IPC
- Indian Penal Code
CHAPTER IV : GENERAL EXCEPTIONS
76. Act done by a person bound, or by mistake of fact believing himself
bound, by law
Nothing
is an offence which is done by a person who is, or who by reason of a
mistake of fact and not by reason of a mistake of law in good faith believes
himself to be, bound by law to do it.
Illustrations
(a) A,
a soldier, fires on a mob by the order of his superior officer, in conformity
with the commands of the law. A has committed no offence.
(b) A,
an officer of a Court of Justice, being ordered by that Court to arrest
Y, and, after due enquiry, believing Z to be Y, arrests Z. A has committed
no offence.
77. Act of Judge when acting judicially
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.
78. Act done pursuant to the judgment or order of Court
Nothing
which is done in pursuance of, or which is warranted by the judgment or
order of, a Court of Justice; if done whilst such judgment or order remains
in force, is an offence, notwithstanding the Court may have had no jurisdiction
to pass such judgment or order, provided the person doing the act in good
faith believes that the Court had such jurisdiction.
79. Act done by a person justified, or by mistake of fact believing
himself justified, by law
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.
Illustration
A sees
Z commit what appears to A to be a murder. A, in the exercise, to the
best of his judgment exerted in good faith, of the power which the law
gives to all persons of apprehending murderers in the fact, seizes Z,
in order to bring Z before the proper authorities. A has committed no
offence, though it may turn out that Z was acting in self-defence.
80. Accident in doing a lawful act
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.
Illustration
A is at
work with a hatchet; the head flies off and kills a man who is standing
by. Here, if there was no want of proper caution on the part of A, his
act is excusable and not an offence.
81. Act likely to cause harm, but done without criminal intent,
and to prevent other harm
Nothing
is an offence 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 person or property.
Explanation.-
It is question of fact in such a case whether the harm to be prevented
or avoided was of such a nature and so imminent as to justify or excuse
the risk of doing the act with the knowledge that it was likely to cause
harm.
Illustrations
(a) A,
the captain of a steam vessel, suddenly and without any fault or negligence
on his part, finds himself in such a position that, before he can stop
his vessel, he must inevitably run down to boat B, with twenty or thirty
passengers on board, unless he changes the course of his vessel, and that,
by changing his course, he must incur risk of running down a boat C with
only two passengers on board, which he may possibly clear. Here, if A
alters his course without any intention to run down the boat C and in
good faith for the purpose of avoiding the danger to the passengers in
the boat B, he is not guilty of an offence, though he may run down the
boat C by doing an act which he knew was likely to cause that effect,
if it be found as a matter of fact that the danger which he intended to
avoid was such as to excuse him in incurring the risk of running down
the boat C.
(b) A,
in a great fire, pulls down houses in order to prevent the conflagration
from spreading He does this with the intention in good faith of saving
human life or property. Here, if it be found that the harm to be prevented
was of such a nature and so imminent as to excuse A's act. A is not guilty
of the offence.
82. Act of a child under seven years of age
Nothing
is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age.
83. Act of a child above seven and under twelve of immature understanding
Nothing
is an offence which is done by a child above seven years of age and under
twelve, who has not attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge
of the nature and consequences of his conduct on that occasion.
84. Act of a person of-unsound mind
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 either wrong or contrary to law.
85. Act of a person incapable of judgment by reason of intoxication
caused against his will
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 either wrong, or contrary to law; provided
that the thing which intoxicated him was administered to him without his
knowledge or a against his will.
86. Offence requiring a particular intent or knowledge committed
by one who is intoxicated
In cases
where an act done is not an offence 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.
87. Act not intended and not known to be likely to cause death
or grievous hurt, done by consent
Nothing
which is not intended to cause death, or grievous hurt, and which is not
known by the doer to be likely to cause death or grievous hurt, is an
offence by reason of any harm which it may cause, or be intended by the
doer to cause, to any person, above eighteen years of age, who has given
consent, whether express or implied, to suffer that harm; or by reason
of any harm which it may be known by the doer to be likely to cause to
any such person who has consented to take the risk of that harm.
