two or more persons to
do or cause to be done an illegal act, or an act which is not illegal by illegal means.
In other words, criminal conspiracy is a crime of planning and agreeing to commit an offence. It is a separate offence
from the actual commission of the offence.
The main elements of criminal conspiracy are:
 Two or more persons.
 An agreement.
 To do or cause to be done an illegal act, or an act which is not illegal by illegal means.
Punishment for criminal conspiracy
The punishment for criminal conspiracy under Section 120A of the IPC is:
 Imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both.
 If the conspiracy is to commit an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for a
term which may extend to ten years, and also with fine.
Examples of criminal conspiracy
Here are some examples of criminal conspiracy:
 Two persons agree to rob a bank.
 Three persons agree to murder someone.
 A group of people agree to riot.
Difference between criminal conspiracy and attempt
Criminal conspiracy is different from attempt. Attempt is the act of trying to commit an offence, but failing to do so.
Conspiracy, on the other hand, is the agreement to commit an offence, regardless of whether the offence is actually
committed.
For example, if two people agree to rob a bank, but they are caught before they can do so, they will be charged with
criminal conspiracy, not attempt to rob a bank.
How to prove criminal conspiracy
The prosecution must prove the following elements of criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt in order to
secure a conviction:
 That two or more persons agreed to commit an offence.
 That the agreement was made with the intention of committing the offence.
 That the agreement was made in advance of the commission of the offence.
The prosecution can prove these elements by direct evidence, such as a confession from one of the conspirators, or by
circumstantial evidence, such as the fact that the conspirators were seen together in the planning stages of the offence.
Conclusion
Criminal conspiracy is a serious offence that can carry a significant punishment. If you are accused of criminal
conspiracy, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer.

SECTIONS 120A
Section 120A of the Indian Penal Code

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 63

Section 120A of the Indian Penal Code defines criminal conspiracy as an agreement between two or more persons to
do or cause to be done an illegal act, or an act which is not illegal by illegal means. It states that when two or more
persons agree to do or cause to be done an illegal act, or an act which is not illegal by illegal means, such an agreement
is designated a criminal conspiracy.
Elements of criminal conspiracy
The following are the elements of criminal conspiracy under Section 120A of the IPC:
 Two or more persons: There must be at least two persons involved in the conspiracy.
 Agreement: There must be an agreement between the parties to commit the offence. The agreement can be
express or implied.
 Illegal act: The agreement must be to commit an illegal act. An illegal act is an act that is prohibited by law.
 Illegal means: The agreement must be to commit the illegal act by illegal means. Illegal means are means that
are prohibited by law.
 Communication: The agreement must be communicated to each of the parties to the conspiracy.
 Intention to commit the offence: The parties to the conspiracy must have the intention to commit the offence.
 Consciousness of the illegality of the act: The parties to the conspiracy must be aware that the act they are
conspiring to commit is illegal.
Application of Section 120A
Section 120A of the IPC applies to all illegal acts, whether they are punishable by the IPC or by any other law. The
section also applies to acts that are not illegal, but which are committed by illegal means.
For example, if two persons agree to rob a bank, they will be guilty of criminal conspiracy even if the robbery is not
actually committed. Similarly, if two persons agree to bribe a government official, they will be guilty of criminal
conspiracy even if the bribe is not actually paid.
Punishment for criminal conspiracy
The punishment for criminal conspiracy under Section 120A of the IPC is:
 Imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both.
 If the conspiracy is to commit an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for a
term which may extend to ten years, and also with fine.
Difference between Section 120 and Section 120A
The main difference between Section 120 and Section 120A of the IPC is that Section 120A specifically applies to
conspiracies to commit offences that are punishable with death, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for a term
which may extend to ten years. Section 120, on the other hand, applies to all other conspiracies, regardless of the
severity of the offence.
Conclusion
Criminal conspiracy is a serious offence that can carry a significant punishment. If you are accused of criminal
conspiracy, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer.

SECTIONS 120B
Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code
Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code deals with criminal conspiracy. It states that when two or more persons agree
to commit any offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term of ten years or more,
such an agreement is designated a criminal conspiracy.
Elements of criminal conspiracy
The following are the elements of criminal conspiracy under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code:
 Two or more persons: There must be at least two persons involved in the conspiracy.
 Agreement: There must be an agreement between the parties to commit the offence. The agreement can be
express or implied.
 Offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term of ten years or more: The
agreement must be to commit an offence that is punishable with death, imprisonment for life or
imprisonment for a term of ten years or more.
Application of Section 120B
Section 120B of the IPC applies to conspiracies to commit all offences punishable with death, imprisonment for life or
imprisonment for a term of ten years or more. This includes offences such as murder, kidnapping, rape, and terrorism.
Punishment for criminal conspiracy

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 64

The punishment for criminal conspiracy under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code is:
 Punishment of the offence provided for the commission of which the conspiracy is formed.
 If the offence is punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term of ten years or more,
such an agreement is designated a criminal conspiracy, and the punishment of such a conspiracy is
imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and also with fine.
Difference between Section 120A and Section 120B
The main difference between Section 120A and Section 120B of the IPC is that Section 120B specifically applies to
conspiracies to commit offences that are punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term of
ten years or more. Section 120A, on the other hand, applies to all other conspiracies, regardless of the severity of the
offence.
Conclusion
Criminal conspiracy is a serious offence that can carry a significant punishment. If you are accused of criminal
conspiracy, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 120B of the IPC:
 The punishment for criminal conspiracy under Section 120B is the same as the punishment for the offence
that is being conspired to commit. For example, if two persons agree to commit murder, the punishment for
their conspiracy will be the same as the punishment for murder, which is imprisonment for life or death.
 The prosecution must prove the following elements of criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt in
order to secure a conviction:
o That two or more persons agreed to commit an offence that is punishable with death, imprisonment
for life or imprisonment for a term of ten years or more.
o That the agreement was made with the intention of committing the offence.
o That the agreement was made in advance of the commission of the offence.
The prosecution can prove these elements by direct evidence, such as a confession from one of the conspirators, or by
circumstantial evidence, such as the fact that the conspirators were seen together in the planning stages of the offence.
Criminal conspiracy is a complex offence, and the law in this area is constantly evolving. If you are accused of criminal
conspiracy, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer to understand your rights and
options.

OFFENCES AGAINST STATE

Offences against the State refer to criminal acts that are directed against the security, sovereignty, integrity, or
functioning of a country or its government. These offenses are considered grave because they pose a threat to the
stability and well-being of the nation and its citizens. In most legal systems, including India, these offenses are
typically treated as serious crimes with severe penalties.

In India, offenses against the State are addressed under various laws, including the Indian Penal Code (IPC), Unlawful
Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), and other specific legislations. Some common examples of offenses against the
State include:
1. **Sedition (Section 124A of the IPC):** Sedition is the act of encouraging or attempting to create disaffection
towards the government of India by words, spoken or written, or by signs or visible representation. It is punishable
with imprisonment for life, to which fine may be added, or with imprisonment that may extend to three years, to
which a fine may be added, or with both.
2. **Waging War against the State (Section 121 of the IPC):** Waging war against the State includes conspiring to or
attempting to wage war or abetting the waging of war against the government of India. It is a serious offense and is
punishable with death, life imprisonment, or rigorous imprisonment for a term extending up to 10 years, along with a
possible fine.
3. **Terrorism (Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act):** Acts of terrorism aimed at causing terror, intimidation, and
fear in the public are covered under the UAPA. It includes acts that threaten the unity, integrity, security, and
sovereignty of India. Offenders can face severe penalties, including the possibility of being declared as "terrorists."
4. **Conspiracy to Overthrow the Government:** Any conspiracy or attempt to overthrow the government by
unconstitutional means can be considered an offense against the State.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 65

5. **Espionage and Treason:** Acts of espionage or betraying the country by assisting its enemies during times of war
are considered grave offenses against the State.
6. **Unauthorized Possession of Official Secrets:** Unauthorized possession, communication, or publication of official
secrets can also be treated as offenses against the State.
It's important to note that offenses against the State are taken seriously, and the investigation, prosecution, and trial of
such cases are often handled by specialized agencies to ensure national security and the proper functioning of the
state machinery.

SECTIONS 121
Section 121 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
"121. Waging, or attempting to wage war, or abetting waging of war, against the Government of India.—Whoever,
wages war against the Government of India, or attempts to wage such war, or abets the waging of such war, shall be
punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine."
Elements of Section 121:
1. **Waging War Against the Government:** Section 121 applies to individuals who engage in acts of waging war
against the Government of India. This includes taking up arms or using force to overthrow or challenge the
government's authority.
2. **Attempting to Wage War:** The section also covers individuals who attempt to wage war against the Government
of India. Even if the actual act of waging war is not completed, attempting to do so is considered a grave offense.
3. **Abetting the Waging of War:** Individuals who aid, support, or abet others in waging war against the Government
of India are also liable under this section.
Application of Section 121:
Section 121 of the IPC is a critical provision aimed at safeguarding the sovereignty, integrity, and security of India. It
covers acts of waging war against the Government, which could include armed rebellion, insurgency, or other attempts
to violently overthrow the established government.
The offense under this section is punishable with death or imprisonment for life, along with a possible fine. Given the
seriousness of the offense, the investigation, prosecution, and trial of cases falling under Section 121 are typically
handled by specialized law enforcement agencies and courts.
It's important to note that the offense under Section 121 is distinct from other offenses such as sedition (Section 124A
of the IPC) and acts of terrorism (covered under various laws, including the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act). Each
offense has its own elements and penalties.
As with any criminal offense, individuals accused under Section 121 have the right to legal representation and a fair
trial. The burden of proof lies with the prosecution to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed
the offense as defined in the section.

SECTIONS 122

Section 122 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

"122. Collecting arms, etc., with intention of waging war against the Government of India.—Whoever collects men,
arms or ammunition or otherwise prepares to wage war with the intention of either waging or being prepared to wage
war against the Government of India, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine."
Elements of Section 122:

1. **Collecting Men, Arms, or Ammunition:** Section 122 applies to individuals who collect, gather, or accumulate men
(persons), arms, ammunition, or any other materials that can be used for waging war.
2. **Intention of Waging War Against the Government:** The offense is committed when the person collects these
resources with the intention of either waging war against the Government of India or being prepared to wage such war
in the future.

Application of Section 122:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 66

Section 122 of the IPC aims to prevent the preparation and organization of armed insurrections or rebellions against
the Government of India. It criminalizes the act of collecting resources, such as men, arms, and ammunition, with the
intent of waging war or being ready to wage war against the government.
The offense under this section is punishable with imprisonment for life, or imprisonment of either description for a
term that may extend up to ten years, and a possible fine. Due to the serious nature of the offense and its implications
for national security, the investigation and prosecution of cases under Section 122 are typically handled by specialized
law enforcement agencies.
It's important to note that Section 122 targets the act of collecting or preparing for war with the intent to use force
against the government. It is different from other offenses against the State, such as waging war against the
government (Section 121 of the IPC) and acts of terrorism or insurgency covered under various laws, including the
Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
As with any criminal offense, individuals accused under Section 122 have the right to legal representation and a fair
trial. The prosecution bears the burden of proving the accused's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

SECTIONS 123
Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951:
"Corrupt practices.—The following shall be deemed to be corrupt practices for the purposes of this Act:
1. The bribery of any elector or the obtaining or procuring of any property or valuable thing by any candidate or his
agent or by any other person with the consent of any candidate or his election agent or the abetment, thereof.
2. The appeal by a candidate or his agent or by any other person with the consent of a candidate or his election agent
to vote or refrain from voting for any person on the ground of his religion, race, caste, community or language or the
use of, or appeal to, religious symbols or the use of, or appeal to, national symbols, such as the national flag or the
national emblem, for the furtherance of the prospects of that candidate's election.
3. The promotion of, or attempt to promote, feelings of enmity or hatred between different classes of the citizens of
India on grounds of religion, race, caste, community, or language, by a candidate or his agent or any other person with
the consent of a candidate or his election agent for the furtherance of the prospects of that candidate's election."

Application of Section 123:

Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, defines "corrupt practices" in relation to elections. It lists
various acts that are considered corrupt practices and are strictly prohibited during elections in India.
Some of the corrupt practices listed in Section 123 include:
1. Bribery of electors.
2. Appealing to voters based on religion, race, caste, community, or language.
3. Use of religious symbols or national symbols for electoral gains.
4. Promoting enmity or hatred between different classes of citizens on the basis of religion, race, caste, community, or
language.

These corrupt practices are considered serious offenses and can lead to the disqualification of the candidate from the
election. Additionally, those found guilty of corrupt practices may face legal consequences, including criminal charges
and penalties.

It's essential to adhere to the provisions of the Representation of the People Act and conduct free and fair elections,
promoting democratic values and ensuring the integrity of the electoral process.

SECTIONS 124

Section 124 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

"124. Sedition.—Whoever, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or
otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection
towards, the Government established by law in India shall be punished with imprisonment for life, to which fine
may be added, or with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which fine may be added, or with fine."
Elements of Section 124:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 67

1. **Act of Sedition:** Section 124 applies to individuals who engage in acts of sedition, which means that they bring or
attempt to bring into hatred or contempt or excite disaffection towards the government established by law in India.
2. **Means of Expression:** Sedition can be committed through various means of expression, including words (spoken
or written), signs, visible representation, or any other method.
Application of Section 124:
Section 124 of the IPC is aimed at preserving the security, stability, and sovereignty of India by prohibiting acts that
could create disaffection or hostility towards the government. Sedition laws are intended to prevent activities that
might incite violence, disorder, or unrest against the government and the state.
The offense of sedition carries serious penalties, and those found guilty can face imprisonment for life, or
imprisonment for a term extending up to three years, along with a possible fine.
It's important to note that the interpretation and application of sedition laws can be sensitive and complex. Over the
years, there have been debates and discussions about the scope and limits of sedition, especially concerning the
balance between freedom of expression and the need to maintain public order.
As with any criminal offense, the prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.
Individuals accused under Section 124 have the right to legal representation and a fair trial.
Given the gravity of the charge and its implications for individual rights and freedoms, sedition cases are typically
handled with careful consideration and are subject to judicial scrutiny.

SECTIONS 125

Section 125 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872:

"Cross-examination as to previous statements in writing.—A witness may be cross-examined as to previous
statements made by him in writing or reduced into writing, and relevant to matters in question, without such writing
being shown to him, or being proved; but if it is intended to contradict him by the writing, his attention must, before
the writing can be proved, be called to those parts of it which are to be used for the purpose of contradicting him."
Elements of Section 125:
1. **Cross-Examination on Previous Statements:** Section 125 allows the cross-examination of a witness regarding
previous statements made by that witness in writing or reduced into writing.
2. **Relevance to Matters in Question:** The previous statements that can be cross-examined must be relevant to the
matters in question in the current legal proceeding.
3. **Not Showing or Proving the Writing:** The cross-examiner does not need to show or prove the writing containing
the previous statements to the witness during cross-examination.
4. **Confrontation for Contradiction:** If the cross-examiner intends to contradict the witness by using the writing,
the witness's attention must be called to the specific parts of the writing that will be used for that purpose before the
writing can be formally proved.
Application of Section 125:
Section 125 of the Indian Evidence Act allows the cross-examination of a witness based on their previous statements
made in writing or reduced into writing. These statements must be relevant to the matters in question in the ongoing
legal proceeding.
During the cross-examination, the cross-examiner does not need to show or prove the writing containing the previous
statements to the witness. However, if the cross-examiner intends to use the writing to contradict the witness, the
witness's attention must first be drawn to the specific parts of the writing that will be used for that purpose before the
writing can be formally proved.

The purpose of Section 125 is to allow for effective cross-examination of witnesses and to test the consistency and
reliability of their testimonies by confronting them with their earlier statements.
It's important to note that the admissibility and use of previous statements in cross-examination are subject to rules of
evidence and judicial scrutiny. The court ensures that the cross-examination is conducted fairly and in accordance
with the law.

SECTIONS 126

Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 68

"Professional communications with legal advisers.—No barrister, attorney, pleader or vakil shall at any time be
permitted, unless with his client's express consent, to disclose any communication made to him in the course and for
the purpose of his employment as such barrister, pleader, attorney or vakil, by or on behalf of his client, or to state the
contents or condition of any document with which he has become acquainted in the course and for the purpose of his
professional employment, or to disclose any advice given by him to his client in the course and for the purpose of such
employment."
Elements of Section 126:
1. **Protection of Communications:** Section 126 provides protection to communications made between a client and
their legal adviser, such as a barrister, attorney, pleader, or vakil (lawyer).
2. **Confidential Nature:** The section ensures that any communication made to a legal adviser by or on behalf of a
client during the course and for the purpose of their professional employment remains confidential.
3. **Non-Disclosure without Client's Consent:** The legal adviser is not permitted to disclose such communications,
the contents or condition of any related document, or any advice given by them to their client unless the client
expressly consents to such disclosure.
Application of Section 126
Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 upholds the confidentiality of communications between a client and their
legal adviser. It aims to promote open and honest communication between clients and their legal representatives,
ensuring that clients can fully and candidly disclose all relevant information without fear of such information being
disclosed in court or other legal proceedings.
This confidentiality privilege allows clients to maintain trust in their legal advisers, enabling the advisers to provide
effective legal advice and representation. It also helps to protect the client's interests and ensures that sensitive
information remains private.
However, it's important to note that there are exceptions to this privilege. For example, in certain situations, a client
may waive the privilege, allowing their legal adviser to disclose the communication or advice. Additionally, the
privilege may not apply if the communication is intended to commit a crime or fraud.

SECTIONS 127
Section 127 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872:
"No advocate to be compelled to disclose communication.—No advocate shall at any time be permitted, unless with his
client's express consent, to disclose any communication made to him in the course and for the purpose of his
employment as such advocate, by or on behalf of his client, or to state the contents or condition of any document with
which he has become acquainted in the course and for the purpose of his professional employment, or to disclose any
advice given by him to his client in the course and for the purpose of such employment."
Elements of Section 127:
1. **Protection of Lawyer-Client Communications:** Section 127 provides protection to communications made
between a lawyer (advocate) and their client during the course and for the purpose of their professional employment.
2. **Confidential Nature:** Similar to Section 126, the section ensures that any communication made to a lawyer by or
on behalf of a client remains confidential.
3. **Non-Disclosure without Client's Consent:** The lawyer is not permitted to disclose such communications, the
contents or condition of any related document, or any advice given by them to their client unless the client expressly
consents to such disclosure.
Application of Section 127:
Section 127 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 reinforces the privilege of lawyer-client confidentiality, which is essential
for maintaining the trust and confidence between a client and their advocate. Just like in Section 126, this provision
aims to promote open and candid communication between clients and their lawyers.
Lawyers are bound by professional ethics and duty to maintain the confidentiality of their clients' communications,
ensuring that sensitive information shared during the course of legal representation remains private and protected.
As with Section 126, there are exceptions to the privilege in Section 127 as well. Clients may choose to waive the
privilege, permitting their lawyer to disclose certain information or advice when necessary. Additionally, the privilege
may not apply if the communication is intended to commit a crime or fraud.
The confidentiality privilege provided in Section 127 is an important aspect of the legal profession and serves to
safeguard the interests of clients and maintain the integrity of legal representation.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 69

SECTIONS 128

Section 128 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

"128. Waiver of privilege against production of documents.—Where a person waives the privilege attached to any
communication or document, he cannot afterwards rely on the same privilege to withhold evidence as to the contents
or nature of such communication or document."
Elements of Section 128:
1. **Waiver of Privilege:** Section 128 states that if a person waives the privilege attached to any communication or
document, that person cannot later rely on the same privilege to withhold evidence regarding the contents or nature
of that communication or document.
Application of Section 128:
Section 128 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 addresses the concept of waiver of privilege. Privilege refers to the legal
right or protection that prevents certain confidential communications or documents from being disclosed in court or
other legal proceedings.
Under Section 128, if a person voluntarily waives the privilege that would have protected a specific communication or
document from being produced in court, that person cannot later claim the same privilege to prevent the evidence
regarding the contents or nature of that communication or document from being disclosed.
In other words, once a person waives the privilege, they are considered to have forfeited their right to maintain
confidentiality over that particular communication or document. The waiver is a conscious and deliberate choice made
by the person, and it typically occurs when they decide to present that communication or document as evidence to
support their case or position in court.
It's important to note that the waiver applies only to the specific communication or document that the person chooses
to produce as evidence. Other privileged communications or documents may still be protected from disclosure,
depending on the circumstances and the applicable legal rules of privilege.

SECTIONS 129

Section 129 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

"129. Confidential communications with legal advisers.—No one shall be compelled to disclose to the Court any
confidential communication which has taken place between him and his legal professional adviser, unless he offers
himself as a witness, in which case he may be compelled to disclose any such communications as may appear to the
Court necessary to be known in order to explain any evidence which he has given, but no others."
Elements of Section 129
1. **Confidential Communications:** Section 129 protects confidential communications that have taken place between
a person and their legal professional adviser, such as a lawyer (advocate), barrister, attorney, pleader, or vakil.
2. **Non-Disclosure in Court:** The section prohibits any person from being compelled to disclose such confidential
communications in court, except under specific circumstances.
3. **Witness Offering Testimony:** If a person offers themselves as a witness in a legal proceeding, they may be
compelled to disclose any confidential communication that the court deems necessary to explain the evidence given by
the witness.
Application of Section 129
Section 129 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 ensures the protection of attorney-client privilege, which is a
fundamental principle of the legal profession. Attorney-client privilege enables clients to freely and openly
communicate with their legal advisers, ensuring that the information shared remains confidential.
Under Section 129, no person can be compelled to disclose any confidential communication made with their legal
adviser unless they voluntarily offer themselves as a witness in the legal proceeding. If a person does offer themselves
as a witness, the court may compel them to disclose only those confidential communications that are necessary to
explain the evidence they have given.
The purpose of Section 129 is to encourage open and candid communication between clients and their legal advisers,
fostering a relationship built on trust and confidentiality. This privilege ensures that clients can fully disclose all
relevant information to their legal advisers without fear that such information will be used against them in court.
However, it's essential to note that the privilege has its limitations and exceptions. For instance, the privilege may not
apply if the communication involves discussions related to an ongoing or intended criminal act or fraud.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 70

SECTIONS 130

Section 130B of the Indian Penal Code

Section 130B of the Indian Penal Code deals with an offence of promoting enmity between different groups on the
ground of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste, community, or any other ground, and doing acts
prejudicial to maintenance of harmony. It states that whoever, with the intention of promoting enmity between
different groups on the ground of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste, community, or any other
ground, and thereby does any act prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony, is said to commit an offence punishable
under this section.
Elements of offences under Section 130B
The following are the elements of offences under Section 130B of the Indian Penal Code:
 A person: There must be a person who commits the offence.
 Intention: There must be an intention to promote enmity between different groups on the ground of religion,
race, place of birth, residence, language, caste, community, or any other ground.
 Doing acts prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony: There must be acts that are prejudicial to the
maintenance of harmony.
Application of Section 130B
Section 130B of the IPC applies to all offences that are committed with the intention of promoting enmity between
different groups on the ground of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste, community, or any other
ground, and thereby do any act prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony. This includes offences such as:
 Making speeches or writing articles that promote hatred between different groups.
 Distributing pamphlets or posters that promote hatred between different groups.
 Performing plays or songs that promote hatred between different groups.
 Organizing or participating in rallies or demonstrations that promote hatred between different groups.
Punishment for offences under Section 130B
The punishment for offences under Section 130B of the Indian Penal Code is imprisonment for up to three years, or
fine, or both.
Conclusion
Offences under Section 130B are serious offences that can carry a significant punishment. If you are accused of an
offence under Section 130B, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer.

OFFENCES AGAINST THE PUBLIC TRANQUILLITY

Offences against public tranquility
Offences against public tranquility are those that disturb the peace and order of society. They include offences such as:
 Unlawful assembly: An unlawful assembly is a gathering of five or more persons who have assembled for an
unlawful purpose.
 Riot: A riot is a disturbance of the public peace by three or more persons, assembled with the common object
of causing the fear of an imminent disturbance of the public peace or commission of any mischief or offence.
 Assaulting or obstructing public servant when suppressing unlawful assembly, riot or affray: This section
deals with the offence of assaulting or obstructing a public servant when he or she is suppressing an unlawful
assembly, riot, or affray.
 Affray: An affray is a disturbance of the public peace by three or more persons, who use or threaten to use
violence to each other.
 Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language,
caste, community, or any other ground whatsoever: This section deals with the offence of promoting enmity
between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste, community,
or any other ground whatsoever.
 Punishment for abetting the commission of offences punishable underSECTIONS152 to 159 or section 295A:
This section deals with the offence of abetting the commission of offences punishable underSECTIONS152 to
159 or section 295A.
Punishment for offences against public tranquility

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 71

The punishment for offences against public tranquility varies depending on the offence. The punishment for unlawful
assembly can be imprisonment for up to six months, or fine, or both. The punishment for riot can be imprisonment for
up to three years, or fine, or both. The punishment for assaulting or obstructing a public servant when suppressing an
unlawful assembly, riot, or affray can be imprisonment for up to one year, or fine, or both. The punishment for affray
can be imprisonment for up to six months, or fine, or both. The punishment for promoting enmity between different
groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste, community, or any other ground
whatsoever can be imprisonment for up to three years, or fine, or both. The punishment for abetting the commission
of offences punishable underSECTIONS152 to 159 or section 295A can be imprisonment for up to three years, or fine,
or both.
Conclusion
Offences against public tranquility are serious offences that can carry a significant punishment. If you are accused of
an offence against public tranquility, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer.
SECTIONS 141

Section 141B of the Indian Penal Code

Section 141B of the Indian Penal Code deals with an offence of promoting enmity and ill-will between classes,
communities, or groups on the ground of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste, community, or any
other ground, and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony. It states that whoever, with the intention of
promoting enmity or ill-will between classes, communities, or groups on the ground of religion, race, place of birth,
residence, language, caste, community, or any other ground, and thereby does any act prejudicial to the maintenance
of harmony, is said to commit an offence punishable under this section.
Elements of offences under Section 141B of the Indian Penal Code
The following are the elements of offences under Section 141B of the Indian Penal Code:
 A person: There must be a person who commits the offence.
 Intention: There must be an intention to promote enmity or ill-will between classes, communities, or groups
on the ground of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste, community, or any other ground.
 Doing acts prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony: There must be acts that are prejudicial to the
maintenance of harmony.
Application of Section 141B of the Indian Penal Code
Section 141B of the IPC applies to all offences that are committed with the intention of promoting enmity or ill-will
between classes, communities, or groups on the ground of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste,
community, or any other ground, and thereby do any act prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony. This includes
offences such as:
 Making speeches or writing articles that promote hatred between different groups.
 Distributing pamphlets or posters that promote hatred between different groups.
 Performing plays or songs that promote hatred between different groups.
 Organizing or participating in rallies or demonstrations that promote hatred between different groups.
Punishment for offences under Section 141B of the Indian Penal Code
The punishment for offences under Section 141B of the Indian Penal Code is imprisonment for up to three years, or
fine, or both.
Conclusion
Offences under Section 141B are serious offences that can carry a significant punishment. If you are accused of an
offence under Section 141B, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 141B of the IPC:
 The offence under Section 141B is a cognizable offence, which means that the police can arrest a person
without a warrant if they have reason to believe that the person has committed the offence.
 The offence under Section 141B is a non-bailable offence, which means that a person arrested for the offence
cannot be released on bail unless the court grants bail.
 The offence under Section 141B is a triable offence, which means that it can be tried by a sessions court or a
court of equivalent jurisdiction.

