B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 4 Criminal Law I 2014 Jun Question Paper with Solutions

For full marks, cover: what "variation in liability" means: the same outward act may lead to no liability, less liability or more; the factors arranged by their effect: (A) factors that remove liability (infancy, unsoundness of mind, involuntary intoxication, mistake of fact, accident, compulsion, necessity, consent, private defence, under the General Exceptions of the Indian Penal Code, now Chapter III of the Sanhita), with cases on mistake (Ram Bahadur Thapa) and intoxication (Bablu); (B) factors that reduce it (voluntary intoxication, a child of twelve to eighteen, the Exceptions to section 300, with Surinder Kumar); (C) factors that increase it (a repeat offence under section 75, the status of the offender or victim, weapons, numbers, premeditation); (D) the stage reached and the part played; a table; the Sanhita; a conclusion.

3. Involuntary intoxication (section 85). A person may be made drunk without his knowledge or against his will. If he is then unable to know the nature of the act, or that it is wrong, he commits no offence.

Facts. In Bablu v. State of Rajasthan, (2006) 13 SCC 116, decided on 12 December 2006, a man strangled his wife and four young children and then announced what he had done. Before the Supreme Court he pleaded drunkenness against the death sentence.

Held. The plea failed. Section 85 needs intoxication without the person's knowledge or against his will. Drunkenness matters only if it makes the person incapable of forming the specific intent. Some drink merely makes a man give way more readily to violent passion. That does not rebut the presumption that he intends the natural consequences of his acts. The death sentence was confirmed.

4. Mistake of fact (sections 76 and 79). A person who, by an honest mistake of fact, believes himself bound or justified by law commits no offence.

Facts. In State of Orissa v. Ram Bahadur Thapa, AIR 1960 Ori 161, decided on 9 November 1959, a servant went out at midnight to see ghosts at an old aerodrome. He struck at figures round a lantern, believing them to be ghosts. They were village women, and one died.

B. Factors that reduce liability

1. Voluntary intoxication (section 86). A person who drinks of his own will is not excused. But he is treated as having only the knowledge a sober man would have. An intention requiring proof may be found missing if he was too drunk to form it. So the offence may fall from murder to culpable homicide.

2. A child of twelve to eighteen. The Code gives no exemption, but the juvenile justice law deals with such a child. It aims at care and reform, not ordinary punishment.

3. The Exceptions to section 300. Five circumstances reduce murder to culpable homicide. They are grave and sudden provocation, private defence exceeded in good faith, and a public servant exceeding his powers in good faith. The other two are a sudden fight and the consent of a person over eighteen.

Facts. In Surinder Kumar v. Union Territory, Chandigarh, AIR 1989 SC 1094, decided on 8 March 1989, a quarrel over a kitchen lent for a wedding grew heated. In the scuffle the appellant fatally stabbed a man who had intervened, with a knife he fetched from the kitchen.

4. Weapons and means. Hurt caused by a dangerous weapon (section 324) or grievous hurt by acid (section 326A) is punished more than simple hurt.

5. Numbers. Robbery by five or more is dacoity, punished up to life (section 395). Members of an unlawful assembly share liability for its offences (section 149).

6. Premeditation and cruelty. These may defeat an Exception to section 300 and weigh towards the gravest sentence.

D. The stage reached and the part played

The stage. A bare intention is not punished, and preparation only for a few grave offences. An attempt is punished, usually less than the completed crime (section 511). The completed offence bears the full penalty.

The part played. Each party is liable to a different extent. There is the person who commits the act, and those who share a common intention (section 34). There are also abettors (sections 107 to 117), conspirators (section 120B) and those who help afterwards (sections 201 and 212).

At a glance

Conclusion. Liability for the same act varies with the offender's age and mind, his knowledge of the facts and the pressure he was under. It also varies with the circumstances, the stage reached and the part he played. The General Exceptions remove liability, as Ram Bahadur Thapa shows for mistake, though not for self-induced drink (Bablu). The Exceptions to murder reduce it, as in Surinder Kumar. Repeat offending, status, weapons and numbers increase it.