Illustration
A and Z
agrees to fence with each other for amusement. This agreement implies
the consent of each to suffer any harm which, in the course of such fencing,
may be caused without foul play; and if A, while playing fairly, hurts
Z, A commits no offence.
88. 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 offence 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.
Illustration
A, a surgeon,
knowing that a particular operation is likely to cause the death of Z,
who suffers under a painful complaint, but not intending to cause Z's
death and intending in good faith, Z's benefit performs that operation
on Z, with Z's consent. A has committed no offence.
89. Act done in good faith for benefit of child or insane person,
by or by consent of guardian
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 offence 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:
Provisos-
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, or the curing of any grievous
disease or infirmity;
Thirdly-
That this exception shall not extend to the voluntary causing of grievous
hurt, or to the attempting to cause grievous hurt, unless it be for the
purpose of preventing death or grievous hurt, or the curing of any grievous
disease or infirmity;
Fourthly-
That this exception shall not extend to the abetment of any offence, to
the committing of which offence it would not extend.
Illustration
A, in
good faith, for his child's benefit without his child's consent, has his
child cut for the stone by a surgeon, knowing it to be likely that the
operation will cause the child's death, but not intending to cause the
child's death. A is within the exception in as much as his object was
the cure of the child.
90. 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.
91. Exclusion of acts which are offences independently of harm
caused
The exceptions
in sections 87, 88 and 89 do not extend to acts which are offences independently
of any harm which they may cause, or be intended to cause, or be known
to be likely to cause, to the person giving the consent, or on whose behalf
the consent is given.
Illustration
Causing
miscarriage (unless caused in good faith for the purpose of saving the
life of the woman) is an offence independently of any harm which it may
cause or be intended to cause to the woman. Therefore, it is not an offence
"by reason of such harm"; and the consent of the woman or of
her guardian to the causing of such miscarriage does not justify the act.
92. Act done in good faith for benefit of a person without consent
Nothing
is an offence 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:
Provisos-
Provided-
First-
That this exception shall not extend to the intentional causing of death,
or 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, or the curing of any grievous
disease or infirmity;
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 offence, to
the committing of which offence it would not extend.
Illustrations
(a) Z
is thrown from his horse, and is insensible. A, a surgeon, finds that
Z requires to be trepanned. A, not intending Z's death, but in good faith,
for Z's benefit, performs the trepan before Z recovers his power of judging
for himself. A has committed no offence.
(b) Z
is carried off by a tiger. A fires at the tiger knowing it to be likely
that the shot may kill Z, but not intending to kill Z, and in good faith
intending Z’s benefit. A's ball gives Z a mortal wound. A has committed
on offence.
(c) A,
a surgeon, sees a child suffer an accident which is likely to prove fatal
unless an operation be immediately performed. There is no time to apply
to the child's guardian. A performs the operation in spite of the entreaties
of the child, intending, in Good faith, the child's benefit. A has committed
no offence.
(d) A
is in a house which is on fire, with Z, a child. People below hold out
a blanket. A drops the child from the housetop, knowing it to be likely
that the fall may kill the child, but not intending to kill the child,
and intending, in good faith, the child's benefit. Here, even if the child
is killed by the fall, A has committed no offence.
Explanation-
Mere pecuniary benefit is not benefit within the meaning of sections 88,
89 and 92.
93. Communication made in good faith
No communication
made in good faith is an offence by reason of any harm to the person to
whom it is made, if it is made for the benefit of that person.
Illustration
A, a surgeon,
in good faith, communicates to a patient his opinion that he cannot live.
The patient dies in consequence of the shock. A has committed no offence,
though he knew it to be likely that the communication might cause the
patient's death.
94. Act to which a person is compelled by threats
Except
murder, and offences against the State punishable with death, nothing
is an offence which 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 short of instant death, place himself
in the situation by which he became subject to such constraint.
Explanation
1- A person who, of his own accord, or by reason of a threat of being
beaten, joins a gang of dacoits, knowing their character, is not entitled
to the benefit of this exception, on the ground of his having been compelled
by his associates to do anything that is an offence by law.