SECTIONS 142

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 72

Section 142 of the Indian Penal Code

Section 142 of the Indian Penal Code deals with an offence of unlawful assembly. It states that “an assembly of five or
more persons, if the common object of the persons composing that assembly is any unlawful purpose, is an unlawful
assembly.”
Elements of offences under Section 142
The following are the elements of offences under Section 142 of the Indian Penal Code:
 A gathering of 5 or more persons: There must be a gathering of at least 5 persons.
 Common object of the persons composing that assembly: The persons composing the assembly must have a
common object.
 Unlawful purpose: The common object must be unlawful.
Application of Section 142
Section 142 of the IPC applies to all assemblies of 5 or more persons, if the common object of the persons composing
that assembly is any unlawful purpose. This includes assemblies that are formed for the purpose of committing any of
the following offences:
 Riot: A riot is a disturbance of the public peace by three or more persons, assembled with the common object
of causing the fear of an imminent disturbance of the public peace or commission of any mischief or offence.
 Assault: Assault is an act of intentionally or recklessly causing another person to fear that immediate unlawful
violence will be used against them.
 Criminal trespass: Criminal trespass is the offence of entering or remaining on someone else's property
without their permission, with the intention of committing an offence.
 Criminal intimidation: Criminal intimidation is the offence of intentionally causing another person to fear that
they will be injured, or that their property will be damaged, in order to compel them to do something they do
not want to do, or to prevent them from doing something they want to do.
Punishment for offences under Section 142
The punishment for offences under Section 142 of the Indian Penal Code is imprisonment for up to 6 months, or fine,
or both.
Conclusion
Offences under Section 142 are serious offences that can carry a significant punishment. If you are accused of an
offence under Section 142, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer.
SECTIONS 143
Section 143 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 143 of the Indian Penal Code deals with an offence of unlawful assembly, when armed with deadly weapons. It
states that if an assembly of five or more persons, with their faces covered or otherwise armed with deadly weapons,
is an unlawful assembly, every person is guilty of an offence punishable under this section.
Elements of offences under Section 143
The following are the elements of offences under Section 143 of the Indian Penal Code:
 A gathering of 5 or more persons: There must be a gathering of at least 5 persons.
 Faces covered or otherwise armed with deadly weapons: The persons composing the assembly must have
their faces covered or be otherwise armed with deadly weapons.
 Unlawful purpose: The common object must be unlawful.
Application of Section 143
Section 143 of the IPC applies to all assemblies of 5 or more persons, if the common object of the persons composing
the assembly is any unlawful purpose, and the persons composing the assembly are armed with deadly weapons. This
includes assemblies that are formed for the purpose of committing any of the following offences:
 Riot: A riot is a disturbance of the public peace by three or more persons, assembled with the common object
of causing the fear of an imminent disturbance of the public peace or commission of any mischief or offence.
 Assault: Assault is an act of intentionally or recklessly causing another person to fear that immediate unlawful
violence will be used against them.
 Criminal trespass: Criminal trespass is the offence of entering or remaining on someone else's property
without their permission, with the intention of committing an offence.
 Criminal intimidation: Criminal intimidation is the offence of intentionally causing another person to fear that
they will be injured, or that their property will be damaged, in order to compel them to do something they do
not want to do, or to prevent them from doing something they want to do.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 73

Punishment for offences under Section 143

The punishment for offences under Section 143 of the Indian Penal Code is imprisonment for up to two years, or fine,
or both.
Conclusion
Offences under Section 143 are serious offences that can carry a significant punishment. If you are accused of an
offence under Section 143, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer.
SECTIONS 144
Section 144 of the Indian Penal Code deals with issuance of orders in urgent cases of nuisance or apprehended danger.
The section states that:
When an executive magistrate is satisfied that a grave emergency exists in which it is necessary to take immediate
action to prevent danger to human life, health or safety, or to prevent a riot or affray, he may pass an order prohibiting
the assembly of five or more persons in any particular place or area.
Elements of offences under Section 144:
The following are the elements of offences under Section 144 of the Indian Penal Code:
 An executive magistrate: An Executive Magistrate is a judicial officer who is appointed by the State
Government, and who has the power to make orders for the maintenance of public order.
 Satisfied that a grave emergency exists: The Magistrate must be satisfied that there is a grave emergency that
needs to be addressed immediately.
 Necessity to take immediate action: The Magistrate must be satisfied that it is necessary to take immediate
action to prevent danger to human life, health or safety, or to prevent a riot or affray.
 Prohibiting the assembly of five or more persons: The Magistrate must pass an order prohibiting the
assembly of five or more persons.
Application of Section 144:
Section 144 of the IPC applies to all cases where the Magistrate is satisfied that a grave emergency exists and it is
necessary to take immediate action to prevent danger to human life, health or safety, or to prevent a riot or affray. This
includes cases where there is a threat of violence, or where there is a risk of public disorder.
Punishment for offences under Section 144:
The punishment for offences under Section 144 of the Indian Penal Code is imprisonment for up to three months, or
fine, or both.
Conclusion
Offences under Section 144 are serious offences that can carry a significant punishment. If you are accused of an
offence under Section 144, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 144 of the IPC:
o The order passed by the Magistrate under Section 144 is called an order under Section 144.
o The order under Section 144 is valid for a period of two months, but it can be extended by the Magistrate
for a further period of two months.
o The order under Section 144 can be enforced by the police.
o If a person disobeys the order under Section 144, he or she can be arrested by the police.

SECTIONS 145
Section 145 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the power of a magistrate to disperse an unlawful assembly. The
section states that:
When an unlawful assembly is actually constituted in any place, any magistrate empowered to try cases of the nature
of those specified in sections 147, 148, 149 and 150 may, by order in writing, disperse such assembly.
Elements of offences under Section 145:
The following are the elements of offences under Section 145 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Unlawful assembly: There must be an unlawful assembly.
 Actually constituted: The unlawful assembly must be actually constituted.
 Any magistrate empowered to try cases of the nature of those specified in sections 147, 148, 149 and 150:
The magistrate must be empowered to try cases of the nature of those specified in sections 147, 148, 149 and
150.
 Order in writing: The magistrate must pass an order in writing.
 Disperse such assembly: The magistrate must order the dispersal of the unlawful assembly.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 74

Application of Section 145:

Section 145 of the IPC applies to all cases where there is an unlawful assembly that is actually constituted. This
includes cases where the assembly is likely to cause a breach of the peace, or where the assembly is likely to commit
any mischief or offence.
Punishment for offences under Section 145:
The punishment for offences under Section 145 of the Indian Penal Code is imprisonment for up to six months, or fine,
or both.
Conclusion
Offences under Section 145 are serious offences that can carry a significant punishment. If you are accused of an
offence under Section 145, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 145 of the IPC:
 The order passed by the magistrate under Section 145 is called an order under Section 145.
 The order under Section 145 can be enforced by the police.
 If a person disobeys the order under Section 145, he or she can be arrested by the police.
If you are served with an order under Section 145, it is important to comply with the order. If you do not comply with
the order, you may be arrested by the police and charged with an offence.
It is important to note that Section 145 does not give the magistrate the power to disperse an assembly that is not
unlawful. An unlawful assembly is an assembly of five or more persons, if the common object of the persons
composing that assembly is any unlawful purpose.

SECTIONS 146
Section 146 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 146 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the offence of rioting. The section states that:
When five or more persons, who are assembled for the purpose of carrying out any unlawful common object, by any
means whatsoever, do by means of force or violence to any person, or damage to property, commit an offence
punishable under this section.
Elements of offences under Section 146
The following are the elements of offences under Section 146 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Five or more persons: There must be five or more persons.
 Assembled for the purpose of carrying out any unlawful common object: The persons must be assembled for
the purpose of carrying out any unlawful common object.
 By any means whatsoever: The unlawful common object must be carried out by any means whatsoever.
 Means of force or violence to any person: The means of carrying out the unlawful common object must be by
means of force or violence to any person.
 Damage to property: The means of carrying out the unlawful common object must be by damage to property.
Application of Section 146
Section 146 of the IPC applies to all cases where five or more persons are assembled for the purpose of carrying out
any unlawful common object, and the unlawful common object is carried out by means of force or violence to any
person or by damage to property. This includes cases where the assembly is likely to cause a breach of the peace, or
where the assembly is likely to commit any mischief or offence.
Punishment for offences under Section 146
The punishment for offences under Section 146 of the Indian Penal Code is imprisonment for up to three years, or fine,
or both.
Conclusion
Offences under Section 146 are serious offences that can carry a significant punishment. If you are accused of an
offence under Section 146, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 146 of the IPC:
 A riot is a disturbance of the public peace by three or more persons, assembled with the common object of
causing the fear of an imminent disturbance of the public peace or commission of any mischief or offence.
 A riot is a serious offence and can result in imprisonment for up to three years.
 A riot can be stopped by the police or by any other person who is able to do so.
 If you are involved in a riot, you could be arrested and charged with an offence.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 75

 If you are arrested for rioting, you should seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer as soon as
possible.

SECTIONS 147
Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the offence of rioting, when armed with deadly weapons. The section
states that “when five or more persons, who are assembled for the purpose of carrying out any unlawful common
object, by any means whatsoever, armed with deadly weapons, do by means of force or violence to any person, or
damage to property, commit an offence punishable under this section.”
Elements of offences under Section 147
The following are the elements of offences under Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Five or more persons: There must be five or more persons.
 Assembled for the purpose of carrying out any unlawful common object: The persons must be assembled for
the purpose of carrying out any unlawful common object.
 By any means whatsoever: The unlawful common object must be carried out by any means whatsoever.
 Armed with deadly weapons: The persons must be armed with deadly weapons.
 Means of force or violence to any person: The means of carrying out the unlawful common object must be by
means of force or violence to any person.
 Damage to property: The means of carrying out the unlawful common object must be by damage to property.
Application of Section 147
Section 147 of the IPC applies to all cases where five or more persons are assembled for the purpose of carrying out
any unlawful common object, and the unlawful common object is carried out by means of force or violence to any
person or by damage to property, and the persons are armed with deadly weapons. This includes cases where the
assembly is likely to cause a breach of the peace, or where the assembly is likely to commit any mischief or offence.
Punishment for offences under Section 147
The punishment for offences under Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code is imprisonment for up to five years, or fine,
or both.
Conclusion
Offences under Section 147 are serious offences that can carry a significant punishment. If you are accused of an
offence under Section 147, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 147 of the IPC:
 A riot is a disturbance of the public peace by three or more persons, assembled with the common object of
causing the fear of an imminent disturbance of the public peace or commission of any mischief or offence.
 A riot is a serious offence and can result in imprisonment for up to five years.
 A riot can be stopped by the police or by any other person who is able to do so.
 If you are involved in a riot, you could be arrested and charged with an offence.
 If you are arrested for rioting, you should seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer as soon as
possible.

SECTIONS 148
Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the offence of rioting, with deadly weapons, and with the intention of
committing murder or any other offence. The section states that “when five or more persons, who are assembled for
the purpose of carrying out any unlawful common object, by any means whatsoever, armed with deadly weapons, and
with the intention of committing murder or any other offence, do by means of force or violence to any person, or
damage to property, commit an offence punishable under this section.”
Elements of offences under Section 148
The following are the elements of offences under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Five or more persons: There must be five or more persons.
 Assembled for the purpose of carrying out any unlawful common object: The persons must be assembled for
the purpose of carrying out any unlawful common object.
 By any means whatsoever: The unlawful common object must be carried out by any means whatsoever.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 76

 Armed with deadly weapons: The persons must be armed with deadly weapons.
 With the intention of committing murder or any other offence: The persons must have the intention of
committing murder or any other offence.
 Means of force or violence to any person: The means of carrying out the unlawful common object must be by
means of force or violence to any person.
 Damage to property: The means of carrying out the unlawful common object must be by damage to property.
Application of Section 148
Section 148 of the IPC applies to all cases where five or more persons are assembled for the purpose of carrying out
any unlawful common object, and the unlawful common object is carried out by means of force or violence to any
person or by damage to property, and the persons are armed with deadly weapons, and the persons have the intention
of committing murder or any other offence. This includes cases where the assembly is likely to cause a breach of the
peace, or where the assembly is likely to commit any mischief or offence.
Punishment for offences under Section 148
The punishment for offences under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code is imprisonment for up to ten years, or fine,
or both.
Conclusion
Offences under Section 148 are serious offences that can carry a significant punishment. If you are accused of an
offence under Section 148, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 148 of the IPC:
 A riot is a disturbance of the public peace by three or more persons, assembled with the common object of
causing the fear of an imminent disturbance of the public peace or commission of any mischief or offence.
 A riot is a serious offence and can result in imprisonment for up to ten years.
 A riot can be stopped by the police or by any other person who is able to do so.
 If you are involved in a riot, you could be arrested and charged with an offence.
 If you are arrested for rioting, you should seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer as soon as
possible.

SECTIONS 149
Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the offence of abetment of a crime committed in prosecution of a
common object by the members of an unlawful assembly. It states that "if any member of an unlawful assembly
commits any offence in prosecution of the common object of that assembly, every other member of the assembly is
guilty of that offence."
Elements of offences under Section 149
The following are the elements of offences under Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Unlawful assembly: There must be an unlawful assembly.
 Common object of the assembly: The assembly must have a common object.
 Commits any offence: A member of the assembly must commit any offence.
 In prosecution of the common object of that assembly: The offence must be committed in prosecution of the
common object of the assembly.
 Every other member of the assembly: Every other member of the assembly is guilty of the offence.
Application of Section 149
Section 149 of the IPC applies to all cases where there is an unlawful assembly, and one of the members of the
assembly commits any offence in prosecution of the common object of the assembly. This includes cases where the
offence committed is a riot, a murder, or any other serious crime.
Punishment for offences under Section 149
The punishment for offences under Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code is the same as the punishment for the offence
that was committed by the member of the assembly. For example, if a member of an unlawful assembly commits
murder, then every other member of the assembly is also guilty of murder, and they can be punished with life
imprisonment.
Conclusion

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 77

Offences under Section 149 are serious offences that can carry a significant punishment. If you are a member of an
unlawful assembly, and one of the other members of the assembly commits an offence, you can be held liable for the
offence. It is important to be aware of the law and to avoid participating in unlawful assemblies.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 149 of the IPC:
o Abetment is the act of intentionally helping or encouraging someone to commit a crime.
o The common object of an unlawful assembly is any unlawful purpose that the members of the assembly
have in common.
o If a member of an unlawful assembly commits an offence in prosecution of the common object of the
assembly, then every other member of the assembly is also guilty of the offence.
o The punishment for offences under Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code is the same as the punishment
for the offence that was committed by the member of the assembly.
o If you are a member of an unlawful assembly, and one of the other members of the assembly commits an
offence, you can be held liable for the offence.
o It is important to be aware of the law and to avoid participating in unlawful assemblies.

SECTIONS 150
Section 150 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 150 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the offence of hiring, or conniving at the hiring, of persons to join
unlawful assembly. It states that “whoever hires or engages or employs, or promotes, or connives at the hiring,
engagement or employment of any person to join or become a member of any unlawful assembly, shall be punished
with imprisonment for up to one year, or fine, or both.”
Elements of offences under Section 150
The following are the elements of offences under Section 150 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Hires or engages or employs: The person must hire or engage or employ another person.
 Or promotes: The person must promote the act of hiring, engaging, or employing another person.
 Or connives at the hiring, engagement or employment: The person must connive at the act of hiring, engaging,
or employing another person.
 Of any person: The person who is hired, engaged, or employed must be a person.
 To join or become a member of any unlawful assembly: The person who is hired, engaged, or employed must
be hired, engaged, or employed to join or become a member of any unlawful assembly.
Application of Section 150
Section 150 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person hires, engages, or employs another person to join or become
a member of any unlawful assembly. This includes cases where the unlawful assembly is likely to cause a breach of the
peace, or where the unlawful assembly is likely to commit any mischief or offence.
Punishment for offences under Section 150
The punishment for offences under Section 150 of the Indian Penal Code is imprisonment for up to one year, or fine, or
both.
Conclusion
Offences under Section 150 are serious offences that can carry a significant punishment. If you are accused of an
offence under Section 150, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 150 of the IPC:
o An unlawful assembly is an assembly of five or more persons, if the common object of the persons composing
that assembly is any unlawful purpose.
o Hiring, engaging, or employing a person to join or become a member of an unlawful assembly is a serious
offence because it can lead to the commission of other serious offences, such as riots, murders, or other
crimes.
o If you are accused of an offence under Section 150, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced
criminal lawyer as soon as possible.

SECTIONS 151
Section 150 of the Indian Penal Code

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 78

Section 150 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the offence of hiring, or conniving at the hiring, of persons to join
unlawful assembly. It states that “whoever hires or engages or employs, or promotes, or connives at the hiring,
engagement or employment of any person to join or become a member of any unlawful assembly, shall be punished
with imprisonment for up to one year, or fine, or both.”
Elements of offences under Section 150
The following are the elements of offences under Section 150 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Hires or engages or employs: The person must hire or engage or employ another person.
 Or promotes: The person must promote the act of hiring, engaging, or employing another person.
 Or connives at the hiring, engagement or employment: The person must connive at the act of hiring, engaging,
or employing another person.
 Of any person: The person who is hired, engaged, or employed must be a person.
 To join or become a member of any unlawful assembly: The person who is hired, engaged, or employed must
be hired, engaged, or employed to join or become a member of any unlawful assembly.
Application of Section 150
Section 150 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person hires, engages, or employs another person to join or become
a member of any unlawful assembly. This includes cases where the unlawful assembly is likely to cause a breach of the
peace, or where the unlawful assembly is likely to commit any mischief or offence.
Punishment for offences under Section 150
The punishment for offences under Section 150 of the Indian Penal Code is imprisonment for up to one year, or fine, or
both.
Conclusion
Offences under Section 150 are serious offences that can carry a significant punishment. If you are accused of an
offence under Section 150, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 150 of the IPC:
o An unlawful assembly is an assembly of five or more persons, if the common object of the persons composing
that assembly is any unlawful purpose.
o Hiring, engaging, or employing a person to join or become a member of an unlawful assembly is a serious
offence because it can lead to the commission of other serious offences, such as riots, murders, or other
crimes.
o If you are accused of an offence under Section 150, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced
criminal lawyer as soon as possible.

SECTIONS 152
Section 152 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 152 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the offence of assaulting or obstructing public servant when
suppressing riot, affray, etc. It states that “whoever, being a public servant, assaults or obstructs any other public
servant in the discharge of his duty as such public servant, when suppressing a riot, affray, or unlawful assembly, shall
be punished with imprisonment for up to two years, or fine, or both.”
Elements of offences under Section 152
The following are the elements of offences under Section 152 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Being a public servant: The person must be a public servant.
 Assaults or obstructs: The person must assault or obstruct another public servant.
 Any other public servant: The other public servant must be a public servant.
 In the discharge of his duty as such public servant: The other public servant must be in the discharge of his
duty as such public servant.
 When suppressing a riot, affray, or unlawful assembly: The other public servant must be suppressing a riot,
affray, or unlawful assembly.
Application of Section 152
Section 152 of the IPC applies to all cases where a public servant assaults or obstructs another public servant in the
discharge of his duty as such public servant when suppressing a riot, affray, or unlawful assembly. This includes cases
where the public servant is trying to disperse the riot, affray, or unlawful assembly.
Punishment for offences under Section 152

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 79

The punishment for offences under Section 152 of the Indian Penal Code is imprisonment for up to two years, or fine,
or both.
Conclusion
Offences under Section 152 are serious offences that can carry a significant punishment. If you are accused of an
offence under Section 152, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 152 of the IPC:
o Assault is the act of intentionally causing any harm or injury to another person.
o Obstruction is the act of preventing or hindering another person from doing something.
o A public servant is a person who is employed in the service of the State and who is authorized by law to
perform public functions.
o A riot is a disturbance of the public peace by three or more persons, assembled with the common object of
causing the fear of an imminent disturbance of the public peace or commission of any mischief or offence.
o An affray is a fight between two or more persons in a public place that causes a disturbance of the public
peace.
o An unlawful assembly is an assembly of five or more persons, if the common object of the persons composing
that assembly is any unlawful purpose.
o Suppressing a riot, affray, or unlawful assembly is the act of preventing or stopping a riot, affray, or unlawful
assembly.
o Assaulting or obstructing a public servant in the discharge of his duty as such public servant when
suppressing a riot, affray, or unlawful assembly is a serious offence because it can interfere with the ability of
the public servant to do his or her job and can lead to the commission of other serious offences, such as riots,
murders, or other crimes.
o If you are accused of an offence under Section 152, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced
criminal lawyer as soon as possible.

SECTIONS 153
Section 153 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 153 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the offence of promoting enmity between different groups on grounds
of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste, or community, and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of
harmony. It states that “whoever, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representations, or
otherwise, promotes or attempts to promote, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste, or
community, feelings of enmity, hatred, or ill-will between different classes of people, shall be punished with
imprisonment for up to three years, or fine, or both.”
Elements of offences under Section 153
The following are the elements of offences under Section 153 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Promotes or attempts to promote: The person must promote or attempt to promote feelings of enmity,
hatred, or ill-will between different classes of people.
 On grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste, or community: The promotion or
attempt to promote must be on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste, or
community.
 Feelings of enmity, hatred, or ill-will: The promotion or attempt to promote must be of feelings of enmity,
hatred, or ill-will.
 Between different classes of people: The promotion or attempt to promote must be between different classes
of people.
Application of Section 153
Section 153 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person promotes or attempts to promote feelings of enmity, hatred,
or ill-will between different classes of people on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste, or
community. This includes cases where the person makes speeches, publishes articles, or distributes pamphlets that
promote or attempt to promote feelings of enmity, hatred, or ill-will between different classes of people.
Punishment for offences under Section 153
The punishment for offences under Section 153 of the Indian Penal Code is imprisonment for up to three years, or fine,
or both.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 80

Conclusion
Offences under Section 153 are serious offences that can carry a significant punishment. If you are accused of an
offence under Section 153, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 153 of the IPC:
 Promote means to encourage or stir up.
 Attempt means to try to do something.
 Feelings of enmity, hatred, or ill-will means feelings of hostility or dislike between different groups of people.
 Different classes of people means different groups of people who are distinguished by religion, race, place of
birth, residence, language, caste, or community.
Promotion of enmity between different groups of people can lead to violence and other serious consequences. It is
important to be aware of the law and to avoid making any statements or taking any actions that could be interpreted
as promoting enmity between different groups of people.

SECTIONS 154
Section 154 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 154 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the duty of a police officer to report to the nearest magistrate the
commission of a cognizable offence. It states that “every police officer, when he receives information about the
commission of a cognizable offence, shall forthwith send a report of the same to the nearest Magistrate.”
Elements of offences under Section 154
The following are the elements of offences under Section 154 of the Indian Penal Code:
 A police officer: The person must be a police officer.
 Receives information: The police officer must receive information about the commission of a cognizable
offence.
 About the commission: The information must be about the commission of a cognizable offence.
 A cognizable offence: The offence must be cognizable.
 Shall forthwith send a report: The police officer must forthwith send a report of the offence to the nearest
Magistrate.
Application of Section 154
Section 154 of the IPC applies to all cases where a police officer receives information about the commission of a
cognizable offence. This includes cases where the offence is committed in the presence of the police officer, or where
the police officer receives information about the offence from a reliable source.
Punishment for offences under Section 154
There is no punishment for offences under Section 154 of the Indian Penal Code. However, a police officer who fails to
comply with the provisions of Section 154 may be liable for disciplinary action.
Conclusion
Section 154 of the IPC is an important provision that ensures that the police are aware of the commission of
cognizable offences and take the necessary action to investigate and prosecute the offenders. If you are a police officer,
it is important to be aware of your duties under Section 154 and to comply with them promptly.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 154 of the IPC:
 A cognizable offence is an offence that can be investigated and prosecuted by the police without the need for a
warrant from a magistrate.
 The nearest magistrate is the magistrate who has jurisdiction over the area where the offence is committed.
 The report to the magistrate must contain the following information:
o The name of the person who committed the offence;
o The time and place of the offence;
o The nature of the offence;
o The names of any witnesses to the offence; and
o Any other relevant information.
Failure to comply with the provisions of Section 154 can lead to disciplinary action against the police officer.

SECTIONS 155
Section 155 of the Indian Penal Code

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 81

Section 155 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the power of a magistrate to direct a police officer to investigate a
cognizable case. It states that “when a Magistrate receives a complaint of the commission of a cognizable offence, he
may direct a police officer to investigate the complaint.”
Elements of offences under Section 155
The following are the elements of offences under Section 155 of the Indian Penal Code:
 A Magistrate: The person must be a Magistrate.
 Receives a complaint: The Magistrate must receive a complaint of the commission of a cognizable offence.
 Of the commission: The complaint must be of the commission of a cognizable offence.
 A cognizable offence: The offence must be cognizable.
 May direct: The Magistrate may direct.
 A police officer: The Magistrate may direct a police officer.
 To investigate: The Magistrate may direct the police officer to investigate the complaint.
Application of Section 155
Section 155 of the IPC applies to all cases where a Magistrate receives a complaint of the commission of a cognizable
offence. This includes cases where the person who complains is the victim of the offence, or where the person who
complains is a witness to the offence.
Punishment for offences under Section 155
There is no punishment for offences under Section 155 of the Indian Penal Code. However, a Magistrate who fails to
comply with the provisions of Section 155 may be liable for disciplinary action.
Conclusion
Section 155 of the IPC is an important provision that ensures that the police are able to investigate cognizable
offences, even if the victim or witness is not willing to cooperate. If you are a Magistrate, it is important to be aware of
your powers under Section 155 and to use them judiciously.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 155 of the IPC:
 A cognizable offence is an offence that can be investigated and prosecuted by the police without the need for a
warrant from a magistrate.
 A complaint is a statement made to a Magistrate by a person who alleges that an offence has been committed
against him or her.
 The police officer who is directed to investigate the complaint must do so promptly and thoroughly.
 The police officer must submit a report to the Magistrate on the results of the investigation.
Failure to comply with the provisions of Section 155 can lead to disciplinary action against the Magistrate.

