Concealing design to commit offence punishable with imprisonment Whoever, intending to facilitate or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby facilitate the commission of an offence punishable with imprisonment, voluntarily conceals, by any act or illegal omission, the existence of a design to commit such offence, or makes any representation which he knows to be false respecting such design, If offence be committed—if offence be not committed. 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: Proviso Provided the act done was a probable consequence of the abetment, and was committed under the influence of the instigation, or with the aid or in pursuance of the conspiracy which constituted the abetment. Imprisonment for 6 months, or fine of 500 rupees, or both. Rioting Whenever force or violence is used by an unlawful assembly, or by any member thereof, in prosecution of the common object of such assembly, every member of such assembly is guilty of the offence of rioting. Therefore, in the absence of any circumstances to show that the injury was caused accidentally or unintentionally, it had to be presumed that the accused had intended to cause the inflicted injury and the condition of cl. Illustration A gives false evidence before a Court of Justice intending thereby to cause Z to be convicted of a dacoity. Therefore A is liable to imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years and also to a fine; and if any hurt be done to Z in consequence of the abetment, he will be liable to imprisonment for a term which may extend to fourteen years, and to fine.
When considering the question of bail, the gravity of the offence involved and the heinousness of the crime which are likely to induce the petitioner to avoid the course of justice must weigh with the court. Comments Mens rea Mens rea is a necessary ingredient for the offence under section 153A of the Indian Penal Code; Bilal Ahmed Kaloo v. In the instant case the circumstances and the social milieu do not militate against the petitioner being granted bail on monetary suretyship at this stage. Extortion by threat of accusation of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life, etc. Participation in the Criminal Act i To apply section 34, apart from the fact that there should be two or more accused, two factors must be established: i common intention, and ii participation of accused in the commission of an offence.
Out of these 26 faced the trial before the Designated Court. Illegal purchase or bid for property offered for sale by authority of public servant Whoever, at any sale of property held by the lawful authority of a public servant, as such, purchases or bids for any property on account of any person, whether himself or any other, whom he knows to be under a legal incapacity to purchase that property at that sale, or bids for such property not intending to perform the obligations under which he lays himself by such bidding, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one month, or with fine which may extend to two hundred rupees, or with both. The conditions precedent for establishing an offence under this section are as follows: a that a married woman had died otherwise than under normal circumstances; b such death was within seven years of her marriage; and c the prosecution has established that there was cruelty and harassment in connection with demand for dowry soon before her death; Baljit Singh v. When considering the question of bail, the gravity of the offence involved and the heinousness of the crime which are likely to induce the petitioner to avoid the course of justice must weigh with the court. It is agreed that A shall administer the poison. C pays away the rupees for good to D, who receives them, not knowing them to be counterfeit. A has committed the offence defined in this section.
Explanation 3 A person is said to cause a thing to move by removing an obstacle which prevented it from moving or by separating it from any other thing, as well as by actually moving it. B, having ill-will towards Z and intending to kill him, and not having been subject to the provocation, assists A in killing Z. Extent to which the right may be exercised The right to private defence in no case extends to the inflicting of more harm that it is necessary to inflict for the purpose of defence. This section is attracted when a person voluntarily causes hurt to other person. Explanation Whether the provocation was grave and sudden enough to prevent the offence from amounting to murder is a question of fact. What Section 42 sub-section f iii of Code of Criminal Procedure Amendment Act, 2005 No. Added by Act 3 of 1894.
Intention of causing death When the appellant dealt a severe knife blow on the stomach of deceased without provocation and when deceased was unarmed and had already been injured by co-accused the appellant cannot be held that he had no intention to cause a murderous assault by mere fact that only one blow was inflicted; Nashik v. Here A has not committed the offence defined in this section. Erasure of mark denoting that stamp has been used Whoever, fraudulently or with intent to cause loss to Government, erase or removes from a stamp issued by the 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 knowingly has in his possession or sells or disposes of any such stamp from which such mark has been erased or removed, or sell or disposes of any such stamp which he knows to have been used, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both. His servant A, before the money comes into the possession of any person entitled to such possession, dishonestly misappropriates it. Exception: — The obstruction of a private way over land or water which a person in good faith believes himself to have lawful right to obstruct, is not an offence within the meaning of this section. Assaulting or obstructing public servant when suppressing riot, etc.
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. It is sufficient that he knows of the order which he disobeys, and that his disobedience produces, or is likely to produce, harm. Comments Ingredients The delay in hearing of appeal for long period is no cause for not interfering with an order of acquittal which was based on conjectures and surmises, resulting in gross failure of justice; State of Rajasthan v. Sections 225A and 225B subs. The circumstances indicate the intention of causing death, Section 34 applies.
Here, though the robbery be not committed, B is liable to one-half of the longest term of imprisonment provided for the offence of robbery, and also to fine. The Court held that one of the injuries inflicted by the appellant was on a vital part of the body of the deceased whom the appellant had no intention to kill, at the same time though he had no intention to kill, the appellant must have known that he was inflicting such bodily injuries as were likely to cause death as a consequence of which death did happen. Prosecution examined 288 witnesses and produced numerous documents and material objects. Explanation A woman who causes herself to miscarry, is within the meaning of this section. Her husband again demanded a sum of Rs.
Comments Age of the prosecutrix i Where the age of prosecutrix was 14 years at the time of incident not proved while test report suggested her age about 40 years and further she had willingly gone with accused without making complaints to any body on way thus no offence is made out and as such conviction is liable to set aside; Shakeel alias Pappoo v. 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 of as long as the fear of instant death or of instant hurt or of instant personal restraint continues. So, complainant can approach the magistrate under Section 156 3 Cr. Comments i When no part of prosecution case is found reliable including the alleged recovery of stolen property at the instance of accused it seems to be on effort by police to involve the accused persons by hook or by crook therefore conviction of co-accused is also liable to be set aside; State v. 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. 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, it if 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. 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 a 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.