Explanation
2- A person seized by a gang of dacoits, and forced, by threat of instant
death, to do a thing which is an offence by law; for example, a smith
compelled to take his tools and to force the door of a house for the dacoits
to enter and plunder it, is entitled to the benefit of this exception.
95. Act causing slight harm
Nothing
is an offence 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.
Of the
Right of Private Defence
96. Things done in private defence
Nothing
is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence.
97. Right of private defence of the body and of property
Every person
has a right, subject to the restrictions contained in section 99, to defend-
First-
His own body, and the body of any other person, against any offence affecting
the human body;
Secondly-
The property, whether movable or immovable, of himself or of any other
person, against any act which is an offence falling under the definition
of theft, robbery, mischief or criminal trespass, or which is an attempt
to commit theft, robbery, mischief or criminal trespass.
98. Right of private defence against the act of a person of unsound
mind, etc.
When an
act, which would otherwise be a certain offence, is not that offence,
by reason of the youth, the want of maturity of understanding, the unsoundness
of mind or the intoxication of the person doing that act, or by reason
of any misconception on the part of that person, every person has the
same right of private defence against that act which he would have if
the act were that offence.
Illustrations
(a) Z,
under the influence of madness, attempts to kill A; Z is guilty of no
offence. But A has the same right of private defence which he would have
if Z were sane.
(b) A
enters by night a house which he is legally entitled to enter Z, in good
faith, taking A for a house-breaker, attacks A. Here Z, by attacking A
under this misconception, commits no offence. But A has the same right
of private defence against Z, which he would have if Z were not acting
under that misconception.
99. Acts against which there is no right of private defence
There is
no right of private defence against an act which does not reasonably cause
the apprehension of death or of grievous hurt, if done, or attempted to
be done, by a public servant acting in good faith under colour of his
office, though that act, may not be strictly justifiable by law.
There is
no right of private defence against an act which does not, reasonably
cause the apprehension of death or of grievous hurt, if done, or attempted
to be done, by the direction of a public servant acting in good faith
under colour of his office, though that direction may not be strictly
justifiable by law
There is
no right of private defence in cases in which there is time to have recourse
to the protection of the public authorities.
Extent
to which the right may be exercised-
The right
of private defence in no case extends to the inflicting. of more harm
than it is necessary to inflict for the purpose of defence.
Explanation
1- A person is not deprived of the right of private defence against an
act done, or attempted to be done, by a public servant, as such, unless
he knows or has reason to believe, that the person doing the act is such
public servant.
Explanation
2- A person is not deprived of the right of private defence against an
act done, or attempted to be done, by the direction of a public servant,
unless he knows, or has reason to believe, that the person doing the act
is acting by such direction, or unless such person states the authority
under which he acts, or if he has authority in writing, unless he produces
such authority, if demanded.
100. When the right of private defence of the body extends to
causing death
The right
of private defence of the body extends, under the restrictions mentioned
in the last preceding section, to the voluntary causing of death or of
any other harm to the assailant, if the offence which occasions the exercise
of the right be of any of the descriptions hereinafter enumerated, namely:-
First-
Such an assault as may reasonably cause the apprehension that death will
otherwise be the consequence of such assault;
Secondly-
Such an assault as may reasonably cause the apprehension that grievous
hurt will otherwise be the consequence of such assault;
Thirdly-
An assault with the intention of committing rape;
Fourthly-
An assault with the intention of gratifying unnatural lust;
Fifthly-
An assault with the intention of kidnapping or abducting;
Sixthly-
An assault with the intention of wrongfully confining a person, under
circumstances which may reasonably cause him to apprehend that he will
be unable to have recourse to the public authorities for his release.
101. When such right extends to causing any harm other than death
If the
offence be not of any of the descriptions enumerated in the last preceding
section, the right of private defence of the body does not extend to the
voluntary causing of death to the assailant, but does extend, under the
restrictions mentioned in section 99, to the voluntary causing to the
assailant of any harm other than death.