SECTIONS 156
Section 156 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 156 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the power of a police officer to investigate a cognizable case without
the order of a magistrate. It states that “any police officer, when he has reason to believe that a cognizable offence has
been committed, may without the order of a Magistrate, investigate the offence.”
Elements of offences under Section 156
The following are the elements of offences under Section 156 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Any police officer: The person must be a police officer.
 Has reason to believe: The police officer must have reason to believe that a cognizable offence has been
committed.
 A cognizable offence: The offence must be cognizable.
 May without the order of a Magistrate: The police officer may, without the order of a Magistrate, investigate
the offence.
Application of Section 156
Section 156 of the IPC applies to all cases where a police officer has reason to believe that a cognizable offence has
been committed. This includes cases where the police officer witnesses the offence himself or herself, or where the
police officer receives information about the offence from a reliable source.
Punishment for offences under Section 156
There is no punishment for offences under Section 156 of the Indian Penal Code. However, a police officer who fails to
comply with the provisions of Section 156 may be liable for disciplinary action.
Conclusion

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 82

Section 156 of the IPC is an important provision that ensures that the police are able to investigate cognizable offences
promptly and without the need for a warrant from a magistrate. If you are a police officer, it is important to be aware
of your powers under Section 156 and to use them judiciously.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 156 of the IPC:
 A cognizable offence is an offence that can be investigated and prosecuted by the police without the need for a
warrant from a magistrate.
 A police officer has reason to believe that an offence has been committed when he or she has information on
reasonable grounds that such an offence has been committed.
 The police officer who investigates the offence must do so promptly and thoroughly.
 The police officer must submit a report to the Magistrate on the results of the investigation.
Failure to comply with the provisions of Section 156 can lead to disciplinary action against the police officer.

SECTIONS 157

Section 157 of the Indian Penal Code

Section 157 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the procedure for investigation of cognizable cases. It states that
“when any police officer has reason to believe that an offence has been committed, he shall, subject to the provisions
of this Chapter, forthwith proceed to the spot, where the offence is committed or is supposed to have been committed,
and shall, if necessary, take down in writing the statement of the informant and the witnesses present, if any.”
Elements of offences under Section 157
The following are the elements of offences under Section 157 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Any police officer: The person must be a police officer.
 Has reason to believe: The police officer must have reason to believe that an offence has been committed.
 An offence: The offence must be cognizable.
 Shall, subject to the provisions of this Chapter, forthwith proceed to the spot: The police officer shall, subject
to the provisions of this Chapter, forthwith proceed to the spot, where the offence is committed or is
supposed to have been committed.
 Where the offence is committed: The police officer shall proceed to the spot where the offence is committed.
 Or is supposed to have been committed: The police officer shall proceed to the spot where the offence is
supposed to have been committed.
 And shall, if necessary, take down in writing the statement of the informant and the witnesses present, if any:
The police officer shall, if necessary, take down in writing the statement of the informant and the witnesses
present, if any.
Application of Section 157
Section 157 of the IPC applies to all cases where a police officer has reason to believe that a cognizable offence has
been committed. This includes cases where the police officer witnesses the offence himself or herself, or where the
police officer receives information about the offence from a reliable source.
Punishment for offences under Section 157
There is no punishment for offences under Section 157 of the Indian Penal Code. However, a police officer who fails to
comply with the provisions of Section 157 may be liable for disciplinary action.
Conclusion
Section 157 of the IPC is an important provision that ensures that the police are able to investigate cognizable offences
promptly and in a systematic manner. If you are a police officer, it is important to be aware of your powers under
Section 157 and to use them judiciously.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 157 of the IPC:
 The phrase "subject to the provisions of this Chapter" refers to the other provisions of Chapter XII of the IPC,
which deal with the investigation of cognizable cases.
 The statement of the informant and the witnesses must be taken down in writing in the presence of the
informant and the witnesses, if they so desire.
 The police officer must also record the time and place where the statement was taken down.
 The statement of the informant and the witnesses must be signed by the informant and the witnesses, if they
so desire.
 The police officer must also sign the statement.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 83

Failure to comply with the provisions of Section 157 can lead to disciplinary action against the police officer.

SECTIONS 158
Section 158 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 158 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the procedure for the investigation of cognizable cases. It states that
“any police officer, making an investigation under this Chapter, shall, if he thinks fit, take down in writing the
statements of all or any of the persons who appear to be acquainted with the facts of the case.”
Elements of offences under Section 158
The following are the elements of offences under Section 158 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Any police officer: The person must be a police officer.
 Making an investigation: The police officer must be making an investigation under Chapter XII of the IPC.
 Under this Chapter: The investigation must be under Chapter XII of the IPC.
 Shall, if he thinks fit, take down in writing the statements of all or any of the persons: The police officer shall, if
he thinks fit, take down in writing the statements of all or any of the persons who appear to be acquainted
with the facts of the case.
 Who appear to be acquainted with the facts of the case: The statements must be taken down of persons who
appear to be acquainted with the facts of the case.
Application of Section 158
Section 158 of the IPC applies to all cases where a police officer is making an investigation under Chapter XII of the
IPC. This includes cases where the police officer is investigating a cognizable offence.
Punishment for offences under Section 158
There is no punishment for offences under Section 158 of the Indian Penal Code. However, a police officer who fails to
comply with the provisions of Section 158 may be liable for disciplinary action.
Conclusion
Section 158 of the IPC is an important provision that ensures that the police are able to obtain the statements of
witnesses in a cognizable case. This can be helpful in the investigation of the case and in the prosecution of the
offender.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 158 of the IPC:
 The phrase "if he thinks fit" means that the police officer has the discretion to decide whether or not to take
down the statements of witnesses.
 The statements of witnesses must be taken down in writing in the presence of the witnesses, if they so desire.
 The police officer must also record the time and place where the statement was taken down.
 The statement of witnesses must be signed by the witnesses, if they so desire.
 The police officer must also sign the statement.
Failure to comply with the provisions of Section 158 can lead to disciplinary action against the police officer.

SECTIONS 159

Section 159 of the Indian Penal Code

Section 159 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the procedure for the investigation of cognizable cases. It states that
“any police officer making an investigation under this Chapter, may, if he thinks fit, take the photographs of the place
in which the offence is committed, or of the objects, if any, which may be connected with the offence.”
Elements of offences under Section 159
The following are the elements of offences under Section 159 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Any police officer: The person must be a police officer.
 Making an investigation: The police officer must be making an investigation under Chapter XII of the IPC.
 Under this Chapter: The investigation must be under Chapter XII of the IPC.
 May, if he thinks fit, take the photographs of the place in which the offence is committed: The police officer
may, if he thinks fit, take the photographs of the place in which the offence is committed.
 Of the objects, if any, which may be connected with the offence: The photographs may be of the objects, if any,
which may be connected with the offence.
Application of Section 159

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 84

Section 159 of the IPC applies to all cases where a police officer is making an investigation under Chapter XII of the
IPC. This includes cases where the police officer is investigating a cognizable offence.
Punishment for offences under Section 159
There is no punishment for offences under Section 159 of the Indian Penal Code. However, a police officer who fails to
comply with the provisions of Section 159 may be liable for disciplinary action.
Conclusion
Section 159 of the IPC is an important provision that allows the police to obtain photographic evidence of the crime
scene and of any objects that may be connected with the offence. This can be helpful in the investigation of the case
and in the prosecution of the offender.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 159 of the IPC:
 The phrase "if he thinks fit" means that the police officer has the discretion to decide whether or not to take
photographs.
 The photographs must be taken in a manner that does not destroy or damage any evidence.
 The photographs must be preserved and produced in court, if necessary.
Failure to comply with the provisions of Section 159 can lead to disciplinary action against the police officer.

SECTIONS 160
Section 160 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 160 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the procedure for the investigation of cognizable cases. It states that
“any police officer making an investigation under this Chapter, may, if he thinks fit, require the attendance of any
person, and examine him on oath, or take his statement in writing, regarding the circumstances of the case.”
Elements of offences under Section 160
The following are the elements of offences under Section 160 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Any police officer: The person must be a police officer.
 Making an investigation: The police officer must be making an investigation under Chapter XII of the IPC.
 Under this Chapter: The investigation must be under Chapter XII of the IPC.
 May, if he thinks fit, require the attendance of any person: The police officer may, if he thinks fit, require the
attendance of any person.
 And examine him on oath: The police officer may examine the person on oath.
 Or take his statement in writing: The police officer may take the statement of the person in writing.
 Regarding the circumstances of the case: The statement must be regarding the circumstances of the case.
Application of Section 160
Section 160 of the IPC applies to all cases where a police officer is making an investigation under Chapter XII of the
IPC. This includes cases where the police officer is investigating a cognizable offence.
Punishment for offences under Section 160
There is no punishment for offences under Section 160 of the Indian Penal Code. However, a police officer who fails to
comply with the provisions of Section 160 may be liable for disciplinary action.
Conclusion
Section 160 of the IPC is an important provision that allows the police to compel witnesses to attend and give evidence
in the course of an investigation. This can be helpful in the investigation of the case and in the prosecution of the
offender.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 160 of the IPC:
 The phrase "if he thinks fit" means that the police officer has the discretion to decide whether or not to
require the attendance of a person.
 The person who is required to attend must be given a reasonable notice of the time and place of the
attendance.
 The person who is required to attend must be sworn in before giving evidence.
 The statement of the person must be recorded in writing and signed by the person.
Failure to comply with the provisions of Section 160 can lead to disciplinary action against the police officer.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SECTION 34 & 149

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 85

Section 34 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deal with the liability of persons for the acts of others. However,
there are some key differences between the two sections.
Section 34
Section 34 of the IPC deals with the joint liability of persons for the acts of others. It states 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."
In other words, Section 34 of the IPC applies when two or more persons act together with the same intention to
commit an offence. Each of the persons who participated in the offence is liable for the offence, even if they did not
actually commit the act that caused the harm.
Section 149
Section 149 of the IPC deals with the unlawful assembly. It states that **"**When five or more persons, who are
assembled for the purpose of committing any offence, do by means of the use of force or of criminal force or of any
other means whatsoever, commit an offence in prosecution of the common object of the assembly, each of such
persons is guilty of the offence."
In other words, Section 149 of the IPC applies when five or more persons jointly commit an offence. The offence
does not have to be planned in advance, and the persons involved do not have to have the same intention.
However, they must all be aware that the offence is being committed and that they are participating in it.
 Section 34: Section 34 of the IPC deals with the joint liability of persons who commit a crime in furtherance of
a common intention.
 Section 149: Section 149 of the IPC deals with the constructive liability of persons who are members of an
unlawful assembly.
 Common intention: Section 34 requires that the persons who commit the crime have a common intention to
commit the crime. This means that they must all agree to commit the crime and they must all know that the
other person(s) involved also intend to commit the crime.
 Common object: Section 149 does not require that the members of the unlawful assembly have a common
intention to commit a crime. Instead, it only requires that they have a common object, which is to use force or
violence to achieve some common purpose.
 Punishment: The punishment for offences under Section 34 is the same as the punishment for the underlying
offence. The punishment for offences under Section 149 is imprisonment for up to two years, or fine, or both.
In summary, Section 34 applies to cases where two or more persons commit a crime with a common intention, while
Section 149 applies to cases where two or more persons are members of an unlawful assembly that uses force or
violence to achieve a common purpose.

Key Differences
The key differences between Section 34 and Section 149 of the IPC are as follows:
 Number of persons: Section 34 requires only two or more persons, while Section 149 requires five or more
persons.
 Intention: Section 34 requires that the persons involved have the same intention to commit the offence, while
Section 149 does not require the same intention.
 Planning: Section 34 does not require that the offence be planned in advance, while Section 149 does not
require planning.
 Knowledge: Section 34 requires that the persons involved be aware that the offence is being committed, while
Section 149 does not require knowledge.
Here are some additional points to note about the two sections:
 Common intention is a subjective concept, which means that it must be proved by the prosecution beyond a
reasonable doubt.
 Common object is an objective concept, which means that it can be inferred from the circumstances of the
case.
 The fact that a person is a member of an unlawful assembly does not automatically mean that they are liable
for the offences committed by the assembly. The prosecution must prove that the person knew that the
assembly was unlawful and that they intended to use force or violence to achieve the common purpose of the
assembly.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 86

Conclusion
Section 34 and Section 149 of the IPC are both important provisions that deal with the liability of persons for the acts
of others. However, there are some key differences between the two sections, which should be carefully considered
when applying them.

SECTIONS 34
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the joint liability of persons who commit a crime in furtherance of a
common intention. It states 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."
Elements of offences under Section 34
The following are the elements of offences under Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Several persons: The offence must be committed by several persons.
 Common intention: The persons must have a common intention to commit the offence.
 Furtherance of the common intention: The offence must be committed in furtherance of the common intention.
Application of Section 34
Section 34 of the IPC applies to all cases where two or more persons commit a crime with a common intention. This
includes cases where the persons are physically present at the scene of the crime, as well as cases where the persons are
not physically present but they are nevertheless involved in the planning or execution of the crime.
Punishment for offences under Section 34
The punishment for offences under Section 34 is the same as the punishment for the underlying offence. For example, if
the underlying offence is murder, then the punishment for the offence under Section 34 is also murder.
Conclusion
Section 34 of the IPC is an important provision that ensures that all persons who are involved in the commission of a
crime are held liable for the offence, regardless of their individual roles in the commission of the offence.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 34 of the IPC:
o The phrase "in furtherance of the common intention" means that the act must be done in order to achieve the
common intention of the persons involved.
o The common intention does not have to be explicitly stated. It can be inferred from the circumstances of the case.
o The fact that a person is a member of a group that commits a crime does not automatically mean that they are
liable for the offence under Section 34. The prosecution must prove that the person had the requisite common
intention to commit the offence.

SECTIONS 149
Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the constructive liability of persons who are members of an unlawful
assembly. It states that "every member of an unlawful assembly, who commits any offence in prosecution of the
common object of that assembly, is guilty of that offence."
Elements of offences under Section 149
The following are the elements of offences under Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Unlawful assembly: The assembly must be unlawful.
 Common object: The assembly must have a common object.
 Offence: The offence must be committed in prosecution of the common object of the assembly.
Application of Section 149
Section 149 of the IPC applies to all cases where two or more persons are members of an unlawful assembly that uses
force or violence to achieve a common purpose. This includes cases where the assembly is formed for the purpose of
committing a crime, as well as cases where the assembly is formed for the purpose of achieving a lawful purpose but
uses force or violence in the process.
Punishment for offences under Section 149
The punishment for offences under Section 149 is imprisonment for up to two years, or fine, or both.
Conclusion

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 87

Section 149 of the IPC is an important provision that ensures that all persons who are members of an unlawful
assembly that uses force or violence are held liable for the offences committed by the assembly, regardless of their
individual roles in the commission of the offences.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 149 of the IPC:
 The phrase "in prosecution of the common object" means that the offence must be committed in order to
achieve the common object of the assembly.
 The common object does not have to be explicitly stated. It can be inferred from the circumstances of the case.
 The fact that a person is a member of an unlawful assembly does not automatically mean that they are liable
for the offences committed by the assembly. The prosecution must prove that the person knew that the
assembly was unlawful and that they intended to use force or violence to achieve the common purpose of the
assembly.

OFFENCES RELATING TO ELECTION: CONTEMPT OF LAWFUL AUTHORITY AND PUBLIC SERVANTS (BRIEF
DISCUSSION)

Offenses relating to elections, contempt of lawful authority, and public servants are covered under various laws in
India. Let's briefly discuss these aspects:
Offenses Relating to Elections:
In India, offenses relating to elections are primarily governed by the Representation of the People Act, 1951. This act
provides rules and regulations for the conduct of elections, qualifications and disqualifications of candidates, electoral
offenses, and the role of the Election Commission of India in overseeing the electoral process.

Some common offenses relating to elections include:

1. **Bribery and Corrupt Practices:** Offering or accepting bribes to influence voters, candidates, or election officials
is a serious electoral offense.
2. **Illegal Practices:** Engaging in activities that are deemed illegal during elections, such as booth capturing,
impersonation, and intimidation.
3. **False Statements:** Making false statements about a candidate's character, assets, or personal life to harm their
electoral prospects.
4. **Election Petitions:** Filing false or frivolous election petitions challenging the validity of an election result.
Penalties for electoral offenses can include disqualification from contesting elections, imprisonment, and fines.
Contempt of Lawful Authority and Public Servants:
Contempt of lawful authority and public servants refers to actions or statements that show disrespect, disobedience,
or disregard for the authority and decisions of public officials or institutions performing their lawful duties. Contempt
can be both civil and criminal in nature.
Contempt of Court: This is a separate category of contempt where actions or publications that scandalize, lower the
authority, or obstruct the functioning of the court may be treated as contempt. Contempt of court can lead to penalties
such as fines, imprisonment, or other punitive actions.
Contempt of Public Servants: This refers to acts that show disrespect or disobedience towards public servants or
officials performing their official duties. It may include obstructing public servants from performing their duties, using
insulting language, or disobeying lawful orders.
Contempt of lawful authority and public servants is generally dealt with under the provisions of the Contempt of
Courts Act, 1971, and relevant provisions of the Indian Penal Code.
The offence of contempt of lawful authority of public servants is defined under Section 186 of the Indian Penal Code
(IPC). It states that "whoever voluntarily obstructs any public servant in the discharge of his public functions, or
attempts to obstruct him in the discharge of his public functions, **shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or
with both."
The essential elements of the offence are:
 Voluntary obstruction: The obstruction must be voluntary.
 Public servant: The person obstructed must be a public servant.
 Discharge of public functions: The public servant must be obstructed in the discharge of his public functions.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 88

Punishment: The punishment for the offence is imprisonment for up to three months, or a fine of up to Rs. 500, or
both.
Public servant is defined under Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) as:
 Every person in the service or employment, whether permanent or temporary, of the Government of India or
of any State, and every person in the service or employment, whether permanent or temporary, of a local
authority, or of a corporation established by a Central, State or Provincial Act, or of any other body corporate
established by law, or of a company incorporated by or under the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), or of a
society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (21 of 1860), is a public servant.
Conclusion
The offence of contempt of lawful authority of public servants is an important provision that ensures that public
servants are able to discharge their duties without interference. The punishment for the offence is also sufficiently
deterrent to prevent people from obstructing public servants in the discharge of their duties.
Other offences relating to election
Here are some other offences relating to election:
 Section 188 of the IPC: Disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant
 Section 183 of the IPC: Resistance to the taking of property by the lawful authority of a public servant
 Section 187 of the IPC: Failure to assist a public servant when called upon to do so
These offences are punishable with imprisonment for up to six months, or a fine, or both.
It is important to note that these are just some of the offences relating to election. There are other offences that may
be committed in the context of an election, such as bribery, impersonation, and influencing or attempting to influence
voters.
It is also important to note that the offences relating to election are not limited to public servants. Any person,
including a private citizen, can be held liable for these offences if they commit them.

SECTIONS 172
Section 172 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 172 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the offence of false statement made in declaration to public servant. It
states that **whoever, makes any false statement in a declaration required by any law for the time being in force to be
made by any person to a public servant, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which
may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 172
The following are the elements of offences under Section 172 of the Indian Penal Code:
 False statement: The statement must be false.
 Declaration: The statement must be made in a declaration.
 Required by law: The declaration must be required by law.
 Public servant: The statement must be made to a public servant.
Application of Section 172
Section 172 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person makes a false statement in a declaration that is required by
law to be made to a public servant. This includes cases where the declaration is made in order to obtain a government
benefit, to register to vote, or to obtain a passport.
Punishment for offences under Section 172
The punishment for offences under Section 172 is imprisonment for up to three years, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 172 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the integrity of the public service. It ensures that public
servants are not misled by false statements, and that government benefits are not given to ineligible persons.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 172 of the IPC:
o The phrase "required by law" means that the declaration must be required by a statute, or by a subordinate
legislation that has been made under a statute.
o The phrase "public servant" has the same meaning as it does in Section 21 of the IPC.
o The offence of false statement made in declaration to public servant is a cognizable offence, which means that
it can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
o The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 89

SECTIONS 173

Section 173 of the Indian Penal Code

Section 173 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the report of police officer on completion of investigation. It states
that as soon as such investigation is completed, the officer in charge of the police station shall forward to the
Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence, a report in writing, setting forth the following particulars:
 The names of the parties;
 The nature of the information;
 The names of the persons who appear to be acquainted with the circumstances of the case;
 Whether any offence appears to have been committed, and, if so, by whom;
 Whether the accused has been arrested;
 Whether he has been released on his bond or bail, and, if so, on what terms; and
 Whether any property has been seized, and, if so, what has been done with it.
Elements of offences under Section 173
The following are the elements of offences under Section 173 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Investigation: The investigation must be completed.
 Report: The report must be in writing.
 Particulars: The report must set forth the particulars mentioned in the section.
Application of Section 173
Section 173 of the IPC applies to all cases where a police officer completes an investigation into a cognizable offence.
This includes cases where the offence is committed by a public servant, or where the offence is committed against a
public servant.
Punishment for offences under Section 173
There is no punishment for offences under Section 173 of the Indian Penal Code. However, a police officer who fails to
comply with the provisions of Section 173 may be liable for disciplinary action.
Conclusion
Section 173 of the IPC is an important provision that ensures that the police are accountable for their investigations. It
requires the police to submit a report to the Magistrate, which sets forth the details of the investigation. This allows
the Magistrate to assess whether the investigation has been conducted properly, and whether there is sufficient
evidence to proceed with the case.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 173 of the IPC:
o The report must be submitted to the Magistrate within a reasonable time.
o The report must be signed by the officer in charge of the police station.
o The report must be accompanied by all the documents that were seized during the investigation.

SECTIONS 174
Section 174 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 174 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the cognizance of offences by Magistrate. It states that if, upon an
investigation under Section 173, it appears to the officer in charge of the police station that there is no sufficient
evidence or that the evidence does not justify the commitment of the accused for trial, he shall, as soon as may be,
report the matter to the Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence, and, unless the Magistrate otherwise
directs, release the accused on his bond with or without sureties.
Elements of offences under Section 174
The following are the elements of offences under Section 174 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Investigation: An investigation must be conducted under Section 173.
 Sufficient evidence: There must be no sufficient evidence.
 Commitment of accused: The accused must not be committed for trial.
Application of Section 174
Section 174 of the IPC applies to all cases where an investigation under Section 173 does not result in sufficient
evidence to commit the accused for trial. This includes cases where the evidence is not strong enough, or where the
evidence is not admissible in court.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 90

Punishment for offences under Section 174

There is no punishment for offences under Section 174 of the Indian Penal Code. However, a police officer who fails to
comply with the provisions of Section 174 may be liable for disciplinary action.
Conclusion
Section 174 of the IPC is an important provision that ensures that the police do not misuse their powers. It prevents
the police from arresting and detaining a person without sufficient evidence.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 174 of the IPC:
o The Magistrate may direct the police to conduct further investigation.
o The Magistrate may release the accused on his own bond.
o The Magistrate may release the accused on the bond of a surety.

SECTIONS 175

Section 175 of the Indian Penal Code

Section 175 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the omission to produce document or other thing to public servant. It
states that whoever, being legally bound to produce or deliver up any document or other thing to any public servant**,
intentionally omits to produce or deliver it up, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may
extend to one month, or with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 175
The following are the elements of offences under Section 175 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Legally bound: The person must be legally bound to produce or deliver up the document or thing.
 Omission: The person must intentionally omit to produce or deliver it up.
 Public servant: The document or thing must be produced or delivered up to a public servant.
Application of Section 175
Section 175 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person is legally bound to produce or deliver up a document or
thing to a public servant, and they intentionally omit to do so. This includes cases where the document or thing is
required by law to be produced or delivered up, or where the document or thing is required by the public servant in
the course of their official duties.
Punishment for offences under Section 175
The punishment for offences under Section 175 is imprisonment for up to one month, or a fine of up to Rs. 500, or
both.
Conclusion
Section 175 of the IPC is an important provision that ensures that public servants have access to the documents and
things that they need in order to perform their duties. It prevents people from withholding documents or things from
public servants, which could obstruct the course of justice.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 175 of the IPC:
o The phrase "legally bound" means that the person must have a legal obligation to produce or deliver up the
document or thing.
o The phrase "public servant" has the same meaning as it does in Section 21 of the IPC.
o The offence of omission to produce document or other thing to public servant is a cognizable offence, which
means that it can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
o The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.

SECTIONS 176
Section 176 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 176 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the omission to give notice or information to public servant. It states
that whoever, being legally bound to give notice or information to any public servant as to the commission of an
offence, intentionally omits to give such notice or information, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term
which may extend to one month, or with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 176
The following are the elements of offences under Section 176 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Legally bound: The person must be legally bound to give notice or information to the public servant.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 91

 Omission: The person must intentionally omit to give such notice or information.
 Public servant: The notice or information must be given to a public servant.
 Offence: The offence must be one that the person is legally bound to report.
Application of Section 176
Section 176 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person is legally bound to give notice or information to a public
servant about the commission of an offence, and they intentionally omit to do so. This includes cases where the
offence is required by law to be reported, or where the offence is required by the public servant in the course of their
official duties.
Punishment for offences under Section 176
The punishment for offences under Section 176 is imprisonment for up to one month, or a fine of up to Rs. 500, or
both.
Conclusion
Section 176 of the IPC is an important provision that ensures that public servants are aware of offences that have been
committed. It prevents people from concealing information about offences, which could obstruct the course of justice.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 176 of the IPC:
o The phrase "legally bound" means that the person must have a legal obligation to give notice or information
to the public servant.
o The phrase "public servant" has the same meaning as it does in Section 21 of the IPC.
o The offence of omission to give notice or information to public servant is a cognizable offence, which means
that it can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
o The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.

SECTIONS 177
Section 177 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 177 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the furnishing false information. It states that whoever, being legally
bound to furnish any information to any public servant, **furnishes **such information which he knows or has reason
to believe to be false, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with
fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 177
The following are the elements of offences under Section 177 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Legally bound: The person must be legally bound to furnish the information.
 False information: The information must be false.
 Knowledge: The person must know or have reason to believe that the information is false.
 Public servant: The information must be furnished to a public servant.
Application of Section 177
Section 177 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person is legally bound to furnish information to a public servant,
and they furnish false information. This includes cases where the information is required by law to be furnished, or
where the information is required by the public servant in the course of their official duties.
Punishment for offences under Section 177
The punishment for offences under Section 177 is imprisonment for up to six months, or a fine of up to Rs. 1,000, or
both.
Conclusion
Section 177 of the IPC is an important provision that ensures that public servants have access to accurate information.
It prevents people from providing false information to public servants, which could obstruct the course of justice.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 177 of the IPC:
 The phrase "legally bound" means that the person must have a legal obligation to furnish the information.
 The phrase "public servant" has the same meaning as it does in Section 21 of the IPC.
 The offence of furnishing false information is a cognizable offence, which means that it can be investigated by
the police without a warrant.
 The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 92

SECTIONS 178
Section 178 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 178 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the refusal to answer to lawful questions. It states that whoever, being
legally bound to answer to any lawful question put to him by a public servant in the discharge of his official duty,
refuses to answer such question, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one
month, or with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 178
The following are the elements of offences under Section 178 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Legally bound: The person must be legally bound to answer the question.
 Lawful question: The question must be a lawful question.
 Public servant: The question must be put to the person by a public servant in the discharge of their official
duty.
 Refusal: The person must refuse to answer the question.
Application of Section 178
Section 178 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person is legally bound to answer a question put to them by a public
servant in the discharge of their official duty, and they refuse to do so. This includes cases where the question is
required by law to be answered, or where the question is required by the public servant in the course of their official
duties.
Punishment for offences under Section 178
The punishment for offences under Section 178 is imprisonment for up to one month, or a fine of up to Rs. 500, or
both.
Conclusion
Section 178 of the IPC is an important provision that ensures that public servants are able to obtain the information
they need in order to perform their duties. It prevents people from refusing to answer questions from public servants,
which could obstruct the course of justice.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 178 of the IPC:
o The phrase "legally bound" means that the person must have a legal obligation to answer the question.
o The phrase "public servant" has the same meaning as it does in Section 21 of the IPC.
o The offence of refusal to answer to lawful questions is a cognizable offence, which means that it can be
investigated by the police without a warrant.
o The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.

