chapter vi put forward exception to this general rule

Upload: manujplamootil

Post on 04-Jun-2018

215 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • 8/13/2019 Chapter VI Put Forward Exception to This General Rule

    1/2

    Chapter VI put forward exception to this general rule, which can be summarized thus:

    1. Judicial acts (SS, 77, 78)

    2. Mistake of fact (SS, 76, 79)

    3. Accident

    4. Absence of criminal intent. (SS 81-86, 92-94)

    5. Consent (SS 87-90)

    6. Trifling Acts. (S.95)

    7. Private Defence (SS, 96-106)

    General Exceptions IPC-Short NoteIndian Penal Code is the major criminal law in India which defines substantive offences and prescribestheir respective punishments. Every offence is treated as a crime against society. One of the majorrequirement to accuse any one of an offence is the presence of mens rea or guilty mind. It is the saying inlaw that an act should be coupled with necessary mens rea to constitute a crime. In certain cases even ifthe act is not performed, one can be punished for his guilty mind. Thus forms the importance of mens reain Penal Law. So we must conclude that the presence of guilty intention is the measure of one's guilty act.But there are circumstances in which the mind can be transformed by some external forces to perform the

    illegal act. Thus even though an act is criminal the mind had no intention to perform the same. Such is thecase when an external force instigates the mind to do a crime.In criminal law the most heard saying is that no innocent must be punished even if thousand criminalsescape. It will not be just to punish someone who was controlled by a criminal as a puppet to do an illegalact. Like wise, there are certain circumstances which would exempt a person from major punishmentor entitle to smaller punishments. Such circumstances are termed 'General Exceptions' in the IPC. Theyare spread throughout Sections 76 to 106 of the Code. The exceptions as provided are as follows with therelevant sections in brackets:

    1. Mistake [76, 79]

    2. Judicial acts[77,78]

    3. Accident[80]

    4. Necessity[81]5. Infancy[82,83]

    6. Insanity[84]

    7. Drunkenness[85,86]

    8. Consent[87 to 93]

    9. Compulsion[94]

    10. Trifles[95]

  • 8/13/2019 Chapter VI Put Forward Exception to This General Rule

    2/2

    11. Private Defence[96 to 106]

    The above forms of exceptions are generally divided into two viz. excusable and justifiable. In excusablethe mens rea is completely absent. In justifiable the acts are not left excused; but are justifie

    Mistake-General Exception-Indian Penal CodeExceptions are of two types viz excusable and justifiable. Mistake is an excusable Exception. It iscontained in Chapter IV of IPC in Sections 76 and 79.Section 76 of the IPC says that nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, is or who by reasonof a mistake of fact and not by reason of a mistake of law in good faith believes himself to be, bound bylaw to do it. It is clear from the section itself that only mistake of fact can be put forward as anException. 'Ignorantia juris non excusat' or ignorance of law is not an excuse according to the Section. Soinorder to constitute an exception the necessary ingredients are as follows: There must be an act done

    The act must contain ingredients of an offence

    The act done must be due to ignorance of fact There must be good faith in doing the act ie there must be due care and caution or such belief

    Belief that he is bound by law to do the act.

    Some or all of the above ingredients shall be present in order to plead the General Exception of Mistake.If the act comes under Mistake, the accused will not be punished.

    A similar provision is laid down under Section 79 which says that nothing is an offence which is done byany person who is justified by law, or who by reason of a mistake of fact and not by reason of a mistakeof law in good faith, believes himself to be justified by law, in doing it. Thus if a person sees anothercommit an act which appears to the first person a murder and the first person in good faith seizes theother to be brought before the police, he has not committed an offence of wrongful restraint orconfinement or like those. The reason is that he was under a mistake of fact and in seizing the other he

    has done a lawful thing in good faith.