102. Commencement and continuance of the right of private defence
of the body
The right
of private defence of the body commences as soon as a reasonable apprehension
of danger to the body arises from an attempt or threat to commit the offence
though the offence may not have been committed; and it continues as long
as such apprehension of danger to the body continues.
103. When the right of private defence of property extends to
causing death
The right
of private defence of property extends, under the restrictions mentioned
in section 99, to the voluntary causing of death or of any other harm
to the wrong-doer, if the offence, the committing of which, or the attempting
to commit which, occasions the exercise of the right, be an offence of
any of the descriptions hereinafter enumerated, namely:-
First-
Robbery;
Secondly-
House-breaking by night;
Thirdly-
Mischief by fire committed on any building, tent or vessel, which building,
tent or vessel is used as a human dwelling, or as a place for the custody
of property;
Fourthly-
Theft, mischief, or house-trespass, under such circumstances as may reasonably
cause apprehension that death or grievous hurt will be the consequence,
if such right of private defence is not exercised.
STATE
AMENDMENTS
In
State of Karnataka w.e.f. 7th. October, 1972
(1) In
clause Thirdly,-
(i) after
the words "mischief by fire", the words "or any explosive
substance" shall be inserted;
(ii) after
the words "as a human dwelling, or" insert the words "as
a place of worship, or".
(2) After
clause Fourthly, the following clause shall be inserted, namely:-
"Fifthly-
Mischief by fire or any explosive substance committed on any property
used or intended to be used for the purpose of Government or any local
authority, statutory body or company owned or controlled by Government
or railway or any vehicle used or adapted to be used for the carriage
of passengers for hire or reward".
In
State of Maharashtra w.e.f. 31st. December, 1971
In section
103, insert the following at the end, namely:-
"Fifthly-
Mischief by fire or any explosive substance committed on any property
used or intended to be used for the purposes of Government or any local
authority, statutory body, company owned or controlled by Government,
railway or tramway, or on any vehicle used or adapted to be used, for
the carriage of passengers for hire or reward".
In
State of Uttar Pradesh w.e.f. 17th. July, 1970
In section
103, after clause fourthly, add the following clause, namely:-
"Fifthly-
Mischief by fire or any explosive substance committed on-
(a) Any
property used or intended to be used for the purpose of Government, or
any local authority or other corporation owned or controlled by the Government,
or
(b) any
railway as defined in clause (4) of section 3 of the Indian Railways Act,
1890 or railways stores as defined in the Railways Stores (Unlawful Possession)
Act, 1955, or
(c) any
transport vehicle as defined in clause (33) of section 2 of the Motor
Vehicles Act. 1939."
104. When such right extends to causing any harm other than death
If the
offence, the committing of which, or the attempting to commit which, occasions
the exercise of the right of private defence, be theft, mischief, or criminal
trespass, not of any of the descriptions enumerated in the last preceding
section, that right does not extend to the voluntary causing of death,
but does extend, subject to the restrictions mentioned in section 99,
to the voluntary causing to the wrong-doer of any harm other than death.
105. Commencement and continuance of the right of private defence
of property
The right
of private defence of property commences when a reasonable apprehension
of dancer to the property commences.
The right
of private defence 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.
The right
of private defence of property against robbery continues as long as the
offender causes or attempts to cause to any person death or hurt or wrongful
restraint or as long as the fear of instant death or of instant hurt or
of instant personal restraint continues.
The right
of private defence of property against criminal trespass or mischief continues
as long as the offender continues in the commission of criminal trespass
or mischief.
The right
of private defence of property against house-breaking by night continues
as long as the house-trespass which has been begun by such house-breaking
continues.
106. Right of private defence against deadly assault when there
is risk of harm to innocent person
If in the
exercise of the right of private defence against an assault which reasonably
causes the apprehension of death, the defender be so situated that he
cannot effectually exercise that right without risk of harm to an innocent
person, his right of private defence extends to the running of that risk.
Illustration
A. is
attacked by a mob who attempt to murder him. He cannot effectually exercise
his right of private defence without firing on the mob, and he cannot
fire without risk of harming young children who are mingled with the mob.
A commits no offence if by so firing he harms any of the children.
|