 SECTIONS 179
Section 179 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 179 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant. It
states that **whoever, knowing that **an order has been promulgated by a public servant, disobeys such order, shall,
if such disobedience causes or is likely to cause obstruction, annoyance or injury to any person, or danger to human
life, health, or safety, or damage to any property, be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend
to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 179
The following are the elements of offences under Section 179 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Order: There must be an order.
 Promulgated: The order must be promulgated by a public servant.
 Knowledge: The person must know that the order has been promulgated by a public servant.
 Disobedience: The person must disobey the order.
 Obstruction, annoyance, injury, danger, or damage: The disobedience must cause or be likely to cause
obstruction, annoyance, injury, danger, or damage.
Application of Section 179
Section 179 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person disobeys an order that has been promulgated by a public
servant, and the disobedience causes or is likely to cause obstruction, annoyance, injury, danger, or damage. This

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 93

includes cases where the order is required by law to be obeyed, or where the order is required by the public servant in
the course of their official duties.
Punishment for offences under Section 179
The punishment for offences under Section 179 is imprisonment for up to six months, or a fine of up to Rs. 1,000, or
both.
Conclusion
Section 179 of the IPC is an important provision that ensures that public servants are able to enforce their orders. It
prevents people from disobeying orders from public servants, which could obstruct the course of justice.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 179 of the IPC:
o The phrase "order" has a wide meaning and can include any type of order, including verbal orders and written
orders.
o The phrase "public servant" has the same meaning as it does in Section 21 of the IPC.
o The offence of disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant is a cognizable offence, which means
that it can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
o The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.

SECTIONS 180
Section 180 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 180 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the obstruction to public servant in discharge of public functions. It
states that **whoever **obstructs **a public servant in the discharge of **his public functions, or **attempts to
**obstruct him, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine
which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 180
The following are the elements of offences under Section 180 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Obstruction: The person must obstruct a public servant in the discharge of their public functions.
 Public servant: The public servant must be a public servant.
 Discharge of public functions: The public servant must be in the discharge of their public functions.
 Attempt: The person must attempt to obstruct the public servant.
Application of Section 180
Section 180 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person obstructs a public servant in the discharge of their public
functions, or attempts to obstruct the public servant. This includes cases where the public servant is trying to prevent
a crime, or where the public servant is trying to enforce the law.
Punishment for offences under Section 180
The punishment for offences under Section 180 is imprisonment for up to six months, or a fine of up to Rs. 1,000, or
both.
Conclusion
Section 180 of the IPC is an important provision that ensures that public servants are able to perform their duties
without hindrance. It prevents people from obstructing public servants, which could obstruct the course of justice.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 180 of the IPC:
o The phrase "public servant" has the same meaning as it does in Section 21 of the IPC.
o The offence of obstruction to public servant in discharge of public functions is a cognizable offence, which
means that it can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
o The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.

SECTIONS 181
Section 180 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 180 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the obstruction to public servant in discharge of public functions. It
states that **whoever **obstructs **a public servant in the discharge of **his public functions, or **attempts to
**obstruct him, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine
which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 180

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 94

The following are the elements of offences under Section 180 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Obstruction: The person must obstruct a public servant in the discharge of their public functions.
 Public servant: The public servant must be a public servant.
 Discharge of public functions: The public servant must be in the discharge of their public functions.
 Attempt: The person must attempt to obstruct the public servant.
Application of Section 180
Section 180 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person obstructs a public servant in the discharge of their public
functions, or attempts to obstruct the public servant. This includes cases where the public servant is trying to prevent
a crime, or where the public servant is trying to enforce the law.
Punishment for offences under Section 180
The punishment for offences under Section 180 is imprisonment for up to six months, or a fine of up to Rs. 1,000, or
both.
Conclusion
Section 180 of the IPC is an important provision that ensures that public servants are able to perform their duties
without hindrance. It prevents people from obstructing public servants, which could obstruct the course of justice.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 180 of the IPC:
o The phrase "public servant" has the same meaning as it does in Section 21 of the IPC.
o The offence of obstruction to public servant in discharge of public functions is a cognizable offence, which
means that it can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
o The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.

SECTIONS 182
Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the wrongful confinement. It states that **whoever **wrongfully
**confines **any person **so **as to **deprive **such person **of his liberty of **free movement, shall be punished
with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 182
The following are the elements of offences under Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Wrongful confinement: The confinement must be wrongful.
 Deprivation of liberty: The confinement must deprive the person of their liberty of free movement.
 Person: The person must be a person.
 Free movement: The person must be deprived of their liberty of free movement.
Application of Section 182
Section 182 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person wrongfully confines another person, and the confinement
deprives the person of their liberty of free movement. This includes cases where the confinement is for a short period
of time, or where the confinement is for a longer period of time.
Punishment for offences under Section 182
The punishment for offences under Section 182 is imprisonment for up to one year, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 182 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the liberty of individuals. It prevents people from being
confined against their will, which could have serious consequences for their personal freedom.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 182 of the IPC:
o The phrase "wrongful" means that the confinement must be without lawful authority.
o The phrase "deprive of liberty" means that the person must be prevented from moving freely.
o The offence of wrongful confinement is a cognizable offence, which means that it can be investigated by the
police without a warrant.
o The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.

SECTIONS 183
Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 95

Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the wrongful confinement. It states that **whoever **wrongfully
**confines **any person **so **as to **deprive **such person **of his liberty of **free movement, shall be punished
with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 182
The following are the elements of offences under Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Wrongful confinement: The confinement must be wrongful.
 Deprivation of liberty: The confinement must deprive the person of their liberty of free movement.
 Person: The person must be a person.
 Free movement: The person must be deprived of their liberty of free movement.
Application of Section 182
Section 182 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person wrongfully confines another person, and the confinement
deprives the person of their liberty of free movement. This includes cases where the confinement is for a short period
of time, or where the confinement is for a longer period of time.
Punishment for offences under Section 182
The punishment for offences under Section 182 is imprisonment for up to one year, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 182 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the liberty of individuals. It prevents people from being
confined against their will, which could have serious consequences for their personal freedom.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 182 of the IPC:
o The phrase "wrongful" means that the confinement must be without lawful authority.
o The phrase "deprive of liberty" means that the person must be prevented from moving freely.
o The offence of wrongful confinement is a cognizable offence, which means that it can be investigated by the
police without a warrant.
o The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.

SECTIONS 184
Section 184 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 184 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the wrongful confinement with intent to extort. It states that
**whoever **wrongfully **confines **any person **so **as to **deprive **such person **of his liberty of **free
**movement, **with intent to extort money or other valuable thing from any person, shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Elements of offences under Section 184
The following are the elements of offences under Section 184 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Wrongful confinement: The confinement must be wrongful.
 Deprivation of liberty: The confinement must deprive the person of their liberty of free movement.
 Person: The person must be a person.
 Free movement: The person must be deprived of their liberty of free movement.
 Extort money or other valuable thing: The confinement must be with the intent to extort money or other
valuable thing from any person.
Application of Section 184
Section 184 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person wrongfully confines another person, and the confinement is
with the intent to extort money or other valuable thing from any person. This includes cases where the confinement is
for a short period of time, or where the confinement is for a longer period of time.
Punishment for offences under Section 184
The punishment for offences under Section 184 is imprisonment for up to ten years, and a fine.
Conclusion
Section 184 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the liberty of individuals. It prevents people from being
confined against their will for the purpose of extorting money or other valuable things.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 184 of the IPC:
 The phrase "wrongful" means that the confinement must be without lawful authority.
 The phrase "deprive of liberty" means that the person must be prevented from moving freely.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 96

 The phrase "extort money or other valuable thing" means that the confinement must be with the intent to
obtain money or other valuable thing from the person.
 The offence of wrongful confinement with intent to extort is a cognizable offence, which means that it can be
investigated by the police without a warrant.
 The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.

SECTIONS 185

Section 185 of the Indian Penal Code

Section 185 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the wrongful confinement in secret with intent to extort. It states that
**whoever **wrongfully **confines **any person **in secret **so **as to **deprive **such person **of his liberty of
**free **movement, **with intent to extort money or other valuable thing from any person, shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to fourteen years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Elements of offences under Section 185
The following are the elements of offences under Section 185 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Wrongful confinement: The confinement must be wrongful.
 Deprivation of liberty: The confinement must deprive the person of their liberty of free movement.
 Person: The person must be a person.
 Free movement: The person must be deprived of their liberty of free movement.
 Secret: The confinement must be in secret.
 Extort money or other valuable thing: The confinement must be with the intent to extort money or other
valuable thing from any person.
Application of Section 185
Section 185 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person wrongfully confines another person in secret, and the
confinement is with the intent to extort money or other valuable thing from any person. This includes cases where the
confinement is for a short period of time, or where the confinement is for a longer period of time.
Punishment for offences under Section 185
The punishment for offences under Section 185 is imprisonment for up to fourteen years, and a fine.
Conclusion
Section 185 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the liberty of individuals. It prevents people from being
confined against their will in secret for the purpose of extorting money or other valuable things.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 185 of the IPC:
o The phrase "wrongful" means that the confinement must be without lawful authority.
o The phrase "deprive of liberty" means that the person must be prevented from moving freely.
o The phrase "secret" means that the confinement must be done in such a way that the person is not aware of
where they are being confined.
o The phrase "extort money or other valuable thing" means that the confinement must be with the intent to
obtain money or other valuable thing from the person.
o The offence of wrongful confinement in secret with intent to extort is a cognizable offence, which means that
it can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
o The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.

SECTIONS 186
Section 185 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 185 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the wrongful confinement in secret with intent to extort. It states that
**whoever **wrongfully **confines **any person **in secret **so **as to **deprive **such person **of his liberty of
**free **movement, **with intent to extort money or other valuable thing from any person, shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to fourteen years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Elements of offences under Section 185
The following are the elements of offences under Section 185 of the Indian Penal Code:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 97

 Wrongful confinement: The confinement must be wrongful.

 Deprivation of liberty: The confinement must deprive the person of their liberty of free movement.
 Person: The person must be a person.
 Free movement: The person must be deprived of their liberty of free movement.
 Secret: The confinement must be in secret.
 Extort money or other valuable thing: The confinement must be with the intent to extort money or other
valuable thing from any person.
Application of Section 185
Section 185 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person wrongfully confines another person in secret, and the
confinement is with the intent to extort money or other valuable thing from any person. This includes cases where the
confinement is for a short period of time, or where the confinement is for a longer period of time.
Punishment for offences under Section 185
The punishment for offences under Section 185 is imprisonment for up to fourteen years, and a fine.
Conclusion
Section 185 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the liberty of individuals. It prevents people from being
confined against their will in secret for the purpose of extorting money or other valuable things.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 185 of the IPC:
o The phrase "wrongful" means that the confinement must be without lawful authority.
o The phrase "deprive of liberty" means that the person must be prevented from moving freely.
o The phrase "secret" means that the confinement must be done in such a way that the person is not aware of
where they are being confined.
o The phrase "extort money or other valuable thing" means that the confinement must be with the intent to
obtain money or other valuable thing from the person.
o The offence of wrongful confinement in secret with intent to extort is a cognizable offence, which means that
it can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
o The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.

SECTIONS 187
Section 187 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 187 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the wrongful confinement for compelling person to do an illegal act. It
states that **whoever **wrongfully **confines **any person **so **as to **deprive **such person **of his liberty of
**free **movement, **with intent to compel **such person **to do an illegal act, shall be punished with imprisonment
of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Elements of offences under Section 187
The following are the elements of offences under Section 187 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Wrongful confinement: The confinement must be wrongful.
 Deprivation of liberty: The confinement must deprive the person of their liberty of free movement.
 Person: The person must be a person.
 Free movement: The person must be deprived of their liberty of free movement.
 Illegal act: The confinement must be with the intent to compel the person to do an illegal act.
Application of Section 187
Section 187 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person wrongfully confines another person, and the confinement is
with the intent to compel the person to do an illegal act. This includes cases where the confinement is for a short
period of time, or where the confinement is for a longer period of time.
Punishment for offences under Section 187
The punishment for offences under Section 187 is imprisonment for up to seven years, and a fine.
Conclusion
Section 187 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the liberty of individuals. It prevents people from being
confined against their will for the purpose of compelling them to do an illegal act.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 187 of the IPC:
o The phrase "wrongful" means that the confinement must be without lawful authority.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 98

o The phrase "deprive of liberty" means that the person must be prevented from moving freely.
o The phrase "illegal act" means that the confinement must be with the intent to compel the person to do an
illegal act.
o The offence of wrongful confinement for compelling person to do an illegal act is a cognizable offence, which
means that it can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
o The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.

 SECTIONS 188
Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code deals with obstructing public servant in discharge of public functions. It states
that **whoever **obstructs **any public servant **in the discharge of **his **public functions **wilfully shall be
punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month, or with fine which may extend to two
hundred rupees, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 188
The following are the elements of offences under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Public servant: The person must be a public servant.
 Public functions: The public servant must be in the discharge of their public functions.
 Obstruct: The person must obstruct the public servant.
 Wilfully: The obstruction must be done wilfully.
Application of Section 188
Section 188 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person obstructs a public servant in the discharge of their public
functions. This includes cases where the obstruction is physical, or where the obstruction is verbal.
Punishment for offences under Section 188
The punishment for offences under Section 188 is simple imprisonment for up to one month, or a fine of up to Rs. 200,
or both.
Conclusion
Section 188 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the ability of public servants to perform their duties. It
prevents people from obstructing public servants in the discharge of their public functions.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 188 of the IPC:
o The phrase "public servant" has the same meaning as it does in Section 21 of the IPC.
o The offence of obstructing public servant in discharge of public functions is a cognizable offence, which means
that it can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
o The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.

SECTIONS 189
Section 189 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 189 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the threat of injury to public servant. It states that **whoever **holds
out **any threat of injury to any public servant, **or **to any person in whom he believes that public servant to be
interested, **for the purpose of inducing **that public servant **to do or to forbear to do any act **connected with the
exercise of the public functions of such public servant, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a
term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 189
The following are the elements of offences under Section 189 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Threat: The person must make a threat.
 Injury: The threat must be of injury.
 Public servant: The person must be a public servant.
 Public functions: The public servant must be in the discharge of their public functions.
 Induce: The threat must be for the purpose of inducing the public servant to do or forbear to do an act
connected with the exercise of their public functions.
Application of Section 189

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 99

Section 189 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person threatens a public servant with injury for the purpose of
inducing the public servant to do or forbear to do an act connected with the exercise of their public functions. This
includes cases where the threat is made verbally, or where the threat is made in writing.
Punishment for offences under Section 189
The punishment for offences under Section 189 is imprisonment for up to two years, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 189 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the ability of public servants to perform their duties
without fear of intimidation. It prevents people from threatening public servants in order to get them to do something
they would not otherwise do.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 189 of the IPC:
o The phrase "public servant" has the same meaning as it does in Section 21 of the IPC.
o The offence of threat of injury to public servant is a cognizable offence, which means that it can be
investigated by the police without a warrant.
o The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.

SECTIONS 190
Section 190 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 190 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the punishment for criminal intimidation. It states that **whoever
**threatens **any person **with **any injury to **his **person, **or **to **his **property, **or **to **the **person
**or **property **of **any **relative **of **his, **or **with **the **destruction **of **any **property **belonging to
**him, **or **with **any **other **injury **to **his **interests, **with **intent to **cause **him **or **any **such
**person **any **fear **or terror, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may
extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 190
The following are the elements of offences under Section 190 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Threat: The person must make a threat.
 Injury: The threat must be of injury.
 Person: The person must be a person.
 Interests: The threat must be to the interests of the person.
 Intent: The threat must be made with the intent to cause the person fear or terror.
Application of Section 190
Section 190 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person threatens another person with injury or damage to their
interests, with the intent to cause them fear or terror. This includes cases where the threat is made verbally, or where
the threat is made in writing.
Punishment for offences under Section 190
The punishment for offences under Section 190 is imprisonment for up to two years, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 190 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the personal liberty and property of individuals. It
prevents people from threatening others in order to intimidate them or to get them to do something they would not
otherwise do.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 190 of the IPC:
o The phrase "injury" has the same meaning as it does in Section 44 of the IPC.
o The phrase "interests" has a wide meaning, and includes both pecuniary and non-pecuniary interests.
o The offence of criminal intimidation is a cognizable offence, which means that it can be investigated by the
police without a warrant.
o The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.

FALSE EVIDENCE
SECTIONS 191
Section 191 of the Indian Penal Code

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 100

Section 191 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the punishment for giving false evidence. It states that **whoever
**gives **any **false **evidence **in **any **judicial proceeding **or **in **any **other **legal **proceeding, shall be
punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with
both.
Elements of offences under Section 191
The following are the elements of offences under Section 191 of the Indian Penal Code:
 False evidence: The evidence must be false.
 Judicial proceeding: The evidence must be given in a judicial proceeding.
 Legal proceeding: The evidence must be given in a legal proceeding.
 Intent: The person must give the false evidence with the intent to deceive the court.
Application of Section 191
Section 191 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person gives false evidence in a judicial proceeding or in any other
legal proceeding. This includes cases where the false evidence is given orally, or where the false evidence is given in
writing.
Punishment for offences under Section 191
The punishment for offences under Section 191 is imprisonment for up to seven years, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 191 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the integrity of the judicial system. It prevents people
from giving false evidence in order to deceive the court and to influence the outcome of a case.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 191 of the IPC:
 The phrase "judicial proceeding" has the same meaning as it does in Section 2(h) of the IPC.
 The phrase "legal proceeding" has a wide meaning, and includes both civil and criminal proceedings.
 The offence of giving false evidence is a cognizable offence, which means that it can be investigated by the
police without a warrant.
 The offence is also a non-bailable offence, which means that the accused person cannot be released on bail
after they have been arrested.
Fabricating false evidence
In addition to giving false evidence, the IPC also prohibits fabricating false evidence. Section 192 of the IPC states that
**whoever **fabricates **any **evidence **for the purpose of being used **in **any **judicial proceeding **or **in
**any **other **legal **proceeding, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may
extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both.
The elements of offences under Section 192 are the same as the elements of offences under Section 191, with the
additional element that the person must fabricate the evidence with the intent that it be used in a judicial proceeding
or other legal proceeding.
The punishment for offences under Section 192 is the same as the punishment for offences under Section 191.
Conclusion
The offences of giving false evidence and fabricating false evidence are serious offences that can have a significant
impact on the judicial system. These offences are punishable by imprisonment, and in some cases, the offender may
also be liable to a fine.
SECTIONS 197
Section 197 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 197 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the **punishment for **issuing or signing false certificate. It states
that **whoever **issues **or **signs **any **certificate **required by law **to **be given or signed, **knowing or
believing that **such certificate **is **false in **any material point, **shall be punished in the same manner as if he
had given false evidence.
Elements of offences under Section 197
The following are the elements of offences under Section 197 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Certificate: The certificate must be a certificate.
 Required by law: The certificate must be required by law.
 False: The certificate must be false in any material point.
 Knowledge or belief: The person must know or believe that the certificate is false.
Application of Section 197

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 101

Section 197 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person issues or signs a certificate that is required by law, and the
certificate is false in any material point. This includes cases where the person knows or believes that the certificate is
false, or cases where the person is reckless as to whether the certificate is false.
Punishment for offences under Section 197
The punishment for offences under Section 197 is the same as the punishment for giving false evidence, which is
imprisonment for up to seven years, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 197 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the integrity of the judicial system. It prevents people
from issuing or signing false certificates in order to deceive the court and to influence the outcome of a case.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 197 of the IPC:
 The phrase "certificate" has a wide meaning, and includes any document that is issued by a person in a
position of authority.
 The phrase "material point" means a point that is relevant to the purpose for which the certificate is required.
 The offence of issuing or signing a false certificate is a cognizable offence, which means that it can be
investigated by the police without a warrant.
 The offence is also a non-bailable offence, which means that the accused person cannot be released on bail
after they have been arrested.
Other related provisions
In addition to Section 197, there are a number of other provisions in the IPC that deal with false certificates. These
include:
 Section 467: Punishment for forgery of valuable security, will, etc.
 Section 468: Punishment for forgery for the purpose of cheating
 Section 471: Punishment for using as genuine a forged document
These provisions are all designed to protect the integrity of important documents and to prevent people from using
false documents to deceive others.
SECTIONS 208
Section 208 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 208 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the **punishment for **fraudulently suffering decree for sum not due.
It states that **whoever **fraudulently **causes or suffer a decree or order to be passed against him **at the suit of
any person for a sum not due, **or for a larger sum than is due, **or for any property or interest in property to which
he is not entitled, **or fraudulently causes or suffers a decree or order to be executed against him after it has been
satisfied, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with
fine, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 208
The following are the elements of offences under Section 208 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Fraudulently: The person must act fraudulently.
 Decree: The decree must be a decree.
 Sum not due: The sum must not be due.
 Property or interest in property: The property or interest in property must not be due.
 Execution: The decree or order must be executed.
Application of Section 208
Section 208 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person fraudulently causes or suffers a decree or order to be passed
against them for a sum not due, or for a larger sum than is due, or for any property or interest in property to which
they are not entitled, or fraudulently causes or suffers a decree or order to be executed against them after it has been
satisfied.
Punishment for offences under Section 208
The punishment for offences under Section 208 is imprisonment for up to two years, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 208 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the interests of individuals. It prevents people from
being subjected to fraudulent decrees or orders, and it prevents people from being executed against for sums that they
do not owe.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 208 of the IPC:
o The phrase "fraudulently" means that the person must act with the intent to deceive the court.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 102

o The phrase "sum not due" means that the sum must not be owed by the person.
o The phrase "property or interest in property" means that the property or interest in property must not belong
to the person.
o The offence of fraudulently suffering decree for sum not due is a cognizable offence, which means that it can
be investigated by the police without a warrant.
o The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.

SECTIONS 209

Section 209 of the Indian Penal Code

Section 209 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the **punishment for **dishonestly making false claim in Court. It
states that **whoever fraudulently or dishonestly **makes **in a Court of Justice any claim which he knows to be false,
shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or
with both.
Elements of offences under Section 209
The following are the elements of offences under Section 209 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Fraudulently: The person must act fraudulently.
 Dishonestly: The person must act dishonestly.
 Claim: The claim must be a claim.
 False: The claim must be false.
 Court of Justice: The claim must be made in a Court of Justice.
Application of Section 209
Section 209 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person fraudulently or dishonestly makes a claim in a Court of
Justice that they know to be false. This includes cases where the claim is made orally, or where the claim is made in
writing.
Punishment for offences under Section 209
The punishment for offences under Section 209 is imprisonment for up to two years, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 209 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the integrity of the judicial system. It prevents people
from making false claims in Court in order to deceive the court and to influence the outcome of a case.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 209 of the IPC:
 The phrase "fraudulently" means that the person must act with the intent to deceive the court.
 The phrase "dishonestly" means that the person must act with the knowledge that the claim is false.
 The phrase "Court of Justice" means a court of law.
 The offence of dishonestly making false claim in Court is a cognizable offence, which means that it can be
investigated by the police without a warrant.
 The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.
Other related provisions
In addition to Section 209, there are a number of other provisions in the IPC that deal with false claims. These include:
 Section 191: Punishment for giving false evidence
 Section 192: Punishment for fabricating false evidence
These provisions are all designed to protect the integrity of the judicial system and to prevent people from making
false claims in Court.

SECTIONS 210
Section 210 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 210 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the **punishment for **fraudulently obtaining decree for sum not due.
It states that **whoever **fraudulently **obtains a decree or order against any person for a sum not due, or for a
larger sum than is due, or for any property or interest in property to which he is not entitled, or fraudulently suffers or

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 103

permits any such act to be done in his name, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 210
The following are the elements of offences under Section 210 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Fraudulently: The person must act fraudulently.
 Decree: The decree must be a decree.
 Sum not due: The sum must not be due.
 Property or interest in property: The property or interest in property must not be due.
 Execution: The decree or order must be executed.
Application of Section 210
Section 210 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person fraudulently obtains a decree or order against them for a
sum not due, or for a larger sum than is due, or for any property or interest in property to which they are not entitled,
or fraudulently suffers or permits any such act to be done in their name.
Punishment for offences under Section 210
The punishment for offences under Section 210 is imprisonment for up to two years, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 210 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the interests of individuals. It prevents people from
being subjected to fraudulent decrees or orders, and it prevents people from being executed against for sums that they
do not owe.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 210 of the IPC:
 The phrase "fraudulently" means that the person must act with the intent to deceive the court.
 The phrase "sum not due" means that the sum must not be owed by the person.
 The phrase "property or interest in property" means that the property or interest in property must not belong
to the person.
 The offence of fraudulently obtaining decree for sum not due is a cognizable offence, which means that it can
be investigated by the police without a warrant.
 The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.

SECTIONS 211

Section 211 of the Indian Penal Code

Section 211 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the **punishment for false charge of offence made with intent to
injure. It states that **whoever, with intent to injure any person, institutes or causes to be instituted any criminal
proceeding against that person, or makes or causes to be made any **accusation against that person **of any offence,
knowing that such person is innocent, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which
may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 211
The following are the elements of offences under Section 211 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Intent to injure: The person must have the intent to injure the other person.
 Criminal proceeding: The criminal proceeding must be a criminal proceeding.
 Accusation: The accusation must be an accusation.
 Innocent: The person must be innocent.
Application of Section 211
Section 211 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person institutes or causes to be instituted any criminal proceeding
against another person, or makes or causes to be made any accusation against another person of any offence, knowing
that the other person is innocent, with the intent to injure the other person.
Punishment for offences under Section 211
The punishment for offences under Section 211 is imprisonment for up to seven years, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 211 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the interests of individuals. It prevents people from
being subjected to false criminal proceedings, and it prevents people from being accused of offences that they did not
commit.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 104

Here are some additional points to note about Section 211 of the IPC:
o The phrase "intent to injure" means that the person must act with the intent to harm the other person.
o The phrase "criminal proceeding" means a proceeding that is initiated by the police or by a court of law.
o The phrase "accusation" means a statement that someone has committed an offence.
o The offence of false charge of offence made with intent to injure is a cognizable offence, which means that it
can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
o The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.

SECTIONS 212
Section 212 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 212 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the **punishment for false charge of offence made with intent to
extort. It states that **whoever, with intent to extort money or other valuable thing from any person, institutes or
causes to be instituted any criminal proceeding against that person, or makes or causes to be made any **accusation
against that person **of any offence, knowing that such person is innocent, shall be punished with imprisonment of
either description for a term which may extend to ten years, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 212
The following are the elements of offences under Section 212 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Intent to extort: The person must have the intent to extort money or other valuable thing from the other
person.
 Criminal proceeding: The criminal proceeding must be a criminal proceeding.
 Accusation: The accusation must be an accusation.
 Innocent: The person must be innocent.
Application of Section 212
Section 212 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person institutes or causes to be instituted any criminal proceeding
against another person, or makes or causes to be made any accusation against another person of any offence, knowing
that the other person is innocent, with the intent to extort money or other valuable thing from the other person.
Punishment for offences under Section 212
The punishment for offences under Section 212 is imprisonment for up to ten years, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 212 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the interests of individuals. It prevents people from
being subjected to false criminal proceedings, and it prevents people from being accused of offences that they did not
commit. It also protects people from being extorted by others.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 212 of the IPC:
o The phrase "intent to extort" means that the person must act with the intent to obtain money or other
valuable thing from the other person by force or threat.
o The phrase "criminal proceeding" means a proceeding that is initiated by the police or by a court of law.
o The phrase "accusation" means a statement that someone has committed an offence.
o The offence of false charge of offence made with intent to extort is a cognizable offence, which means that it
can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
o The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after they
have been arrested.

OFFENCES RELATING TO COINS AND GOVERNMENT STAMPS

The Indian Penal Code (IPC) contains a number of offences relating to coins and government stamps. These offences
are designed to protect the integrity of the monetary system and to ensure that government stamps are not used for
fraudulent purposes.
Some of the key offences relating to coins and government stamps in the IPC include:
 Counterfeiting: This is the offence of making a false coin or government stamp with the intent to deceive. The
punishment for counterfeiting is imprisonment for up to 10 years, or a fine, or both.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 105

 Altering coins or government stamps: This is the offence of altering a coin or government stamp with the
intent to deceive. The punishment for altering coins or government stamps is imprisonment for up to 7 years,
or a fine, or both.
 Possession of counterfeit coins or government stamps: This is the offence of possessing counterfeit coins or
government stamps with the intent to use them or to sell them. The punishment for possession of counterfeit
coins or government stamps is imprisonment for up to 3 years, or a fine, or both.
 Using as genuine a counterfeit coin or government stamp: This is the offence of using a counterfeit coin or
government stamp as if it were genuine. The punishment for using as genuine a counterfeit coin or
government stamp is imprisonment for up to 7 years, or a fine, or both.
In addition to the offences listed above, there are a number of other offences relating to coins and government stamps
in the IPC. These offences include:
 Fraudulently or dishonestly diminishing the weight or altering the composition of coins: This is the offence of
fraudulently or dishonestly diminishing the weight or altering the composition of coins. The punishment for
this offence is imprisonment for up to 7 years, or a fine, or both.
 Using as genuine any coin knowing it to be counterfeit: This is the offence of using as genuine any coin
knowing it to be counterfeit. The punishment for this offence is imprisonment for up to 7 years, or a fine, or
both.
 Using as genuine any government stamp knowing it to be counterfeit: This is the offence of using as genuine
any government stamp knowing it to be counterfeit. The punishment for this offence is imprisonment for up
to 7 years, or a fine, or both.
The offences relating to coins and government stamps in the IPC are serious offences that can result in significant
penalties. It is important to be aware of these offences and to take steps to avoid committing them.

SECTIONS 230
Section 230 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 230 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the **punishment for **uttering forged coin. It states that
**whoever **utters any coin knowing the same to be counterfeit, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 230
The following are the elements of offences under Section 230 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Uttering: The coin must be uttered.
 Counterfeit: The coin must be counterfeit.
 Knowing: The person must know that the coin is counterfeit.
Application of Section 230
Section 230 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person utters a counterfeit coin, knowing that the coin is
counterfeit. This includes cases where the person utters the coin in payment for goods or services, or in any other
way.
Punishment for offences under Section 230
The punishment for offences under Section 230 is imprisonment for up to seven years, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 230 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the integrity of the monetary system. It prevents
people from using counterfeit coins to defraud others.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 230 of the IPC:
 The phrase "uttering" means to put into circulation.
 The phrase "counterfeit" means to make a false coin.
 The phrase "knowing" means that the person must be aware that the coin is counterfeit.
 The offence of uttering a counterfeit coin is a cognizable offence, which means that it can be investigated
by the police without a warrant.
 The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after
they have been arrested.

SECTIONS 231
Section 231 of the Indian Penal Code

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 106

Section 231 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the **punishment for **counterfeiting coin. It states that
**whoever **counterfeits any coin, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years,
and shall also be liable to fine.
Elements of offences under Section 231
The following are the elements of offences under Section 231 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Counterfeiting: The coin must be counterfeited.
 Coin: The coin must be a coin.
Application of Section 231
Section 231 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person counterfeits a coin. This includes cases where the person
counterfeits a coin by making a false coin, or by altering a genuine coin.
Punishment for offences under Section 231
The punishment for offences under Section 231 is imprisonment for up to ten years, and a fine.
Conclusion
Section 231 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the integrity of the monetary system. It prevents
people from making counterfeit coins that could be used to defraud others.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 231 of the IPC:
 The phrase "counterfeiting" means to make a false coin.
 The phrase "coin" means a piece of metal that is stamped with an official design and is used as money.
 The offence of counterfeiting a coin is a cognizable offence, which means that it can be investigated by the
police without a warrant.
 The offence is also a non-bailable offence, which means that the accused person cannot be released on bail
after they have been arrested.

SECTIONS 232
Section 232 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 232 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the **punishment for **counterfeiting Government stamp. It states
that **whoever **counterfeits any Government stamp, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may
extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Elements of offences under Section 232
The following are the elements of offences under Section 232 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Counterfeiting: The government stamp must be counterfeited.
 Government stamp: The government stamp must be a government stamp.
Application of Section 232
Section 232 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person counterfeits a government stamp. This includes cases
where the person counterfeits a government stamp by making a false stamp, or by altering a genuine stamp.
Punishment for offences under Section 232
The punishment for offences under Section 232 is imprisonment for up to seven years, and a fine.
Conclusion
Section 232 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the integrity of the government's monetary system. It
prevents people from making counterfeit government stamps that could be used to defraud others.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 232 of the IPC:
 The phrase "counterfeiting" means to make a false government stamp.
 The phrase "government stamp" means a stamp that is issued by the government and is used for official
purposes.
 The offence of counterfeiting a government stamp is a cognizable offence, which means that it can be
investigated by the police without a warrant.
 The offence is also a non-bailable offence, which means that the accused person cannot be released on bail
after they have been arrested.

SECTIONS 233
Section 233 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 233 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the **punishment for **making or buying, etc., instruments for
counterfeiting coin or Government stamp. It states that **whoever **makes or buys, or receives, or has in his

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 107

possession, any instrument or material for the purpose of counterfeiting coin or Government stamp, knowing or
having reason to believe that it is intended to be used for that purpose, shall be punished with imprisonment for a
term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 233
The following are the elements of offences under Section 233 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Instrument: The instrument must be an instrument.
 Material: The material must be material.
 Counterfeiting coin or Government stamp: The instrument or material must be intended to be used for
counterfeiting coin or government stamp.
Application of Section 233
Section 233 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person makes or buys, or receives, or has in their possession,
any instrument or material that is intended to be used for counterfeiting coin or government stamp. This includes
cases where the person intends to use the instrument or material to counterfeit coin or government stamp, or
where the person knows that the instrument or material is likely to be used for counterfeiting coin or government
stamp.
Punishment for offences under Section 233
The punishment for offences under Section 233 is imprisonment for up to three years, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 233 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the integrity of the monetary system. It prevents
people from making or possessing instruments or materials that could be used to counterfeit coin or government
stamp.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 233 of the IPC:
o The phrase "instrument" means a tool or device that can be used to counterfeit coin or government stamp.
o The phrase "material" means a substance that can be used to counterfeit coin or government stamp.
o The offence of making or buying, or receiving, or having in possession, instruments or materials for
counterfeiting coin or government stamp is a cognizable offence, which means that it can be investigated
by the police without a warrant.
o The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after
they have been arrested.

SECTIONS 234
Section 234 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 234 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the **punishment for **having in possession counterfeit coin or
Government stamp knowing the same to be counterfeit. It states that **whoever **has in his possession any coin or
Government stamp knowing the same to be counterfeit, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which
may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 234
The following are the elements of offences under Section 234 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Coin or Government stamp: The coin or government stamp must be a coin or government stamp.
 Counterfeit: The coin or government stamp must be counterfeit.
 Knowing: The person must know that the coin or government stamp is counterfeit.
Application of Section 234
Section 234 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person has in their possession any coin or government stamp
that they know to be counterfeit. This includes cases where the person has the coin or government stamp in their
possession for the purpose of using it, or where the person has the coin or government stamp in their possession
for the purpose of selling it.
Punishment for offences under Section 234
The punishment for offences under Section 234 is imprisonment for up to two years, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 234 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the integrity of the monetary system. It prevents
people from possessing counterfeit coin or government stamp that could be used to defraud others.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 234 of the IPC:
 The phrase "coin" means a piece of metal that is stamped with an official design and is used as money.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 108

 The phrase "government stamp" means a stamp that is issued by the government and is used for official
purposes.
 The offence of having in possession counterfeit coin or government stamp knowing the same to be
counterfeit is a cognizable offence, which means that it can be investigated by the police without a
warrant.
 The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after
they have been arrested.

SECTIONS 235
Section 235 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 235 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the **punishment for **using as genuine counterfeit coin or
Government stamp. It states that **whoever **uses any coin or Government stamp knowing the same to be
counterfeit, as genuine, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, and
shall also be liable to fine.
Elements of offences under Section 235
The following are the elements of offences under Section 235 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Coin or Government stamp: The coin or government stamp must be a coin or government stamp.
 Counterfeit: The coin or government stamp must be counterfeit.
 Using as genuine: The person must use the coin or government stamp as if it were genuine.
Application of Section 235
Section 235 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person uses any coin or government stamp that they know to be
counterfeit as if it were genuine. This includes cases where the person uses the coin or government stamp in
payment for goods or services, or in any other way.
Punishment for offences under Section 235
The punishment for offences under Section 235 is imprisonment for up to seven years, and a fine.
Conclusion
Section 235 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the integrity of the monetary system. It prevents
people from using counterfeit coin or government stamp to defraud others.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 235 of the IPC:
 The phrase "coin" means a piece of metal that is stamped with an official design and is used as money.
 The phrase "government stamp" means a stamp that is issued by the government and is used for official
purposes.
 The offence of using as genuine counterfeit coin or government stamp is a cognizable offence, which
means that it can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
 The offence is also a non-bailable offence, which means that the accused person cannot be released on bail
after they have been arrested.

SECTIONS 236
Section 236 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 236 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the **punishment for **fraudulent **diminution of weight or
**altering composition of coins. It states that **whoever **fraudulently or dishonestly diminishes the weight or
alters the composition of any coin, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven
years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Elements of offences under Section 236
The following are the elements of offences under Section 236 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Coin: The coin must be a coin.
 Diminution of weight: The weight of the coin must be diminished.
 Altering the composition: The composition of the coin must be altered.
Application of Section 236
Section 236 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person fraudulently or dishonestly diminishes the weight or
alters the composition of any coin. This includes cases where the person diminishes the weight of the coin by
removing some of the metal, or where the person alters the composition of the coin by adding or removing some of
the metal.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 109

Punishment for offences under Section 236

The punishment for offences under Section 236 is imprisonment for up to seven years, and a fine.
Conclusion
Section 236 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the integrity of the monetary system. It prevents
people from diminishing the weight or altering the composition of coins in order to defraud others.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 236 of the IPC:
 The phrase "diminish" means to reduce the size or weight of something.
 The phrase "alter" means to change something.
 The offence of fraudulently or dishonestly diminishing the weight or altering the composition of any coin
is a cognizable offence, which means that it can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
 The offence is also a non-bailable offence, which means that the accused person cannot be released on bail
after they have been arrested.

SECTIONS 237
Section 237 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 237 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the **punishment for **possession of coin with intent to utter
knowing the same to be diminished or altered. It states that **whoever **has in his possession any coin, knowing
the same to be diminished or altered in weight or composition, with intent to utter the same, shall be punished
with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 237
The following are the elements of offences under Section 237 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Coin: The coin must be a coin.
 Diminished or altered in weight or composition: The coin must be diminished or altered in weight or
composition.
 Intent to utter: The person must have the intent to utter the coin.
Application of Section 237
Section 237 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person has in their possession any coin that they know to be
diminished or altered in weight or composition with the intent to utter the same. This includes cases where the
person intends to use the coin in payment for goods or services, or in any other way.
Punishment for offences under Section 237
The punishment for offences under Section 237 is imprisonment for up to three years, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 237 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the integrity of the monetary system. It prevents
people from possessing coins that have been diminished or altered in weight or composition in order to defraud
others.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 237 of the IPC:
 The phrase "diminished or altered in weight or composition" means that the coin has been made lighter or
heavier, or that the composition of the coin has been changed.
 The phrase "utter" means to put into circulation.
 The offence of possessing coin with intent to utter knowing the same to be diminished or altered is a
cognizable offence, which means that it can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
 The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after
they have been arrested.

SECTIONS 238
Section 238 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 238 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the **punishment for **import or export of counterfeits of the
Indian coin. It states that **whoever **imports into India, or exports there from, any counterfeit coin, which he
knows or has reason to believe to be a counterfeit of Indian coin, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term
which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Elements of offences under Section 238
The following are the elements of offences under Section 238 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Counterfeit coin: The coin must be a counterfeit coin.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 110

 Indian coin: The coin must be an Indian coin.

 Import or export: The coin must be imported into India or exported from India.
 Knowing: The person must know or have reason to believe that the coin is a counterfeit.
Application of Section 238
Section 238 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person imports into India or exports from India any counterfeit
coin that they know or have reason to believe is a counterfeit of Indian coin. This includes cases where the person
imports the coin for their own use, or where the person imports the coin for the purpose of selling it.
Punishment for offences under Section 238
The punishment for offences under Section 238 is imprisonment for up to ten years, and a fine.
Conclusion
Section 238 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the integrity of the Indian monetary system. It
prevents people from importing or exporting counterfeit coins that could be used to defraud others.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 238 of the IPC:
 The phrase "counterfeit coin" means a coin that is made to look like a genuine coin, but is not actually
genuine.
 The phrase "Indian coin" means a coin that is issued by the Government of India.
 The offence of importing or exporting counterfeits of the Indian coin is a cognizable offence, which means
that it can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
 The offence is also a non-bailable offence, which means that the accused person cannot be released on bail
after they have been arrested.

SECTIONS 239
Section 239 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 239 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the punishment for delivery of coin possessed with knowledge that
it is counterfeit. It states that whoever, having any counterfeit coin, which at the time when he became possessed of
it, he knew to be counterfeit, fraudulently or with intent that fraud may be committed, delivers the same to any
person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years, and shall also be liable to
fine.
Elements of offences under Section 239
The following are the elements of offences under Section 239 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Counterfeit coin: The coin must be a counterfeit coin.
 Knowing: The person must know that the coin is a counterfeit.
 Delivery: The person must deliver the coin to another person.
 Fraudulent or dishonest intent: The person must have the intent to defraud or to deceive.
Application of Section 239
Section 239 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person has in their possession any counterfeit coin that they
know to be counterfeit and they then deliver the coin to another person with the intent to defraud or to deceive.
This includes cases where the person delivers the coin in payment for goods or services, or in any other way.
Punishment for offences under Section 239
The punishment for offences under Section 239 is imprisonment for up to five years, and a fine.
Conclusion
Section 239 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the integrity of the monetary system. It prevents
people from delivering counterfeit coins to others in order to defraud them.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 239 of the IPC:
o The phrase "deliver" means to give or hand over.
o The phrase "fraudulent or dishonest intent" means that the person must intend to deceive or to cheat
another person.
o The offence of delivering a coin possessed with knowledge that it is counterfeit is a cognizable offence,
which means that it can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
o The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after
they have been arrested.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 111

SECTIONS 240
Section 240 of the Indian Penal Code
Section 240 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the **punishment for **having in possession counterfeit coin not
knowing the same to be counterfeit. It states that **whoever **has in his possession any coin, which at the time
when he became possessed of it, he did not know to be counterfeit, but which he afterwards came to know to be
counterfeit, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with
both.
Elements of offences under Section 240
The following are the elements of offences under Section 240 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Counterfeit coin: The coin must be a counterfeit coin.
 Not knowing: The person must not know that the coin is a counterfeit.
 Subsequent knowledge: The person must subsequently come to know that the coin is a counterfeit.
Application of Section 240
Section 240 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person has in their possession any counterfeit coin that they do
not know is counterfeit, but they subsequently come to know that the coin is a counterfeit. This includes cases
where the person was unaware that the coin was counterfeit when they first acquired it, or where the person was
unaware that the coin was counterfeit because they were deceived by the person who gave them the coin.
Punishment for offences under Section 240
The punishment for offences under Section 240 is imprisonment for up to two years, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 240 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the integrity of the monetary system. It prevents
people from being punished for possessing counterfeit coins if they did not know that the coins were counterfeit.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 240 of the IPC:
 The phrase "not knowing" means that the person must not have any knowledge that the coin is a
counterfeit.
 The phrase "subsequent knowledge" means that the person must come to know that the coin is a
counterfeit after they have already acquired it.
 The offence of having in possession counterfeit coin not knowing the same to be counterfeit is a cognizable
offence, which means that it can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
 The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after
they have been arrested.

SECTIONS 263

Section 263 of the Indian Penal Code

Whoever, fraudulently or with intent to cause loss to Government, erases or removes from a stamp issued by
Government for the purpose of revenue, any mark put or impressed upon such stamp for the purpose of denoting
that the same has been used, or sells or disposes of any such stamp from which such mark has been erased or
removed, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with
both.
Elements of offences under Section 263
The following are the elements of offences under Section 263 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Stamp: The stamp must be a stamp issued by the Government for the purpose of revenue.
 Mark: The mark must be a mark put or impressed upon the stamp for the purpose of denoting that the
same has been used.
 Erasing or removing: The mark must be erased or removed from the stamp.
 Fraudulent intent: The person must have the fraudulent intent to cause loss to Government.
 Sale or disposal: The person must sell or dispose of the stamp.
Application of Section 263
Section 263 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person fraudulently or with intent to cause loss to Government
erases or removes from a stamp issued by Government for the purpose of revenue, any mark put or impressed
upon such stamp for the purpose of denoting that the same has been used, or sells or disposes of any such stamp
from which such mark has been erased or removed. This includes cases where the person erases or removes the

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 112

mark from the stamp in order to reuse the stamp, or where the person sells or disposes of the stamp to someone
else who they know will reuse the stamp.
Punishment for offences under Section 263
The punishment for offences under Section 263 is imprisonment for up to three years, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 263 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the integrity of the government's revenue system. It
prevents people from erasing or removing marks from stamps in order to reuse the stamps or to sell them to
others who will reuse them.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 263 of the IPC:
 The phrase "erases or removes" means that the person must physically remove the mark from the stamp.
 The phrase "fraudulent intent" means that the person must intend to cause loss to the government by
erasing or removing the mark from the stamp.
 The offence of erasing or removing a mark from a stamp is a cognizable offence, which means that it can be
investigated by the police without a warrant.
 The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after
they have been arrested.

SECTIONS 263A
Section 263A of the Indian Penal Code
Whoever, with intent to cause loss to Government, or to any person, or to deceive any person, makes, sells, or
disposes of, or uses, any material capable of being used as a stamp, resembling in all respects, or nearly resembling,
a stamp issued by Government for the purpose of revenue, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which
may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 263A
The following are the elements of offences under Section 263A of the Indian Penal Code:
 Material: The material must be material capable of being used as a stamp.
 Resembling: The material must resemble in all respects, or nearly resemble, a stamp issued by
Government for the purpose of revenue.
 Intent: The person must have the intent to cause loss to Government, or to any person, or to deceive any
person.
 Making, selling, disposing of, or using: The person must make, sell, dispose of, or use the material.
Application of Section 263A
Section 263A of the IPC applies to all cases where a person with intent to cause loss to Government, or to any
person, or to deceive any person, makes, sells, disposes of, or uses, any material capable of being used as a stamp,
resembling in all respects, or nearly resembling, a stamp issued by Government for the purpose of revenue. This
includes cases where the person makes the material in order to use it as a counterfeit stamp, or where the person
sells or disposes of the material to someone else who they know will use it as a counterfeit stamp.
Punishment for offences under Section 263A
The punishment for offences under Section 263A is imprisonment for up to three years, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 263A of the IPC is an important provision that protects the integrity of the government's revenue system. It
prevents people from making, selling, disposing of, or using material that resembles a government stamp in order
to deceive others.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 263A of the IPC:
 The phrase "resembling" means that the material must be very similar to a government stamp.
 The phrase "intent to deceive" means that the person must intend to deceive someone into believing that
the material is a genuine government stamp.
 The offence of making, selling, disposing of, or using material resembling a government stamp is a
cognizable offence, which means that it can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
 The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after
they have been arrested.

PUBLIC NUISANCE & PRIVATE NUISANCE: OFFENCES RELATING TO RELIGION

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 113

Public nuisance and private nuisance are two types of nuisance under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Public nuisance
is an act or omission that causes harm to the public at large, while private nuisance is an act or omission that
causes harm to a specific person or group of people.
There are a number of offences relating to religion that are covered under the IPC. These offences include:
 Section 295: This section deals with the offence of insulting or attempting to insult the religion or religious
beliefs of any class of citizens of India.
 Section 296: This section deals with the offence of destroying, damaging, or defiling any place of worship,
or any object held sacred by any class of persons.
 Section 297: This section deals with the offence of offering any indignity to any person, by intentionally
touching the person with the intention of outraging the modesty, or by intentionally disrobing or
attempting to disrobe the person, or with the intention of exposing the person to the view of any other
person.
 Section 298: This section deals with the offence of wounding the religious feelings of any person, by
uttering any word or making any sound or gesture, or exhibiting any object, intending that such word or
sound or gesture or object may be perceived by that person.
These offences are important because they protect the religious freedom of all citizens of India. They also help to
ensure that religious places and objects are not desecrated or damaged.
In addition to the offences listed above, there are a number of other provisions in the IPC that can be used to
prosecute people who commit offences relating to religion. For example, Section 505(2) of the IPC deals with the
offence of making statements that are likely to incite religious hatred or ill-will.
 SECTION 295
Section 295 of the Indian Penal Code
Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of any class of citizens of India,
intentionally insults or attempts to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of that class, by words, either spoken
or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term
which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 295
The following are the elements of offences under Section 295 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Deliberate and malicious intention: The person must have the deliberate and malicious intention of
outraging the religious feelings of any class of citizens of India.
 Insult or attempt to insult: The person must insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs
of that class.
 Words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise: The insult or
attempt to insult must be done by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible
representations or otherwise.
Application of Section 295
Section 295 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the
religious feelings of any class of citizens of India, intentionally insults or attempts to insult the religion or the
religious beliefs of that class, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or
otherwise. This includes cases where the person insults or attempts to insult the religion or religious beliefs of a
class of people by making derogatory remarks about their religion, or by defiling or destroying religious symbols
or places of worship.
Punishment for offences under Section 295
The punishment for offences under Section 295 is imprisonment for up to three years, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 295 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the religious freedom of all citizens of India. It
prevents people from intentionally insulting or attempting to insult the religion or religious beliefs of any class of
citizens of India.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 295 of the IPC:
 The phrase "deliberate and malicious intention" means that the person must intend to insult the religion
or religious beliefs of a class of people with the intention of causing them harm.
 The phrase "insult" means to show disrespect or contempt for something.
 The phrase "attempt to insult" means to try to insult something.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 114

 The offence of insulting or attempting to insult the religion or religious beliefs of a class of citizens of India
is a cognizable offence, which means that it can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
 The offence is also a non-bailable offence, which means that the accused person cannot be released on bail
after they have been arrested.

SECTION 296
Section 296 of the Indian Penal Code
Whoever, with any intention of provoking a breach of the peace, or with any other malicious intention, destroys,
damages or defiles any place of worship, or any object held sacred by any class of persons, shall be punished with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 296
The following are the elements of offences under Section 296 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Intention of provoking a breach of the peace: The person must have the intention of provoking a breach of
the peace.
 Malicious intention: The person must have any other malicious intention.
 Destroys, damages or defiles: The person must destroy, damage, or defile any place of worship, or any
object held sacred by any class of persons.
Application of Section 296
Section 296 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person with any intention of provoking a breach of the peace, or
with any other malicious intention, destroys, damages or defiles any place of worship, or any object held sacred by
any class of persons. This includes cases where the person destroys, damages, or defiles a religious building, or
where the person defiles a religious symbol or object.
Punishment for offences under Section 296
The punishment for offences under Section 296 is imprisonment for up to two years, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 296 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the religious freedom of all citizens of India. It
prevents people from destroying, damaging, or defiling places of worship or objects held sacred by any class of
persons, with the intention of provoking a breach of the peace or with any other malicious intention.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 296 of the IPC:
 The phrase "place of worship" means any building or structure used for religious purposes.
 The phrase "object held sacred" means any object that is considered to be holy or sacred by any class of
persons.
 The offence of destroying, damaging, or defiling a place of worship or object held sacred is a cognizable
offence, which means that it can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
 The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after
they have been arrested.

SECTION 297
Section 296 of the Indian Penal Code
Whoever, with any intention of provoking a breach of the peace, or with any other malicious intention, destroys,
damages or defiles any place of worship, or any object held sacred by any class of persons, shall be punished with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 296
The following are the elements of offences under Section 296 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Intention of provoking a breach of the peace: The person must have the intention of provoking a breach of
the peace.
 Malicious intention: The person must have any other malicious intention.
 Destroys, damages or defiles: The person must destroy, damage, or defile any place of worship, or any
object held sacred by any class of persons.
Application of Section 296
Section 296 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person with any intention of provoking a breach of the peace, or
with any other malicious intention, destroys, damages or defiles any place of worship, or any object held sacred by

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 115

any class of persons. This includes cases where the person destroys, damages, or defiles a religious building, or
where the person defiles a religious symbol or object.
Punishment for offences under Section 296
The punishment for offences under Section 296 is imprisonment for up to two years, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 296 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the religious freedom of all citizens of India. It
prevents people from destroying, damaging, or defiling places of worship or objects held sacred by any class of
persons, with the intention of provoking a breach of the peace or with any other malicious intention.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 296 of the IPC:
 The phrase "place of worship" means any building or structure used for religious purposes.
 The phrase "object held sacred" means any object that is considered to be holy or sacred by any class of
persons.
 The offence of destroying, damaging, or defiling a place of worship or object held sacred is a cognizable
offence, which means that it can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
 The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after
they have been arrested.
SECTION 298

Section 296 of the Indian Penal Code

Whoever, with any intention of provoking a breach of the peace, or with any other malicious intention, destroys,
damages or defiles any place of worship, or any object held sacred by any class of persons, shall be punished with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of offences under Section 296
The following are the elements of offences under Section 296 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Intention of provoking a breach of the peace: The person must have the intention of provoking a breach of
the peace.
 Malicious intention: The person must have any other malicious intention.
 Destroys, damages or defiles: The person must destroy, damage, or defile any place of worship, or any
object held sacred by any class of persons.
Application of Section 296
Section 296 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person with any intention of provoking a breach of the peace, or
with any other malicious intention, destroys, damages or defiles any place of worship, or any object held sacred by
any class of persons. This includes cases where the person destroys, damages, or defiles a religious building, or
where the person defiles a religious symbol or object.
Punishment for offences under Section 296
The punishment for offences under Section 296 is imprisonment for up to two years, or a fine, or both.
Conclusion
Section 296 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the religious freedom of all citizens of India. It
prevents people from destroying, damaging, or defiling places of worship or objects held sacred by any class of
persons, with the intention of provoking a breach of the peace or with any other malicious intention.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 296 of the IPC:
 The phrase "place of worship" means any building or structure used for religious purposes.
 The phrase "object held sacred" means any object that is considered to be holy or sacred by any class of
persons.
 The offence of destroying, damaging, or defiling a place of worship or object held sacred is a cognizable
offence, which means that it can be investigated by the police without a warrant.
 The offence is also a bailable offence, which means that the accused person can be released on bail after
they have been arrested.
UNIT - 111
OFFENCES AFFECTING HUMAN LIFE

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 116

Offences affecting human life are the most serious offences in the Indian Penal Code (IPC). These offences are
punishable by death or life imprisonment.
The following are some of the offences affecting human life under the IPC:
 Murder: Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with the intention of causing death.
 Culpable homicide not amounting to murder: Culpable homicide not amounting to murder is the unlawful
killing of a human being without the intention of causing death, but with the knowledge that death may be
the likely consequence of the act.
 Voluntarily causing hurt: Voluntarily causing hurt is the intentional infliction of bodily injury on another
person.
 Grievous hurt: Grievous hurt is bodily injury which causes the victim to suffer from a disease, infirmity, or
disability which may be permanent or likely to be permanent.
 Attempt to murder: Attempt to murder is the act of trying to commit murder, but failing to do so.
These offences are punishable by death or life imprisonment, depending on the circumstances of the case.
In addition to the above offences, there are a number of other offences affecting human life under the IPC, such as:
 Kidnapping and abduction: Kidnapping and abduction is the unlawful taking away or keeping of a person
without their consent.
 Abetment of suicide: Abetment of suicide is the act of intentionally helping or encouraging another person
to commit suicide.
 Infanticide: Infanticide is the unlawful killing of a child less than twelve years of age.
 Dowry death: Dowry death is the death of a woman within seven years of her marriage caused by her
husband or any relative of her husband due to any demand for dowry or any connected act.
These offences are also punishable by death or life imprisonment, depending on the circumstances of the case.
Offences affecting human life are serious crimes that have a devastating impact on the victims and their families.
The Indian government takes these offences very seriously, and offenders are severely punished.

 SECTION 299
Sure. Here is some information about Section 299 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including the elements and
application of the section:
Section 299 of the Indian Penal Code
Whoever commits murder shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Elements of offences under Section 299
The following are the elements of offences under Section 299 of the Indian Penal Code:
 Commits murder: The person must commit murder.
 Murder: Murder is defined as the unlawful killing of a human being with intention of causing death.
Application of Section 299
Section 299 of the IPC applies to all cases where a person commits murder. This includes cases where the person
kills another person with the intention of causing death, or where the person kills another person in the heat of
passion.
Punishment for offences under Section 299

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 117

The punishment for offences under Section 299 is death, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Conclusion
Section 299 of the IPC is an important provision that protects the lives of all citizens of India. It defines murder and
sets out the punishment for this offence. The punishment for murder is severe because this offence is considered to
be very serious. The law aims to deter people from committing murder and to protect the lives of others.
Here are some additional points to note about Section 299 of the IPC:
 The phrase "unlawful killing" means that the killing must be illegal.
 The phrase "human being" means any person who is alive.
 The phrase "intention of causing death" means that the person must intend to kill the other person.
 The phrase "heat of passion" means that the person was so angry that they lost control of their actions.
 The punishment for murder can be reduced if the person is convicted of a lesser offence, such as culpable
homicide not amounting to murder

 SECTION 300
Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) defines murder as the unlawful killing of a human being with the
intention of causing death.
Elements of the offence of murder
The following are the essential elements of murder under Section 300:
 Unlawful killing: The killing must be unlawful. This means that the killing must not be justified by law,
such as self-defence or defence of property.
 Human being: The victim must be a human being.
 Intention to cause death: The accused must have intended to cause the death of the victim.
Application of Section 300
Section 300 applies to any unlawful killing of a human being with the intention of causing death. This includes
killings that are premeditated, planned, and deliberate, as well as killings that are impulsive, reckless, and
negligent.
Punishment for murder
Murder is punishable by death or life imprisonment. The death penalty is only imposed in the most serious cases,
such as murders that are premeditated, planned, and deliberate, or murders that are committed in a heinous
manner.
Exceptions to Section 300
Section 300 contains a number of exceptions to the definition of murder. These exceptions are:
 Act done in exercise of right of private defence of person or property: If the accused kills the victim in
order to protect himself or herself or his or her property from unlawful aggression, then the accused will
not be guilty of murder.
 Act done by public servant or by person acting in aid of public servant in good faith, for the advancement
of public justice: If the accused kills the victim in good faith in order to advance public justice, then the
accused will not be guilty of murder.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 118

 Act done in execution of sentence of court: If the accused kills the victim in execution of a sentence of
death passed by a court of law, then the accused will not be guilty of murder.
 Act done by consent of person killed: If the victim consents to be killed, then the accused will not be guilty
of murder.
If the accused is able to prove that one of these exceptions applies, then they will not be guilty of murder.
Examples of murder
The following are some examples of murder under Section 300:
 A person shoots and kills another person with the intention of causing death.
 A person stabs another person with a knife with the intention of causing death.
 A person poisons another person with the intention of causing death.
 A person runs over another person with a car with the intention of causing death.
 A person sets fire to a building with the intention of causing death.
Conclusion
Section 300 is a very important provision of the IPC because it defines the most serious crime in the Indian
criminal law system. Murder is punishable by death or life imprisonment. The Supreme Court of India has
interpreted Section 300 in a number of cases to ensure that it is applied fairly and consistently.
 SECTION 301
Section 301 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
Culpable homicide not amounting to murder is the unlawful killing of a human being without the intention of
causing death, but with the knowledge that death may be the likely consequence of the act.
Elements of the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder
The following are the essential elements of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 301:
 Unlawful killing: The killing must be unlawful. This means that the killing must not be justified by law,
such as self-defence or defence of property.
 Human being: The victim must be a human being.
 Knowledge that death may be the likely consequence of the act: The accused must have knowledge that
death may be the likely consequence of their act. This knowledge does not have to be certain, but it must
be more than a mere possibility.
Application of Section 301
Section 301 applies to any unlawful killing of a human being without the intention of causing death, but with the
knowledge that death may be the likely consequence of the act. This includes killings that are committed
recklessly, negligently, or under the influence of extreme emotions such as anger or passion.
Punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder
Culpable homicide not amounting to murder is punishable by imprisonment for life or imprisonment of any term
not less than seven years, and may also extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Exceptions to Section 301
Section 301 does not apply to killings that are committed in self-defence or defence of property, or to killings that
are committed in the execution of a sentence of death passed by a court of law.
Examples of culpable homicide not amounting to murder
The following are some examples of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 301:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 119

 A person shoots and kills another person while driving recklessly.

 A person stabs another person while arguing in a fit of rage.
 A person poisons another person while trying to scare them.
 A person sets fire to a building while trying to burn down a rival business.
 A person drives a car into a crowd of people while trying to escape from a police chase.
Conclusion
Section 301 is an important provision of the IPC because it provides a punishment for unlawful killings of human
beings that do not meet the requirements of murder. Culpable homicide not amounting to murder is punishable by
imprisonment for life or imprisonment of any term not less than seven years, and may also extend to ten years, and
shall also be liable to fine

 SECTION 302
Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the offence of murder. Murder is the unlawful killing of a
human being with the intention of causing death.
Elements of the offence of murder
The following are the essential elements of murder under Section 302:
 Unlawful killing: The killing must be unlawful. This means that the killing must not be justified by law,
such as self-defence or defence of property.
 Human being: The victim must be a human being.
 Intention to cause death: The accused must have intended to cause the death of the victim.
Application of Section 302
Section 302 applies to any unlawful killing of a human being with the intention of causing death. This includes
killings that are premeditated, planned, and deliberate, as well as killings that are impulsive, reckless, and
negligent.
Punishment for murder
Murder is punishable by death or life imprisonment. The death penalty is only imposed in the most serious cases,
such as murders that are premeditated, planned, and deliberate, or murders that are committed in a heinous
manner.
Exceptions to Section 302
Section 302 contains a number of exceptions to the definition of murder. These exceptions are the same as the
exceptions to Section 300, which are:
 Act done in exercise of right of private defence of person or property: If the accused kills the victim in
order to protect himself or herself or his or her property from unlawful aggression, then the accused will
not be guilty of murder.
 Act done by public servant or by person acting in aid of public servant in good faith, for the advancement
of public justice: If the accused kills the victim in good faith in order to advance public justice, then the
accused will not be guilty of murder.
 Act done in execution of sentence of court: If the accused kills the victim in execution of a sentence of
death passed by a court of law, then the accused will not be guilty of murder.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 120

 Act done by consent of person killed: If the victim consents to be killed, then the accused will not be guilty
of murder.
If the accused is able to prove that one of these exceptions applies, then they will not be guilty of murder.
Conclusion
Section 302 is the most serious offence under the IPC. It is punishable by death or life imprisonment. The Supreme
Court of India has interpreted Section 302 in a number of cases to ensure that it is applied fairly and consistently.

 SECTION 303
Section 303 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the offence of murder by a life convict. Murder by a life
convict is the killing of another person by a person who is already serving a life sentence for murder.
Elements of the offence of murder by a life convict
The following are the essential elements of murder by a life convict under Section 303:
 The accused must be a life convict: The accused must be a person who is already serving a life sentence for
murder.
 The accused must kill another person: The accused must kill another person.
Application of Section 303
Section 303 applies to any killing of another person by a life convict. This includes killings that are premeditated,
planned, and deliberate, as well as killings that are impulsive, reckless, and negligent.
Punishment for murder by a life convict
Murder by a life convict is punishable by death.
Exceptions to Section 303
Section 303 does not apply to killings that are committed in self-defence or defence of property, or to killings that
are committed in the execution of a sentence of death passed by a court of law.
Conclusion
Section 303 is a specific provision of the IPC that deals with the offence of murder by a life convict. It is punishable
by death. The Supreme Court of India has interpreted Section 303 in a number of cases to ensure that it is applied
fairly and consistently

 SECTION 304
Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder by
a rash or negligent act. Culpable homicide not amounting to murder by a rash or negligent act is the unlawful
killing of a human being without the intention of causing death, but as a result of rash or negligent act.
Elements of the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder by a rash or negligent act
The following are the essential elements of culpable homicide not amounting to murder by a rash or negligent act
under Section 304:
 Unlawful killing: The killing must be unlawful. This means that the killing must not be justified by law,
such as self-defence or defence of property.
 Human being: The victim must be a human being.
 Rash or negligent act: The accused must have committed a rash or negligent act.
 Death as a result of rash or negligent act: The death of the victim must have been caused as a result of the
accused's rash or negligent act.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 121

Application of Section 304

Section 304 applies to any unlawful killing of a human being without the intention of causing death, but as a result
of rash or negligent act. This includes killings that are committed by driving recklessly, by using dangerous
weapons without care, or by failing to take reasonable care in dangerous situations.
Punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder by a rash or negligent act
Culpable homicide not amounting to murder by a rash or negligent act is punishable by imprisonment for up to ten
years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Exceptions to Section 304
Section 304 does not apply to killings that are committed in self-defence or defence of property, or to killings that
are committed in the execution of a sentence of death passed by a court of law.
Conclusion
Section 304 is an important provision of the IPC because it provides a punishment for unlawful killings of human
beings that are caused by rash or negligent acts. Culpable homicide not amounting to murder by a rash or negligent
act is punishable by imprisonment for up to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Here are some examples of culpable homicide not amounting to murder by a rash or negligent act under Section
304:
 A driver runs over and kills a pedestrian while driving recklessly.
 A person fires a gun recklessly and kills someone.
 A person leaves a dangerous weapon lying around and a child picks it up and kills someone with it.
 A construction worker fails to take reasonable care and a building collapses, killing someone.
 A doctor performs a surgery negligently and the patient dies..

 SECTION 305
Section 305 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the offence of abetment of suicide of a child or insane person.
Abetment of suicide is the act of intentionally helping or encouraging another person to commit suicide.
Elements of the offence of abetment of suicide of a child or insane person
The following are the essential elements of abetment of suicide of a child or insane person under Section 305:
 The accused must have abetted the suicide of a child or insane person: The accused must have
intentionally helped or encouraged the victim to commit suicide.
 The victim must be a child or insane person: The victim must be a person who is under the age of eighteen
years or is of unsound mind.
 The victim must have committed suicide: The victim must have actually committed suicide.
Application of Section 305
Section 305 applies to any intentional help or encouragement that is given to a child or insane person to commit
suicide. This includes giving the victim the means to commit suicide, or providing them with information on how to
commit suicide.
Punishment for abetment of suicide of a child or insane person
Abetment of suicide of a child or insane person is punishable by imprisonment for up to ten years, and shall also be
liable to fine.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 122

Examples of abetment of suicide of a child or insane person under Section 305:

 A parent gives their child the means to commit suicide.
 A friend provides an insane person with information on how to commit suicide.
 A teacher encourages a student to commit suicide because the student is failing their classes.
 A doctor prescribes excessive medication to a patient with suicidal tendencies.
 A religious leader convinces a follower that suicide is the only way to achieve salvation.
Conclusion
Section 305 is an important provision of the IPC because it protects children and insane persons from being
encouraged to commit suicide. Abetment of suicide of a child or insane person is punishable by imprisonment for
up to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

 SECTION 306
Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the offence of abetment of suicide. Abetment of suicide is the
act of intentionally helping or encouraging another person to commit suicide.
Elements of the offence of abetment of suicide
The following are the essential elements of abetment of suicide under Section 306:
 The accused must have abetted the suicide of another person: The accused must have intentionally helped
or encouraged the victim to commit suicide.
 The victim must have attempted to commit suicide: The victim must have made a serious effort to commit
suicide, even if they were unsuccessful.
Application of Section 306
Section 306 applies to any intentional help or encouragement that is given to another person to commit suicide.
This includes giving the victim the means to commit suicide, or providing them with information on how to commit
suicide.
Punishment for abetment of suicide
Abetment of suicide is punishable by imprisonment for up to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Exceptions to Section 306
Section 306 does not apply to cases where the accused abets the suicide of another person in order to save them
from an imminent danger. For example, if a person is being tortured and they commit suicide to escape the torture,
then the person who abetted the suicide would not be guilty of an offence under Section 306.
Conclusion
Section 306 is an important provision of the IPC because it protects people from being encouraged to commit
suicide. Abetment of suicide is punishable by imprisonment for up to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

 SECTION 307
Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the offence of attempt to murder. Attempt to murder is the
act of trying to kill another person without actually succeeding.
Elements of the offence of attempt to murder
The following are the essential elements of attempt to murder under Section 307:
 The accused must have intended to kill the victim: The accused must have had the intention to kill the
victim.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 123

 The accused must have taken some steps towards committing the murder: The accused must have taken
some steps towards committing the murder, but the murder must not have been completed.
Application of Section 307
Section 307 applies to any intentional act that is taken towards killing another person, even if the murder is not
completed. This includes acts such as firing a gun at someone, stabbing someone, or poisoning someone.
Punishment for attempt to murder
Attempt to murder is punishable by imprisonment for up to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Examples of attempt to murder under Section 307:
 A person fires a gun at another person, but the bullet misses.
 A person stabs another person with a knife, but the victim does not die.
 A person poisons another person's food, but the victim does not eat the food.
 A person sets fire to a building with the intention of killing the people inside, but no one is killed.
Conclusion
Section 307 is an important provision of the IPC because it protects people from being killed. Attempt to murder is
punishable by imprisonment for up to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

 SECTION 308
Section 308 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the offence of grievous hurt with intent to commit murder.
Grievous hurt is bodily injury which causes the victim to be in severe pain or danger of death.
Elements of the offence of grievous hurt with intent to commit murder
The following are the essential elements of grievous hurt with intent to commit murder under Section 308:
 The accused must have caused grievous hurt to the victim: The accused must have caused the victim
bodily injury which causes the victim to be in severe pain or danger of death.
 The accused must have intended to cause grievous hurt to the victim: The accused must have had the
intention to cause grievous hurt to the victim.
Application of Section 308
Section 308 applies to any intentional act that causes grievous hurt to another person, if the accused also had the
intention to kill the victim. This includes acts such as stabbing someone with a knife, beating someone with a blunt
object, or setting someone on fire.
Punishment for grievous hurt with intent to commit murder
Grievous hurt with intent to commit murder is punishable by imprisonment for up to seven years, and shall also be
liable to fine.
Examples of grievous hurt with intent to commit murder under Section 308:
 A person stabs another person with a knife, causing them to be in severe pain and danger of death.
 A person beats another person with a blunt object, causing them to be in severe pain and danger of death.
 A person sets another person on fire, causing them to be in severe pain and danger of death.
Conclusion
Section 308 is an important provision of the IPC because it protects people from being killed. Grievous hurt with
intent to commit murder is punishable by imprisonment for up to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

 SECTION 309

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 124

Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the offence of attempt to commit suicide. Attempt to suicide
is the act of trying to kill oneself without actually succeeding.
Elements of the offence of attempt to suicide
The following are the essential elements of attempt to suicide under Section 309:
 The accused must have intended to kill himself or herself: The accused must have had the intention to kill
himself or herself.
 The accused must have taken some steps towards committing suicide: The accused must have taken some
steps towards committing suicide, but the suicide must not have been completed.
Application of Section 309
Section 309 applies to any intentional act that is taken towards killing oneself, even if the suicide is not completed.
This includes acts such as jumping from a high place, taking poison, or cutting oneself.
Punishment for attempt to suicide
Attempt to suicide is punishable by imprisonment for up to one year, or with fine, or with both.
Exceptions to Section 309
Section 309 does not apply to cases where the accused attempts suicide due to mental illness or intoxication. In
such cases, the accused may be treated under the Mental Health Act, 1987.
Conclusion
Section 309 is an important provision of the IPC because it protects people from being forced to commit suicide.
Attempt to suicide is punishable by imprisonment for up to one year, or with fine, or with both.

 SECTION 310
Section 310 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the offence of attempt to commit culpable homicide not
amounting to murder. Culpable homicide not amounting to murder is the unlawful killing of a human being
without the intention of causing death, but with the knowledge that death may be the likely consequence of the act.
Elements of the offence of attempt to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder
The following are the essential elements of attempt to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder under
Section 310:
 The accused must have intended to cause bodily injury to the victim: The accused must have had the
intention to cause bodily injury to the victim.
 The accused must have known that death may be the likely consequence of causing bodily injury to the
victim: The accused must have known that death may be the likely consequence of causing bodily injury to
the victim.
 The accused must have taken some steps towards causing bodily injury to the victim: The accused must
have taken some steps towards causing bodily injury to the victim, but the bodily injury must not have
been caused.
Application of Section 310
Section 310 applies to any intentional act that is taken towards causing bodily injury to another person, if the
accused knew that death may be the likely consequence of causing bodily injury to the victim. This includes acts
such as stabbing someone with a knife, beating someone with a blunt object, or setting someone on fire.
Punishment for attempt to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 125

Attempt to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder is punishable by imprisonment for up to three
years, or with fine, or with both.
Examples of attempt to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 310:
 A person stabs another person with a knife, but the victim does not die.
 A person beats another person with a blunt object, but the victim does not die.
 A person sets another person on fire, but the victim does not die.
Conclusion
Section 310 is an important provision of the IPC because it protects people from being killed. Attempt to commit
culpable homicide not amounting to murder is punishable by imprisonment for up to three years, or with fine, or
with both.

 SECTION 311
Section 311 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the offence of causing grievous hurt with intent to commit
culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Grievous hurt is bodily injury which causes the victim to be in severe
pain or danger of death.
Elements of the offence of causing grievous hurt with intent to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder
The following are the essential elements of causing grievous hurt with intent to commit culpable homicide not
amounting to murder under Section 311:
 The accused must have caused grievous hurt to the victim: The accused must have caused the victim
bodily injury which causes the victim to be in severe pain or danger of death.
 The accused must have intended to cause grievous hurt to the victim: The accused must have had the
intention to cause grievous hurt to the victim.
 The accused must have known that grievous hurt may be the likely consequence of causing grievous hurt
to the victim: The accused must have known that grievous hurt may be the likely consequence of causing
grievous hurt to the victim.
Application of Section 311
Section 311 applies to any intentional act that causes grievous hurt to another person, if the accused knew that
grievous hurt may be the likely consequence of causing grievous hurt to the victim. This includes acts such as
stabbing someone with a knife, beating someone with a blunt object, or setting someone on fire.
Punishment for causing grievous hurt with intent to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder
Causing grievous hurt with intent to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder is punishable by
imprisonment for up to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Examples of causing grievous hurt with intent to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder under
Section 311:
 A person stabs another person with a knife, causing them to be in severe pain and danger of death.
 A person beats another person with a blunt object, causing them to be in severe pain and danger of death.
 A person sets another person on fire, causing them to be in severe pain and danger of death.
Conclusion

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 126

Section 311 is an important provision of the IPC because it protects people from being killed. Causing grievous hurt
with intent to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder is punishable by imprisonment for up to seven
years, and shall also be liable to fine.

HURT
The Indian Penal Code (IPC) does not have a specific definition of "hurt." However, Section 319 of the IPC defines
"bodily injury" as "any hurt or damage to any part of the human body." This suggests that "hurt" under the IPC can
be any physical injury, no matter how minor.
Section 321 of the IPC defines "grievous hurt" as "any hurt which causes the sufferer to be in severe pain or danger
of death." This suggests that "grievous hurt" under the IPC is a more serious form of hurt, which can cause
significant pain and suffering or even death.
There are a number of offences under the IPC that can be committed by causing hurt or grievous hurt. These
include:
 Section 323: Assault or criminal force causing hurt: This offence is committed by intentionally causing hurt
to another person.
 Section 324: Assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty: This offence is
committed by intentionally causing hurt to a public servant who is performing his official duties.
 Section 325: Assault or criminal force with intent to commit grievous hurt: This offence is committed by
intentionally causing grievous hurt to another person.
 Section 326: Attempt to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder: This offence is committed by
intentionally causing hurt to another person with the intention of causing death.
 Section 328: Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means: This offence is committed by
intentionally causing hurt to another person by using a dangerous weapon or means.
The punishment for these offences varies depending on the severity of the hurt caused. For example, Section 323 of
the IPC provides for a punishment of up to three months imprisonment or a fine of up to Rs. 500, or both. Section
324 of the IPC provides for a punishment of up to two years imprisonment or a fine of up to Rs. 1,000, or both.
Section 325 of the IPC provides for a punishment of up to seven years imprisonment or a fine of up to Rs. 5,000, or
both. Section 326 of the IPC provides for a punishment of up to ten years imprisonment or a fine of up to Rs. 5,000,
or both. Section 328 of the IPC provides for a punishment of up to seven years imprisonment or a fine of up to Rs.
5,000, or both.

GRIEVOUS HURT

Grievous hurt is defined in Section 321 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) as "any hurt which causes the sufferer to be
in severe pain or danger of death." It is a more serious form of hurt than ordinary hurt, and it can cause significant
pain and suffering or even death.
There are a number of factors that can be considered when determining whether an injury is grievous hurt. These
include:
 The nature of the injury
 The severity of the pain
 The duration of the pain

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 127

 The risk of death

Some examples of injuries that may be considered grievous hurt include:
 A stab wound to the chest
 A gunshot wound to the head
 A fracture of the skull
 A severe burn
 A loss of consciousness
If a person is found guilty of causing grievous hurt, they can be punished with imprisonment for up to seven years,
and shall also be liable to fine.
Here are some examples of offences under the IPC that can be committed by causing grievous hurt:
 Section 325: Assault or criminal force with intent to commit grievous hurt: This offence is committed by
intentionally causing grievous hurt to another person.
 Section 326: Attempt to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder: This offence is committed by
intentionally causing hurt to another person with the intention of causing death.
 Section 328: Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means: This offence is committed by
intentionally causing hurt to another person by using a dangerous weapon or means.

WRONGFUL RESTRAINT WRONG CONFINEMENT

Wrongful restraint and wrong confinement are two related offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Wrongful restraint is defined in Section 340 of the IPC as "the unlawful detention of a person in any manner so that
he is prevented from proceeding beyond certain circumscribed limits."
Wrong confinement is defined in Section 342 of the IPC as "the unlawful confinement of a person in any place
without his free consent."
Both wrongful restraint and wrong confinement can be committed by using physical force, threats, or intimidation.
Examples of wrongful restraint and wrong confinement include:
 Locking someone in a room
 Holding someone against their will
 Preventing someone from leaving a place
 Blocking someone's path
 Threatening someone with violence if they try to leave
Punishment for wrongful restraint and wrong confinement
Wrongful restraint and wrong confinement are both punishable offences under the IPC. The punishment for
wrongful restraint is imprisonment for up to three months, or a fine of up to Rs. 500, or both. The punishment for
wrong confinement is imprisonment for up to one year, or a fine of up to Rs. 1,000, or both.
When is wrongful restraint or wrong confinement justified?
There are some situations where wrongful restraint or wrong confinement may be justified. For example, a police
officer may restrain a suspect to prevent them from escaping. A parent may confine a child to their room as
punishment. However, these situations are exceptions, and the restraint or confinement must be reasonable and
necessary.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 128

CRIMINAL FORCE AND ASSAULT

Criminal force and assault are two related offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Criminal force is defined in Section 350 of the IPC as "the intentional use of force or violence upon any person, or
the intentional omission to use such force or violence as may be reasonably necessary for the protection of oneself
or another person, or for the defence of property," where such act "may reasonably cause fear of hurt or injury in
the mind of the person to whom such force or violence is used or omitted to be used."
Assault is defined in Section 351 of the IPC as "an act of intentionally applying force to any person or intentionally
putting any person in fear of such application of force."
The main difference between criminal force and assault is that criminal force can be committed even if the victim
does not actually suffer any physical injury. For example, if a person intentionally pushes another person, it is
considered criminal force, even if the person does not fall or suffer any other physical injury. Assault, on the other
hand, requires that the victim actually suffer some fear of physical injury. For example, if a person intentionally
raises their hand to strike another person, but does not actually strike them, it is considered assault.
Both criminal force and assault are punishable offences under the IPC. The punishment for criminal force varies
depending on the severity of the force used. For example, if the force used is likely to cause death or grievous hurt,
the punishment is imprisonment for up to three years, or a fine, or both. The punishment for assault is
imprisonment for up to three months, or a fine, or both.
Here are some examples of criminal force and assault:
 Pushing someone
 Shoving someone
 Punching someone
 Kicking someone
 Slapping someone
 Threatening someone with violence
 Holding someone against their will
 Using a weapon to intimidate someone

UNIT - IV
KIDNAPPING
Kidnapping is defined in Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) as "the taking away of any person without his
consent, from any place where he is entitled by law to be, with intent to secretly and wrongfully confine him."
Kidnapping is a serious offence under the IPC, and it is punishable by imprisonment for up to seven years, and shall
also be liable to fine.
There are a number of factors that can be considered when determining whether an act is kidnapping. These
include:
 The use of force or coercion
 The intent to confine the victim
 The secrecy of the act
Some examples of kidnapping include:
 Taking a child away from their parents without their consent

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 129

 Holding someone against their will in a locked room

 Kidnapping someone for ransom
 Trafficking someone for the purpose of forced labor or sexual exploitation
If you believe that you or someone you know has been kidnapped, you should contact the police immediately. The
police will take steps to locate the victim and bring the perpetrator to justice.
Here are some of the specific provisions of the IPC that relate to kidnapping:
 Section 363: Kidnapping: This section defines kidnapping and makes it a punishable offence.
 Section 364: Kidnapping with intent to murder: This section makes it a punishable offence to kidnap
someone with the intention of murdering them.
 Section 365: Kidnapping for ransom: This section makes it a punishable offence to kidnap someone for
ransom.
 Section 366: Kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel her marriage, etc.: This section makes it
a punishable offence to kidnap, abduct, or induce a woman to compel her to marry the accused or any
other person.
 Section 367: Kidnapping or abducting with intent secretly and wrongfully to confine person kidnapped or
abducted, and compel or induce person so confined to do or omit anything

ABDUCTION
Abduction is defined in Section 362 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) as "the taking away or enticing away of any
person from any place where he is entitled by law to be, with intent to compel him to do or omit to do any act
against his will."
Abduction is a serious offence under the IPC, and it is punishable by imprisonment for up to seven years, and shall
also be liable to fine.
There are a number of factors that can be considered when determining whether an act is abduction. These
include:
 The use of force or coercion
 The intent to compel the victim to do something against their will
 The taking away or enticing away of the victim from a place where they are entitled to be
Some examples of abduction include:
 Taking a child away from their parents without their consent
 Forcing someone to marry against their will
 Trafficking someone for the purpose of forced labor or sexual exploitation
 Enticing someone away from their home or workplace with the intent to harm them
If you believe that you or someone you know has been abducted, you should contact the police immediately. The
police will take steps to locate the victim and bring the perpetrator to justice.
Here are some of the specific provisions of the IPC that relate to abduction:
 Section 362: Abduction: This section defines abduction and makes it a punishable offence.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 130

 Section 366: Kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel her marriage, etc.: This section makes it
a punishable offence to kidnap, abduct, or induce a woman to compel her to marry the accused or any
other person.
 Section 366A: Procuring of minor girl for sexual exploitation: This section makes it a punishable offence to
procure a minor girl for sexual exploitation.
 Section 366B: Kidnapping or abducting woman with intent to compel her to be married, etc.: This section
makes it a punishable offence to kidnap or abduct a woman with the intent to compel her to be married, to
be forced to illicit intercourse, or to be trafficked.
 Section 367: Kidnapping or abducting with intent secretly and wrongfully to confine person kidnapped or
abducted, and compel or induce person so confined to do or omit anything

SEXUAL OFFENCES
The Indian Penal Code (IPC) contains a number of provisions that deal with sexual offences. These offences range
from rape and sexual assault to child sexual abuse and voyeurism.
Rape is defined in Section 375 of the IPC as "sexual intercourse with a woman under circumstances falling under
any of the six following descriptions:
(i) Against her will. (ii) Without her consent. (iii) With her consent, when her consent has been obtained by putting
her or any person in whom she is interested in fear of death or of hurt or of any other injury, or the threat of any
such injury to any person. (iv) With her consent, when the consent has been obtained by means of fraud or
misrepresentation of fact. (v) With her consent, when her consent has been obtained by person in authority as
defined in Section 17 of the Indian Penal Code, for the purpose of such person deriving any advantage from it. (vi)
With or without her consent, when she is under eighteen years of age."
Rape is a serious offence under the IPC and is punishable by imprisonment for life, or for a term of not less than ten
years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Sexual assault is defined in Section 354 of the IPC as "assault or use of criminal force on a woman, to outrage her
modesty."
Sexual assault is a serious offence under the IPC and is punishable by imprisonment for up to three years, or a fine,
or both.
Child sexual abuse is defined in Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 as
"any act of sexual assault or sexual harassment of a child."
Child sexual abuse is a serious offence under the POCSO Act and is punishable by imprisonment for up to ten years,
and shall also be liable to fine.
Voyeurism is defined in Section 354A of the IPC as "spying upon any person with intent to intrude upon their
privacy."
Voyeurism is a serious offence under the IPC and is punishable by imprisonment for up to three years, or a fine, or
both.
If you believe that you or someone you know has been the victim of a sexual offence, you should contact the police
immediately. The police will take steps to investigate the matter and bring the perpetrator to justice.
Here are some of the specific provisions of the IPC and POCSO Act that relate to sexual offences:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 131

 Section 375: Rape: This section defines rape and makes it a punishable offence.
 Section 354: Assault or use of criminal force to outrage modesty of woman: This section makes it a
punishable offence to assault or use criminal force on a woman to outrage her modesty.
 Section 376: Punishment for rape: This section prescribes the punishment for rape.
 Section 354A: Voyeurism: This section defines voyeurism and makes it a punishable offence.
 Section 354B: Immoral Trafficking in Women and Girls: This section makes it a punishable offence to
commit immoral trafficking in women and girls.
 Section 354C: Stalking: This section defines stalking and makes it a punishable offence.
 Section 509: Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman: This section makes it a
punishable offence to use words, gestures, or acts that are intended to insult the modesty of a woman.

RAPE: CUSTODIAL RAPE

Custodial rape is defined under Section 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) as follows:
Whoever, being a public servant and having the custody of a woman under his charge, commits rape on such
woman, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term of not less than ten years, but which may extend
to life, and shall also be liable to fine.
This section specifically covers cases where the rape is committed by a police officer or other public servant on a
woman who is in their custody. Custodial rape is a heinous crime that violates the victim's human rights and
dignity. It is also a form of torture and can have devastating physical and psychological consequences for the
victim.
The IPC also contains provisions for harsher punishment for custodial rape if the victim is a minor or if the rape
results in the death of the victim.
In addition to the IPC, there are also a number of other laws that address custodial rape, including the Protection of
Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention,
Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013.
Custodial rape is a serious problem in India, and there have been a number of high-profile cases in recent years. In
2012, the Nirbhaya case shocked the nation and led to widespread protests demanding justice for the victim. In
2018, the Kathua case sparked outrage over the rape and murder of an eight-year-old girl in custody of the police.
Despite the attention that these cases have brought to the issue, custodial rape continues to be a problem in India.
According to a 2018 report by the National Crime Records Bureau, there were over 3,000 cases of custodial rape
reported in India that year.
The government of India has taken some steps to address the problem of custodial rape, such as passing the
Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, which increased the punishment for custodial rape. However, more needs
to be done to prevent and punish this crime.
Here are some of the things that can be done to address the problem of custodial rape:
 Improve training for police officers and other public servants on how to prevent and respond to sexual
violence.
 Establish independent mechanisms to investigate and prosecute cases of custodial rape.
 Provide support services to victims of custodial rape, including counseling and medical care.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 132

 Raise awareness about the problem of custodial rape and the rights of victims.

 RAPE: MARITAL RAPE SECTIONS 375

Marital rape is not explicitly defined in the Indian Penal Code (IPC). However, there are a number of provisions in
the IPC that can be used to prosecute marital rape cases.
Section 375 of the IPC defines rape as follows:
A man is said to commit "rape" who, except in the case hereinafter excepted, has sexual intercourse with a woman
under circumstances falling under any of the following descriptions:- (i) Against her will. (ii) Without her consent.
(iii) With her consent, when her consent has been obtained by putting her or any person in whom she is interested
in fear of death or of hurt. (iv) With her consent, when the man knows that he is not her husband and that her
consent is given because she believes that he is her husband.
The exception mentioned in Section 375(1)(iv) is for cases where the man has reasonable grounds to believe that
he is the woman's husband. This exception has been interpreted by the courts to mean that marital rape is not a
crime in India.
However, there have been a number of cases in recent years where the courts have held that marital rape can be
prosecuted under other provisions of the IPC, such as Section 376(1)(a), which covers cases of rape where the
victim is under the age of 18, and Section 376(2)(n), which covers cases of rape where the victim is subjected to
cruelty or unnatural sex.
In 2017, the Supreme Court of India issued a landmark judgment in the case of Kamla v. State of Madhya Pradesh. In
this case, the Court held that marital rape can be prosecuted under Section 376(1)(a) of the IPC, even if the victim
is over the age of 18. The Court also held that the exception in Section 375(1)(iv) is unconstitutional.
However, the Supreme Court's judgment in Kamla v. State of Madhya Pradesh is not binding on lower courts. As a
result, there is still uncertainty about whether marital rape can be prosecuted under the IPC.
In addition to the IPC, there are also a number of other laws that can be used to prosecute marital rape cases. For
example, the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, includes provisions for restraining orders
and compensation for victims of domestic violence.
Despite the legal challenges, there is a growing movement to criminalize marital rape in India. A number of
organizations are working to raise awareness about the issue and to lobby the government to change the law.
It is important to note that marital rape is a serious crime that can have devastating consequences for victims.
Victims of marital rape may experience physical and psychological trauma, and they may also be isolated from
their support networks. It is important to provide support to victims of marital rape and to hold perpetrators
accountable for their crimes.

 SECTIONS 377
Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) states that:
Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal, shall be
punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to
ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Elements of the offence:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 133

 Voluntary carnal intercourse: This means that the intercourse must be consensual.
 Against the order of nature: This is a vague term that has been interpreted to include oral and anal sex, as
well as same-sex sexual activity.
 With any man, woman or animal: This means that the intercourse can be with a person of any gender or
with an animal.
Application of the offence:
Section 377 applies to all people in India, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity. However, the
Supreme Court of India has ruled that Section 377 is unconstitutional insofar as it criminalizes consensual sexual
acts between adults in private. This means that Section 377 can no longer be used to prosecute people for engaging
in oral and anal sex or same-sex sexual activity in private.
Punishment for the offence:
The punishment for violating Section 377 is imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a
term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Case law:
In 2018, the Supreme Court of India ruled that Section 377 was unconstitutional insofar as it criminalized
consensual sexual acts between adults in private. However, the Court upheld the validity of Section 377 insofar as
it criminalized sex with minors, non-consensual sexual acts, and bestiality.
This means that Section 377 can still be used to prosecute people for engaging in sexual activity with a minor,
without consent, or with an animal.
Conclusion:
Section 377 of the IPC is a controversial law that has been used to discriminate against and oppress LGBTQ+
people in India. The Supreme Court's ruling in 2018 was a landmark victory for the LGBTQ+ community, but there
is still more work to be done to ensure that LGBTQ+ people are fully protected from discrimination and violence

OFFENCES AGAINST PROPERTY: THEFT, ROBBERY AND DACOITY

Sure. Here is a more detailed explanation of offences against property:

Theft
Theft is the unlawful taking of movable property without the owner's consent. It is one of the most common crimes
in India, and it can have a devastating impact on victims.
To be guilty of theft, the accused must have the following two essential elements:
 Intent to take the property dishonestly. This means that the accused must have intended to take the
property without the owner's consent. It is not enough for the accused to simply want to take the
property; they must also intend to do so without the owner's permission.
 Movement of the property. The accused must have physically moved the property away from the owner's
possession. This can be done in any way, such as by carrying the property away, putting it in a bag and
taking it away, or even simply moving it from one place to another within the owner's property.
Robbery
Robbery is a more serious form of theft that involves the use of force or threat of force to steal property. It is also
known as mugging or hold-up.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 134

To be guilty of robbery, the accused must have the following three essential elements:
 Intent to commit theft. This is the same as the intent element required for theft.
 Voluntary causing of hurt or alarm to any person. This means that the accused must have physically
harmed the victim or put them in fear of being harmed. Harm can be physical or psychological.
 Theft after causing hurt or alarm. This means that the accused must have stolen property after causing
hurt or alarm to the victim.
Dacoity
Dacoity is the most serious form of theft against property. It involves a group of four or more people committing
theft with the use of force or arms.
To be guilty of dacoity, the accused must have the following two essential elements:
 Four or more persons conjointly committing theft. This means that at least four people must be involved in
the theft. All of the accused must be acting together, and they must all be aware of each other's intentions.
 Use of force or arms. This means that the accused must have used force or arms to commit the theft. Force
can be physical or psychological, and arms can be any weapon, such as a gun, knife, or stick.
Punishment for theft, robbery, and dacoity
The punishment for theft, robbery, and dacoity varies depending on the circumstances of the offence. However, the
minimum punishment for theft is three years' imprisonment, and the maximum punishment is seven years'
imprisonment. The minimum punishment for robbery is seven years' imprisonment, and the maximum
punishment is life imprisonment. The minimum punishment for dacoity is ten years' imprisonment, and the
maximum punishment is death.
Conclusion
Theft, robbery, and dacoity are all serious offences against property that can have a devastating impact on victims.
It is important to be aware of these offences and to take steps to protect yourself and your property. Here are some
tips:
 Be aware of your surroundings and take precautions to avoid becoming a victim of theft.
 Do not leave valuables unattended in public places.
 Be careful about who you give your personal information to.
 Install security devices in your home and business.
 Report any suspicious activity to the police.

CRIMINAL MISAPPROPRIATION OF PROPERTY

Criminal misappropriation of property is a serious offence under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It is defined as the
dishonest misappropriation or conversion of property entrusted to the accused for a specific purpose.
The essential elements of the offence of criminal misappropriation of property are:
 Entrustment of property to the accused. This means that the property must have been given to the accused
by another person, either explicitly or implicitly.
 Dishonest misappropriation or conversion of the property. This means that the accused must have
misused the property for their own benefit, or for the benefit of someone else.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 135

 Specific purpose for which the property was entrusted. This means that the accused must have been
entrusted with the property for a specific purpose, and they must have misused the property for a purpose
other than the one for which it was entrusted.
Punishment for criminal misappropriation of property
The punishment for criminal misappropriation of property varies depending on the value of the property that was
misappropriated. However, the minimum punishment is one year's imprisonment, and the maximum punishment
is ten years' imprisonment.
Examples of criminal misappropriation of property
Here are some examples of criminal misappropriation of property:
 A bank employee steals money from a customer's account.
 A company director uses company funds for personal expenses.
 A trustee of a charity embezzles funds from the charity.
 A lawyer steals money from a client's trust account.
How to protect yourself from criminal misappropriation of property
There are a number of things that you can do to protect yourself from criminal misappropriation of property:
 Be careful about who you entrust with your property.
 Make sure that there are clear terms and conditions for the use of your property.
 Monitor the use of your property regularly.
 Keep records of all transactions involving your property.
 Report any suspicious activity to the police.

CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST

Criminal breach of trust is a serious offence under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It is defined as the dishonest
misappropriation or conversion of property entrusted to the accused, or dishonestly using or disposing of that
property in violation of any direction of law prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be discharged, or of any
legal contract, express or implied, which he has made touching the discharge of such trust.
The essential elements of the offence of criminal breach of trust are:
 Entrustment of property to the accused. This means that the property must have been given to the accused
by another person, either explicitly or implicitly.
 Dishonest misappropriation or conversion of the property. This means that the accused must have
misused the property for their own benefit, or for the benefit of someone else.
 Violation of any direction of law or legal contract. This means that the accused must have misused the
property in a way that is prohibited by law, or in a way that is contrary to the terms of any legal contract
that they have made.
Punishment for criminal breach of trust
The punishment for criminal breach of trust varies depending on the value of the property that was
misappropriated and the circumstances of the offence. However, the minimum punishment is three years'
imprisonment, and the maximum punishment is ten years' imprisonment.
Examples of criminal breach of trust
Here are some examples of criminal breach of trust:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 136

 A bank employee steals money from a customer's account and uses it to gamble.
 A company director embezzles funds from the company and uses them to buy a luxury car.
 A trustee of a charity uses charity funds to pay for their own personal expenses.
 A lawyer steals money from a client's trust account and uses it to pay off their gambling debts.
How to protect yourself from criminal breach of trust
There are a number of things that you can do to protect yourself from criminal breach of trust:
 Be careful about who you entrust with your property.
 Make sure that there are clear terms and conditions for the use of your property.
 Monitor the use of your property regularly.
 Keep records of all transactions involving your property.
 Report any suspicious activity to the police.
By taking these steps, you can help to protect yourself from becoming a victim of criminal breach of trust.

RECEIVING OF STOLEN PROPERTY CHEATING

Receiving of stolen property is a serious offence under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It is defined as dishonestly
receiving or retaining any stolen property knowing or having reason to believe the same to be stolen property.
The essential elements of the offence of receiving of stolen property are:
 Dishonesty. This means that the accused must have known or had reason to believe that the property was
stolen.
 Receipt or retention of the property. This means that the accused must have taken possession of the
property, or kept it in their possession.
 Knowledge or reason to believe that the property was stolen. This means that the accused must have
known, or had reason to believe, that the property had been stolen from its rightful owner.
Punishment for receiving of stolen property
The punishment for receiving of stolen property is imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or
with fine, or with both.
Cheating is also a serious offence under the IPC. It is defined as dishonestly inducing another person to deliver any
property to the accused or to consent to the accused doing or omitting to do anything which he was not legally
bound to do.
The essential elements of the offence of cheating are:
 Dishonesty. This means that the accused must have intended to deceive the victim.
 Inducing the victim to deliver property or consent to something. This means that the accused must have
used some form of deception to get the victim to give them something, or to do something that they would
not otherwise have done.
 Property or consent. This means that the victim must have delivered some form of property to the
accused, or consented to something that the accused wanted them to do.
Punishment for cheating
The punishment for cheating varies depending on the circumstances of the offence. However, the minimum
punishment is one year's imprisonment, and the maximum punishment is seven years' imprisonment.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 137

Relationship between receiving of stolen property and cheating

The two offences of receiving of stolen property and cheating can be related in certain circumstances. For example,
if an accused person dishonestly receives stolen property, they may also be guilty of cheating if they induce the
victim of the theft to sell them the property.
Example
A thief steals a car and then sells it to a used car dealer. The used car dealer knows or has reason to believe that the
car is stolen. The used car dealer is guilty of receiving of stolen property. If the used car dealer also induces the
thief to sell them the car by offering them a high price, then the used car dealer is also guilty of cheating.
Conclusion
Both receiving of stolen property and cheating are serious offences under the IPC. It is important to be aware of
these offences and to take steps to avoid committing them. Here are some tips:
 Be careful about who you buy goods from.
 Do your research before buying a used car or other expensive item.
 Be suspicious of any offer that seems too good to be true.
 If you have any doubts about the provenance of any goods, do not buy them.

FRAUDULENT DEEDS AND DISPOSITION OF PROPERTY

Fraudulent deeds and disposition of property are serious offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). They are
defined as follows:
 Fraudulent deeds is defined as making or signing a false document with intent to defraud.
 Disposition of property is defined as transferring or disposing of property without the owner's consent.
The essential elements of the offence of fraudulent deeds are:
 Making or signing a false document. This means that the accused must have created or signed a document
that is false in some way.
 Intent to defraud. This means that the accused must have intended to use the false document to deceive
someone.
The essential elements of the offence of disposition of property are:
 Transfer or disposal of property. This means that the accused must have transferred or disposed of
property that belongs to someone else.
 Without the owner's consent. This means that the accused must have disposed of the property without the
owner's knowledge or permission.
Punishment for fraudulent deeds and disposition of property
The punishment for fraudulent deeds and disposition of property varies depending on the circumstances of the
offence. However, the minimum punishment is one year's imprisonment, and the maximum punishment is ten
years' imprisonment.
Examples of fraudulent deeds and disposition of property
Here are some examples of fraudulent deeds and disposition of property:
 A person forges a signature on a deed of sale and transfers property to themselves.
 A person uses a fake power of attorney to sell property that belongs to someone else.
 A person steals a title deed and transfers property to themselves.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 138

 A person uses deception to convince someone to sell them property below market value.
How to protect yourself from fraudulent deeds and disposition of property
There are a number of things that you can do to protect yourself from fraudulent deeds and disposition of
property:
 Be careful about who you sign documents for.
 Make sure that you understand the terms of any document before you sign it.
 Have your documents reviewed by a lawyer before you sign them.
 Be suspicious of any offer that seems too good to be true.
 If you have any doubts about the authenticity of a document or the validity of a transaction, do not
proceed.

UNIT - V
MISCHIEF
Mischief is a criminal offence under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It is defined as the doing of any act with intent to
cause, or knowing that it is likely to cause, wrongful loss or damage to the public or to any person.
The essential elements of the offence of mischief are:
 Doing of an act. This means that the accused must have actually done something, such as breaking a
window or setting fire to something.
 Intent to cause wrongful loss or damage. This means that the accused must have intended to cause harm to
someone or something.
 Knowledge that the act is likely to cause wrongful loss or damage. This means that the accused must have
known that their act was likely to have harmful consequences.
Punishment for mischief
The punishment for mischief varies depending on the nature of the act and the circumstances of the offence.
However, the minimum punishment is one month's imprisonment, and the maximum punishment is three years'
imprisonment.
Examples of mischief
Here are some examples of mischief:
 Breaking a window.
 Setting fire to a building.
 Tampering with a vehicle.
 Damaging property.
 Distributing false information.
 Public nuisance.
How to protect yourself from mischief
There are a number of things that you can do to protect yourself from mischief:
 Be aware of your surroundings and take precautions to avoid becoming a victim of mischief.
 Lock your doors and windows at night.
 Do not leave valuables unattended in public places.
 Be careful about who you give your personal information to.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 139

 Report any suspicious activity to the police.

CRIMINAL TRESPASS

Criminal trespass is a criminal offence under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It is defined as entering or remaining on
someone else's property without their permission.
The essential elements of the offence of criminal trespass are:
 Entry or remaining on someone else's property. This means that the accused must have physically entered
or remained on someone else's property.
 Without permission. This means that the accused must have entered or remained on the property without
the owner's consent.
Punishment for criminal trespass
The punishment for criminal trespass varies depending on the circumstances of the offence. However, the
minimum punishment is three months' imprisonment, and the maximum punishment is one year's imprisonment.
Examples of criminal trespass
Here are some examples of criminal trespass:
 Entering someone else's house without their permission.
 Staying in someone else's house without their permission.
 Entering someone else's property to commit an offence.
 Remaining on someone else's property after being asked to leave.
How to protect yourself from criminal trespass
There are a number of things that you can do to protect yourself from criminal trespass:
 Put up fences and gates around your property.
 Install security alarms and cameras.
 Keep your doors and windows locked at all times.
 Be aware of your surroundings and report any suspicious activity to the police.

OFFENCES RELATING TO DOCUMENT AND PROPERTY INARKS

Offences relating to documents and property marks are a category of criminal offences under the Indian Penal
Code (IPC) that deal with the fraudulent alteration or destruction of documents and the unauthorized use of
property marks. These offences can have serious consequences, both for individuals and for society as a whole.
Some of the most common offences relating to documents and property marks include:
 Forgery: Forgery is the act of making a false document with the intent to deceive someone. This can
include forging signatures, seals, or other official markings.
 Fraudulent use of a false document: This offence occurs when someone uses a false document with the
intent to deceive someone else. This can include using a fake passport, driver's license, or other
identification document.
 Alteration of a document: This offence occurs when someone changes the contents of an existing
document without authorization. This can include changing the date, amount, or other relevant
information on a document.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 140

 Destruction of a document: This offence occurs when someone intentionally destroys a document without
authorization. This can include burning, tearing, or otherwise damaging a document.
 Unauthorized use of a property mark: This offence occurs when someone uses a property mark without
permission. This can include using a trademark, copyright, or other intellectual property without
authorization.
The punishment for offences relating to documents and property marks varies depending on the specific offence
and the circumstances of the case. However, the penalties can be severe, including imprisonment and fines.
It is important to be aware of the offences relating to documents and property marks so that you can take steps to
protect yourself and your property. Here are some tips:
 Be careful about what documents you sign and who you give them to.
 Be suspicious of any offer that seems too good to be true.
 If you suspect that someone is trying to defraud you, contact the police immediately.
 Keep your property marks safe and secure.
 Report any unauthorized use of your property marks to the relevant authorities.

OFFENCES RELATING TO MARRIAGE

Offences relating to marriage are a category of criminal offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) that deal with
the fraudulent or illegal solemnization of marriages. These offences can have serious consequences for both the
individuals involved and for society as a whole.
Some of the most common offences relating to marriage include:
 Bigamy: Bigamy is the act of marrying someone when you are already legally married to someone else.
 Polygamy: Polygamy is the act of marrying multiple spouses at the same time.
 Child marriage: Child marriage is the marriage of a child below the age of 18.
 Forced marriage: Forced marriage is the marriage of a person without their consent.
 Impersonation for marriage: Impersonation for marriage is the act of pretending to be someone else in
order to get married.
 Fraudulent solemnization of marriage: Fraudulent solemnization of marriage is the act of solemnizing a
marriage without the proper authority or without the consent of the parties involved.
The punishment for offences relating to marriage varies depending on the specific offence and the circumstances of
the case. However, the penalties can be severe, including imprisonment and fines.
It is important to be aware of the offences relating to marriage so that you can take steps to protect yourself and
your loved ones. Here are some tips:
 Be careful about who you marry.
 Make sure that you have all of the necessary documentation before getting married.
 Be suspicious of any marriage proposal that seems too good to be true.
 If you suspect that someone is trying to force you into a marriage, contact the police immediately.
 If you are a victim of a fraudulent marriage, you can seek help from a legal expert.

 SECTIONS 493
Section 493 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) states that:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 141

Whoever by deceit causes any person who is not lawfully married to another person to believe that he or she is
lawfully married to such other person and to cohabit with him or her in that belief, shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Essential elements of the offence
The essential elements of the offence of deceitfully causing a person to believe that they are lawfully married to
another person and to cohabit with them in that belief are:
 Deceit. This means that the accused must have intentionally deceived the victim.
 Belief that the victim is lawfully married to the accused. This means that the victim must have believed
that they were legally married to the accused.
 Cohabitation in that belief. This means that the victim must have lived with the accused as husband or wife
in that belief.
Punishment for the offence
The punishment for the offence of deceitfully causing a person to believe that they are lawfully married to another
person and to cohabit with them in that belief is imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend
to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Examples of the offence
Here are some examples of the offence of deceitfully causing a person to believe that they are lawfully married to
another person and to cohabit with them in that belief:
 A man marries a woman under false pretenses, such as by claiming to be someone else or by concealing
his marital status.
 A man and woman have a common-law marriage without realizing that it is not legally recognized in their
jurisdiction.
 A man and woman have a religious marriage but not a civil marriage.
 A man and woman have a civil marriage but the man is already married to someone else.
How to protect yourself from the offence
There are a number of things that you can do to protect yourself from the offence of deceitfully causing a person to
believe that they are lawfully married to another person and to cohabit with them in that belief:
 Do your research before getting married.
 Make sure that you have all of the necessary documentation before getting married.
 Be suspicious of any marriage proposal that seems too good to be true.
 If you are unsure about your legal status, consult with a lawyer.

 SECTIONS 494
Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) states that:
Whoever, having a husband or wife living, marries in any form whatsoever with another person, shall be punished
with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to
fine.
Essential elements of the offence
The essential elements of the offence of bigamy are:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 142

 Having a husband or wife living. This means that the accused must be legally married to another person.
 Marrying in any form whatsoever with another person. This means that the accused must have entered
into a marriage with another person, regardless of whether the marriage was solemnized in accordance
with law.
Punishment for the offence
The punishment for the offence of bigamy is imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to
seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Examples of the offence
Here are some examples of the offence of bigamy:
 A man marries a woman while still legally married to another woman.
 A woman marries a man while still legally married to another man.
 A man has a religious marriage with a second woman while still legally married to his first wife.
 A woman has a civil marriage with a second man while still legally married to her first husband.
How to protect yourself from the offence
There are a number of things that you can do to protect yourself from the offence of bigamy:
 Make sure that your spouse is legally divorced before you get married to someone else.
 Be suspicious of anyone who is already married and is trying to marry you.
 If you suspect that your spouse is planning to commit bigamy, contact the police immediately.

 SECTIONS 495
Section 495 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) states that:
Whoever, having a husband or wife living, goes through a form of marriage with any other person, such form not
being a valid marriage in the eye of law, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both.
Essential elements of the offence
The essential elements of the offence of going through a form of marriage with another person while having a
husband or wife living are:
 Having a husband or wife living. This means that the accused must be legally married to another person.
 Going through a form of marriage with any other person. This means that the accused must have
participated in a ceremony that is typically associated with marriage, such as exchanging vows or
exchanging rings.
 Such form not being a valid marriage in the eye of law. This means that the ceremony did not meet the
legal requirements for a valid marriage.
Punishment for the offence
The punishment for the offence of going through a form of marriage with another person while having a husband
or wife living is imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with
both.
Examples of the offence
Here are some examples of the offence of going through a form of marriage with another person while having a
husband or wife living:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 143

 A man has a religious ceremony with a second woman, but they do not obtain a civil marriage certificate.
 A woman has a civil ceremony with a second man, but they do not have a religious ceremony.
 A man and woman have a common-law marriage, but they do not have a formal marriage ceremony.
 A man and woman have a religious marriage in a country where polygamy is legal, but they then move to a
country where polygamy is illegal.
How to protect yourself from the offence
There are a number of things that you can do to protect yourself from the offence of going through a form of
marriage with another person while having a husband or wife living:
 Be suspicious of anyone who is already married and is trying to marry you.
 Make sure that any marriage ceremony that you participate in is valid in the eyes of law.
 If you suspect that someone is planning to commit this offence, contact the police immediately.

 SECTIONS 496
Section 496 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) states that:
Whoever dishonestly or with a fraudulent intention goes through a form of marriage with any person, knowing
that he or she is not thereby lawfully married to such person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Essential elements of the offence
The essential elements of the offence of dishonestly or fraudulently going through a form of marriage with another
person are:
 Dishonesty or fraudulent intention. This means that the accused must have intended to deceive the other
person into believing that they were lawfully married.
 Going through a form of marriage with any person. This means that the accused must have participated in
a ceremony that is typically associated with marriage, such as exchanging vows or exchanging rings.
 Knowing that he or she is not thereby lawfully married to such person. This means that the accused must
have known that the ceremony did not meet the legal requirements for a valid marriage.
Punishment for the offence
The punishment for the offence of dishonestly or fraudulently going through a form of marriage with another
person is imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to
fine.
Examples of the offence
Here are some examples of the offence of dishonestly or fraudulently going through a form of marriage with
another person:
 A man marries a woman under false pretenses, such as by claiming to be someone else or by concealing
his marital status.
 A woman has a religious marriage with a man who is already married to someone else.
 A man and woman have a civil marriage but they both know that they are not legally divorced from their
previous spouses.
 A man and woman have a marriage ceremony in a country where polygamy is illegal, but they both know
that they want to have multiple spouses.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 144

How to protect yourself from the offence

There are a number of things that you can do to protect yourself from the offence of dishonestly or fraudulently
going through a form of marriage with another person:
 Be suspicious of anyone who is trying to marry you quickly or without proper documentation.
 Make sure that you understand the legal requirements for a valid marriage in your jurisdiction.
 If you suspect that someone is planning to commit this offence, contact the police immediately.

 SECTIONS 497
Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which was in force from 1860 to 2018, criminalized adultery. It stated
that a man who had sexual intercourse with the wife of another man without the consent or connivance of that
man could be punished with up to five years imprisonment, a fine, or both. The wife, however, was exempt from
punishment.
Elements of the offence
The following elements must be present for an offence of adultery under Section 497 IPC to be committed:
 Sexual intercourse: There must be an act of sexual intercourse between a man and a woman.
 Married woman: The woman must be married to another man.
 Consent or connivance of the husband: The husband must not have consented to or connived at the sexual
intercourse.
 Knowledge or reason to believe that the woman is married: The man must have known or had reason to
believe that the woman is married to another man.
Application
Section 497 IPC could only be applied to situations where a man had sexual intercourse with the wife of another
man without the consent or connivance of the husband. The wife herself could not be prosecuted for adultery.
Punishments
The punishment for adultery under Section 497 IPC was imprisonment for a term extending to five years, or with
fine, or with both.
Striking down of Section 497 IPC
The Supreme Court of India struck down Section 497 IPC on September 27, 2018, in a landmark judgment. The
Court held that the section was unconstitutional because it violated the fundamental rights to equality and privacy
of married women. The Court also found that the section discriminated against married women by treating them
as the property of their husbands.
Conclusion
Section 497 IPC is no longer in force in India. It was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2018, in a landmark
judgment. The striking down of Section 497 was a major victory for women's rights in India.

 SECTIONS 498
Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code criminalizes cruelty by a husband or his relatives against his wife. It states
that 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 years and shall also be liable to fine.
Elements of the offence
The following elements must be present for an offence of cruelty under Section 498A IPC to be committed:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 145

 Husband or relative of the husband: The accused must be either the husband of the victim or a relative of
the husband.
 Subjects the woman to cruelty: The accused must engage in conduct that causes physical or mental pain or
suffering to the victim.
 Cruelty: The conduct must be of such a nature that it is likely to drive the victim to commit suicide or cause
grave injury or danger to her life, limb, or mental or physical health.
Application
Section 498A IPC can be applied to any situation where a husband or his relatives subject a woman to cruelty. The
cruelty can be physical, mental, or emotional. It can be continuous or episodic. It can be severe or mild.
Punishments
The punishment for cruelty under Section 498A IPC is imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years
and shall also be liable to fine.
Special provisions
Section 498A IPC also contains a number of special provisions, such as:
 The police must register a case of cruelty under Section 498A IPC on the basis of a complaint by the victim
or any other person.
 The accused cannot be released on bail without the permission of the court.
 The victim is entitled to compensation from the accused.
Challenges
Section 498A IPC has been criticized for being misused by women to harass their husbands and in-laws. However,
the Supreme Court of India has taken steps to address these concerns, such as by issuing guidelines to the police on
how to investigate cases of cruelty under Section 498A IPC.
Overall, Section 498A IPC is an important tool for protecting women from domestic violence. It has helped to
reduce the incidence of dowry-related deaths and suicides in India.

 SECTIONS 498 A

Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code criminalizes cruelty by a husband or his relatives against his wife. It states
that 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 years and shall also be liable to fine.
Elements of the offence
The following elements must be present for an offence of cruelty under Section 498A IPC to be committed:
 Husband or relative of the husband: The accused must be either the husband of the victim or a relative of
the husband.
 Subjects the woman to cruelty: The accused must engage in conduct that causes physical or mental pain or
suffering to the victim.
 Cruelty: The conduct must be of such a nature that it is likely to drive the victim to commit suicide or cause
grave injury or danger to her life, limb, or mental or physical health.
Examples of cruelty under Section 498A IPC
Some examples of cruelty under Section 498A IPC include:

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 146

 Physical abuse, such as beating, slapping, or kicking the victim.

 Mental abuse, such as name-calling, insults, and threats.
 Emotional abuse, such as isolation from family and friends, controlling the victim's finances, and denying
the victim access to education or employment.
 Economic abuse, such as withholding money from the victim or forcing the victim to work without pay.
 Sexual abuse, such as forcing the victim to have sex against her will.
Application of Section 498A IPC
Section 498A IPC can be applied to any situation where a husband or his relatives subject a woman to cruelty. The
cruelty can be physical, mental, or emotional. It can be continuous or episodic. It can be severe or mild.
Procedure for filing a complaint under Section 498A IPC
A complaint under Section 498A IPC can be filed by the victim or any other person. The complaint can be filed with
the police or with a magistrate.
Once a complaint is filed, the police must investigate the matter and register a case if they find that there is
sufficient evidence. The accused cannot be released on bail without the permission of the court.
Trial and punishment under Section 498A IPC
If the accused is found guilty of cruelty under Section 498A IPC, they can be sentenced to imprisonment for a term
which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.
The court may also order the accused to pay compensation to the victim.
Challenges to Section 498A IPC
Section 498A IPC has been criticized for being misused by women to harass their husbands and in-laws. There
have been a number of cases where women have filed false complaints under Section 498A IPC in order to extort
money from their husbands or in-laws.
The Supreme Court of India has taken steps to address these concerns, such as by issuing guidelines to the police
on how to investigate cases of cruelty under Section 498A IPC.
Conclusion
Section 498A IPC is an important tool for protecting women from domestic violence. It has helped to reduce the
incidence of dowry-related deaths and suicides in India. However, it is important to be aware of the challenges to
the section and to ensure that it is used fairly and judiciously.

DEFAMATION

Defamation in the Indian Penal Code (IPC) is defined as the act of making or publishing any imputation concerning
any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the
reputation of such person.
Elements of the offence of defamation
The following elements must be present for an offence of defamation under Section 499 IPC to be committed:
 Imputation: There must be an imputation made or published about a person.
 Harm to reputation: The imputation must be likely to harm the reputation of the person.
 Intention or knowledge: The person making or publishing the imputation must intend to harm the
reputation of the person or know that the imputation is likely to harm the reputation of the person.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 147

Types of imputations that can be defamatory

Any imputation that lowers the person's character in the estimation of others, or causes them to be shunned or
avoided, or makes them odious or ridiculous, or injures their reputation in their office, profession, trade or calling,
can be defamatory.
Examples of defamatory imputations
Some examples of defamatory imputations include:
 Calling someone a liar, cheat, or thief.
 Saying that someone is incompetent or dishonest in their work.
 Spreading rumors about someone's personal life or relationships.
 Publishing false or misleading information about someone.
Exceptions to defamation
Section 499 IPC contains a number of exceptions, which means that certain types of imputations are not
considered to be defamatory. These exceptions include:
 Imputations of truth which public good requires to be made or published.
 Imputations made in good faith concerning the conduct of a public servant in the discharge of his public
functions.
 Imputations made in good faith concerning the character, conduct, or capacity of any person whose
character, conduct, or capacity it is the duty of the person making the imputation to discuss.
 Imputations made in good faith in order to protect the interests of the person making the imputation or of
any other person.
Defenses to defamation
There are a number of defenses available to people who are accused of defamation. These defenses include:
 Truth: If the imputation made or published is true, then there is no defamation.
 Privilege: If the imputation made or published is made in the course of performing a legal duty or in order
to protect the interests of the person making the imputation or of any other person, then there is no
defamation.
 Fair comment: If the imputation made or published is a fair comment on a matter of public interest, then
there is no defamation.
Procedure for filing a defamation case
A defamation case can be filed by the person whose reputation has been harmed by the defamatory imputation.
The case can be filed in a magistrate's court or in a sessions court.
The plaintiff must prove the following elements in order to succeed in a defamation case:
 That the defendant made or published an imputation concerning the plaintiff.
 That the imputation was defamatory.
 That the defendant intended to harm the plaintiff's reputation or knew that the imputation was likely to
harm the plaintiff's reputation.
If the plaintiff is successful in their case, the defendant can be ordered to pay damages to the plaintiff.
Conclusion
Defamation is a serious offence in India. It is important to be aware of the law and to take steps to avoid making or
publishing defamatory imputations.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 148

 SECTIONS 499
Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code defines defamation as the act of making or publishing any imputation
concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm,
the reputation of such person.
Elements of the offence
The following elements must be present for an offence of defamation under Section 499 IPC to be committed:
 Imputation: There must be an imputation made or published about a person.
 Harm to reputation: The imputation must be likely to harm the reputation of the person.
 Intention or knowledge: The person making or publishing the imputation must intend to harm the
reputation of the person or know that the imputation is likely to harm the reputation of the person.
Application
Section 499 IPC can be applied to any situation where a person makes or publishes an imputation about another
person that is likely to harm their reputation. The imputation can be true or false.
Exceptions
Section 499 IPC contains a number of exceptions, which means that certain types of imputations are not
considered to be defamatory. These exceptions include:
 Imputations of truth which public good requires to be made or published.
 Imputations made in good faith concerning the conduct of a public servant in the discharge of his public
functions.
 Imputations made in good faith concerning the character, conduct, or capacity of any person whose
character, conduct, or capacity it is the duty of the person making the imputation to discuss.
 Imputations made in good faith in order to protect the interests of the person making the imputation or of
any other person.
Punishment
The punishment for defamation under Section 499 IPC is imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years,
or with fine, or with both.
Challenges
Section 499 IPC has been criticized for being too broad and for restricting freedom of speech. However, the
Supreme Court of India has held that Section 499 IPC is a necessary law to protect the reputation of individuals.
Conclusion
Section 499 IPC is a complex law that can be difficult to apply. It is important to seek legal advice if you are unsure
whether or not your conduct constitutes defamation.

 SECTIONS 500
Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the punishment for defamation. It states that whoever defames
another shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of the offence of defamation under Section 500 IPC
The following elements must be present for an offence of defamation under Section 500 IPC to be committed:
 Imputation: There must be an imputation made or published about a person.
 Harm to reputation: The imputation must be likely to harm the reputation of the person.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 149

 Intention or knowledge: The person making or publishing the imputation must intend to harm the
reputation of the person or know that the imputation is likely to harm the reputation of the person.
Punishment for defamation under Section 500 IPC
The punishment for defamation under Section 500 IPC is imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years,
or with fine, or with both.
Compoundable offence
Defamation is a compoundable offence, which means that the victim can forgive the offender and the case can be
withdrawn. However, the court can still take suo motu cognizance of a defamation case if it is in the public interest
to do so.
Conclusion
Defamation is a serious offence in India. It is important to be aware of the law and to take steps to avoid making or
publishing defamatory imputations.

 SECTIONS 501
Section 501 of the Indian Penal Code deals with aggravated defamation. It states that whoever publishes any
imputation concerning any person with intent to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such
imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, and makes or publishes such imputations knowing or having
reason to believe that they are false, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two
years, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of the offence of aggravated defamation under Section 501 IPC
The following elements must be present for an offence of aggravated defamation under Section 501 IPC to be
committed:
 Imputation: There must be an imputation made or published about a person.
 Harm to reputation: The imputation must be likely to harm the reputation of the person.
 Intention to harm or knowledge that the imputation is likely to harm: The person making or publishing the
imputation must intend to harm the reputation of the person or know that the imputation is likely to harm
the reputation of the person.
 Knowledge that the imputation is false: The person making or publishing the imputation must know that
the imputation is false or have reason to believe that the imputation is false.
Punishment for aggravated defamation under Section 501 IPC
The punishment for aggravated defamation under Section 501 IPC is imprisonment for a term which may extend to
two years, or with fine, or with both.
Defenses to aggravated defamation
The defenses available to people who are accused of aggravated defamation are the same as the defenses available
to people who are accused of defamation under Section 499 IPC. These defenses include:
 Truth: If the imputation made or published is true, then there is no aggravated defamation.
 Privilege: If the imputation made or published is made in the course of performing a legal duty or in order
to protect the interests of the person making the imputation or of any other person, then there is no
aggravated defamation.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 150

 Fair comment: If the imputation made or published is a fair comment on a matter of public interest, then
there is no aggravated defamation.
Conclusion
Aggravated defamation is a more serious offence than defamation under Section 499 IPC. It is important to be
aware of the law and to take steps to avoid making or publishing defamatory imputations, especially if you know
that the imputations are false.

 SECTIONS 502
Section 502 of the Indian Penal Code deals with criminal defamation. It states that whoever publishes any
imputation concerning any person, with intent to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such
imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, and which is intended to provoke him to commit an offence
against the person making or publishing such imputation, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which
may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of the offence of criminal defamation under Section 502 IPC
The following elements must be present for an offence of criminal defamation under Section 502 IPC to be
committed:
 Imputation: There must be an imputation made or published about a person.
 Harm to reputation: The imputation must be likely to harm the reputation of the person.
 Intention to harm or knowledge that the imputation is likely to harm: The person making or publishing the
imputation must intend to harm the reputation of the person or know that the imputation is likely to harm
the reputation of the person.
 Intention to provoke: The person making or publishing the imputation must intend to provoke the person
to whom the imputation is made to commit an offence against the person making or publishing the
imputation.
Punishment for criminal defamation under Section 502 IPC
The punishment for criminal defamation under Section 502 IPC is imprisonment for a term which may extend to
three years, or with fine, or with both.
Defenses to criminal defamation
The defenses available to people who are accused of criminal defamation are the same as the defenses available to
people who are accused of aggravated defamation under Section 501 IPC. These defenses include:
 Truth: If the imputation made or published is true, then there is no criminal defamation.
 Privilege: If the imputation made or published is made in the course of performing a legal duty or in order
to protect the interests of the person making the imputation or of any other person, then there is no
criminal defamation.
 Fair comment: If the imputation made or published is a fair comment on a matter of public interest, then
there is no criminal defamation.
Conclusion
Criminal defamation is the most serious form of defamation under the Indian Penal Code. It is important to be
aware of the law and to take steps to avoid making or publishing defamatory imputations, especially if you intend
to provoke the person to whom the imputation is made to commit an offence against you.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 151

CRIMINAL INTIMIDATION AND ANNOYANCE AND ATTEMPT TO COMMIT SUCH OFFENCES

Criminal intimidation and annoyance are serious offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). They can have a
devastating impact on the victim's mental and emotional health, and can even lead to physical harm.
Criminal intimidation is defined as threatening someone with violence or harm in order to compel them to do
something or to prevent them from doing something. Annoyance is defined as repeated or persistent conduct that
causes someone to suffer mental or emotional distress.
Attempt to commit criminal intimidation and annoyance is also an offence under the IPC. It occurs when someone
takes steps to commit criminal intimidation or annoyance, but does not succeed.
Examples of criminal intimidation and annoyance
Some examples of criminal intimidation and annoyance include:
 Threatening to kill or harm someone
 Threatening to damage someone's property
 Harassing someone through phone calls, text messages, or social media
 Following someone around
 Repeatedly making unwanted sexual advances
Punishment for criminal intimidation and annoyance
The punishment for criminal intimidation and annoyance under the IPC varies depending on the severity of the
offence. However, it can include imprisonment for up to three years, or a fine, or both.
If you are a victim of criminal intimidation or annoyance, it is important to seek help from the police. You can also
file a complaint with the National Commission for Women or the National Commission for Minorities, depending
on your circumstances.
Here are some tips for staying safe if you are being intimidated or harassed:
 Keep a record of all incidents, including the date, time, and what happened.
 Tell someone you trust about what is happening.
 If you feel unsafe, go to a safe place, such as a friend's house or a police station.
 Report the incidents to the police.

 SECTIONS 506
Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code deals with criminal intimidation. It states that whoever commits criminal
intimidation shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with
both.
Elements of the offence of criminal intimidation under Section 506 IPC
The following elements must be present for an offence of criminal intimidation under Section 506 IPC to be
committed:
 Threat: There must be a threat made to the victim.
 Intention to cause alarm or fear: The person making the threat must intend to cause the victim alarm or
fear.
 Capability of carrying out the threat: The person making the threat must have the capability of carrying
out the threat.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 152

Punishment for criminal intimidation under Section 506 IPC

The punishment for criminal intimidation under Section 506 IPC is imprisonment for a term which may extend to
three years, or with fine, or with both.
Exceptions to criminal intimidation
Section 506 IPC contains a number of exceptions, which means that certain threats are not considered to be
criminal intimidation. These exceptions include:
 Threats made in good faith for the protection of oneself or of other persons from injury, or for the
protection of property.
 Threats made by public officers in the discharge of their official duties.
 Threats made in the course of legal proceedings.
Defenses to criminal intimidation
There are a number of defenses available to people who are accused of criminal intimidation. These defenses
include:
 Consent: If the victim consents to the threat, then there is no criminal intimidation.
 Necessity: If the threat is made in a situation of necessity, then there is no criminal intimidation.
 Mistake of fact: If the person making the threat makes a mistake of fact about the ability to carry out the
threat, then there is no criminal intimidation.
Conclusion
Criminal intimidation is a serious offence under the Indian Penal Code. It can have a devastating impact on the
victim's mental and emotional health. It is important to be aware of the law and to take steps to avoid threatening
others.
 SECTIONS 507
Section 507 of the Indian Penal Code deals with criminal intimidation by an anonymous communication. It states
that whoever commits criminal intimidation by an anonymous communication shall be punished with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of the offence of criminal intimidation by an anonymous communication under Section 507 IPC
The following elements must be present for an offence of criminal intimidation by an anonymous communication
under Section 507 IPC to be committed:
 Threat: There must be a threat made to the victim.
 Anonymous communication: The threat must be made through an anonymous communication.
 Intention to cause alarm or fear: The person making the threat must intend to cause the victim alarm or
fear.
 Capability of carrying out the threat: The person making the threat must have the capability of carrying
out the threat.
Punishment for criminal intimidation by an anonymous communication under Section 507 IPC
The punishment for criminal intimidation by an anonymous communication under Section 507 IPC is
imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Examples of criminal intimidation by an anonymous communication
Some examples of criminal intimidation by an anonymous communication include:
 Sending threatening letters to the victim.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 153

 Leaving threatening messages on the victim's phone or social media.

 Posting threatening messages on the victim's website or blog.
 Sending threatening emails to the victim.
Conclusion
Criminal intimidation by an anonymous communication is a serious offence under the Indian Penal Code. It can
have a devastating impact on the victim's mental and emotional health. It is important to be aware of the law and
to take steps to avoid making anonymous threats.

 SECTIONS 508
Section 508 of the Indian Penal Code deals with criminal intimidation by using a false name or false pretenses. It
states that whoever commits criminal intimidation by using a false name or false pretenses shall be punished with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of the offence of criminal intimidation by using a false name or false pretenses under Section 508 IPC
The following elements must be present for an offence of criminal intimidation by using a false name or false
pretenses under Section 508 IPC to be committed:
 Threat: There must be a threat made to the victim.
 False name or false pretenses: The threat must be made under a false name or false pretenses.
 Intention to cause alarm or fear: The person making the threat must intend to cause the victim alarm or
fear.
 Capability of carrying out the threat: The person making the threat must have the capability of carrying
out the threat.
Punishment for criminal intimidation by using a false name or false pretenses under Section 508 IPC
The punishment for criminal intimidation by using a false name or false pretenses under Section 508 IPC is
imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Examples of criminal intimidation by using a false name or false pretenses
Some examples of criminal intimidation by using a false name or false pretenses include:
 Pretending to be a police officer and threatening to arrest the victim.
 Pretending to be a government official and threatening to take away the victim's property.
 Pretending to be a doctor and threatening to harm the victim's health.
 Pretending to be a lawyer and threatening to sue the victim.
Conclusion
Criminal intimidation by using a false name or false pretenses is a serious offence under the Indian Penal Code. It
can have a devastating impact on the victim's mental and emotional health. It is important to be aware of the law
and to take steps to avoid making threats under a false name or false pretenses.

 SECTIONS 509
Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code deals with word, gesture, or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman. It
states that whoever, intending to insult the modesty of any woman, utters any word, makes any gesture, or exhibits
any object, intending that such word or gesture or object may be seen or heard by such woman, or intrudes upon
the privacy of such woman, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may
extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 154

Elements of the offence of insult to the modesty of a woman under Section 509 IPC
The following elements must be present for an offence of insult to the modesty of a woman under Section 509 IPC
to be committed:
 Intention to insult the modesty of a woman: The person must intend to insult the modesty of a woman.
 Word, gesture, or act: The word, gesture, or act must be intended to insult the modesty of the woman.
 Seen or heard by the woman: The word, gesture, or act must be intended to be seen or heard by the
woman.
 Intrusion on the privacy of the woman: The person must intrude upon the privacy of the woman.
Punishment for insult to the modesty of a woman under Section 509 IPC
The punishment for insult to the modesty of a woman under Section 509 IPC is imprisonment of either description
for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
Examples of insult to the modesty of a woman
Some examples of insult to the modesty of a woman include:
 Making lewd or obscene remarks to a woman.
 Making sexual gestures towards a woman.
 Exhibiting pornographic material to a woman.
 Invading a woman's personal space without her consent.
 Following a woman in a threatening manner.
Conclusion
Insult to the modesty of a woman is a serious offence under the Indian Penal Code. It can have a devastating impact
on the victim's mental and emotional health. It is important to be aware of the law and to take steps to avoid
insulting the modesty of women.

 SECTIONS 510
Section 510 of the Indian Penal Code deals with attempt to commit criminal intimidation. It states that whoever
attempts to commit criminal intimidation shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of the offence of attempt to commit criminal intimidation under Section 510 IPC
The following elements must be present for an offence of attempt to commit criminal intimidation under Section
510 IPC to be committed:
 Intention to commit criminal intimidation: The person must intend to commit criminal intimidation.
 Actus reus: The person must take some steps towards committing criminal intimidation.
Punishment for attempt to commit criminal intimidation under Section 510 IPC
The punishment for attempt to commit criminal intimidation under Section 510 IPC is imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.
Examples of attempt to commit criminal intimidation
Some examples of attempt to commit criminal intimidation include:
 Threatening to kill or harm someone, but not following through with the threat.
 Damaging someone's property, but not damaging it enough to cause serious harm.
 Following someone around, but not making any threats or demands.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU

 155

 Sending threatening letters or messages, but not actually threatening to carry out the threats.
Conclusion
Attempt to commit criminal intimidation is a serious offence under the Indian Penal Code. It can have a devastating
impact on the victim's mental and emotional health. It is important to be aware of the law and to take steps to
avoid attempting to commit criminal intimidation.

 SECTIONS 511
Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code deals with attempt to commit annoyance. It states that whoever attempts to
commit annoyance shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one
year, or with fine, or with both.
Elements of the offence of attempt to commit annoyance under Section 511 IPC
The following elements must be present for an offence of attempt to commit annoyance under Section 511 IPC to
be committed:
 Intention to commit annoyance: The person must intend to commit annoyance.
 Actus reus: The person must take some steps towards committing annoyance.
Punishment for attempt to commit annoyance under Section 511 IPC
The punishment for attempt to commit annoyance under Section 511 IPC is imprisonment of either description for
a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.
Examples of attempt to commit annoyance
Some examples of attempt to commit annoyance include:
 Following someone around and making repeated unwanted contact.
 Sending repeated unwanted messages or emails.
 Making repeated unwanted phone calls.
 Damaging someone's property in a minor way.
 Making threats to cause annoyance, but not following through with the threats.
Conclusion
Attempt to commit annoyance is a serious offence under the Indian Penal Code. It can have a significant impact on
the victim's mental and emotional health. It is important to be aware of the law and to take steps to avoid
attempting to commit annoyance.

©NITHEESH NOTES CRIMINAL LAW IPC SEM 4 KSLU