Quiz on Law of Crimes (Part I)
⚖️ Quiz on Law of Crimes (Part I)
1. What is the definition of “Crime” under the Indian Penal Code?
Answer:
A crime is an act or omission forbidden by law and punishable by the State. Under the IPC, a crime is any act or omission which is declared punishable.
Explanation:
Crime is a breach of a public law that provides for punishment by the state.
Case Law:
K.M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra (1962) — The court highlighted the importance of intention and actus reus (guilty act) in defining crime.
2. What are the two essential ingredients of a crime?
Answer:
Actus Reus (Guilty Act): The physical act or unlawful omission.
Mens Rea (Guilty Mind): The intention or knowledge of wrongdoing.
Explanation:
Both act and intention must be present for an act to be considered a crime.
Case Law:
State of Maharashtra v. Mayer Hans George (1965) — Defined the significance of mens rea.
Shivaji Sahebrao Bobade v. State of Maharashtra (1973) — Mens rea is essential except in strict liability offences.
3. What is the difference between “Culpable Homicide” and “Murder” under the IPC?
Answer:
Culpable Homicide (Section 299 IPC): Causing death with intention or knowledge but without the special conditions.
Murder (Section 300 IPC): A more aggravated form of culpable homicide with additional conditions like the use of deadly weapon, premeditation, or causing death with the intention of causing bodily injury likely to cause death.
Explanation:
All murders are culpable homicide, but not all culpable homicides are murder.
Case Law:
Virsa Singh v. State of Punjab (1958) — Differentiated murder and culpable homicide based on intention and knowledge.
Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980) — Landmark judgment on sentencing for murder.
4. Explain the term “Wrongful Restraint” and “Wrongful Confinement.”
Answer:
Wrongful Restraint (Section 339 IPC): Preventing someone from moving in a direction in which they have a right to proceed.
Wrongful Confinement (Section 340 IPC): Wrongfully restraining a person within certain limits.
Explanation:
Restraint restricts movement in a particular direction; confinement restricts movement within certain limits.
Case Law:
Bhagwan Das v. State of Punjab (1965) — Clarified the difference between restraint and confinement.
5. What is “Criminal Intimidation” under the IPC?
Answer:
Defined under Section 503 IPC, criminal intimidation involves threatening someone with injury to person, reputation, or property with the intent to cause alarm or compel action.
Explanation:
It creates fear of injury in the mind of the victim.
Case Law:
State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh (1996) — Discussed the essentials of intimidation and whether a threat constitutes criminal intimidation.
6. What is “Theft” under the IPC?
Answer:
Section 378 IPC: Theft is the dishonest taking of movable property out of the possession of any person without consent.
Explanation:
The key elements are dishonesty, moving property without consent, and intent to permanently deprive.
Case Law:
K.M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra — Theft defined with focus on dishonest intention.
R. v. Robinson (1977) (English case often cited) — Clarified consent and dishonesty.
7. What is “Voluntarily Causing Hurt”?
Answer:
Defined under Section 319 IPC as causing bodily pain, disease, or infirmity to another person voluntarily.
Explanation:
Intentional causing of harm, even if minor, amounts to hurt.
Case Law:
Kashinath v. State of Maharashtra (1965) — Held that intention to cause hurt is necessary.
8. What is “Attempt to Commit a Crime”?
Answer:
Defined under Section 511 IPC, attempt to commit an offence involves doing an act towards commission of a crime but not completing it.
Explanation:
There must be a direct movement towards the commission of the offence.
Case Law:
R. v. Eagleton (1855) — Early case on attempt, establishing proximity test.
State of Rajasthan v. Kashi Ram (2006) — Clarified attempt must be more than preparation.
9. What is the distinction between “Preparation” and “Attempt” to commit a crime?
Answer:
Preparation: Planning or arranging to commit crime but not yet directly acting.
Attempt: Direct movement toward the commission of the crime after preparation.
Explanation:
Attempt is punishable, preparation is generally not.
Case Law:
Regina v. Eagleton (1855) — The proximity test to distinguish attempt from preparation.
10. What is the “Principle of Double Jeopardy”?
Answer:
Protected under Article 20(2) of the Indian Constitution, it prohibits a person from being tried twice for the same offence.
Explanation:
Ensures fairness and prevents harassment by the state.
Case Law:
Sanjay Dutt v. State (1994) — Affirmed protection against double jeopardy.
Summary Table of Key Sections:
| Offence | IPC Section | Definition/Key Points |
|---|---|---|
| Culpable Homicide | 299 | Causing death with intent or knowledge |
| Murder | 300 | Aggravated form of culpable homicide |
| Wrongful Restraint | 339 | Preventing movement in a particular direction |
| Wrongful Confinement | 340 | Restraining within certain limits |
| Criminal Intimidation | 503 | Threatening injury to cause alarm or compel action |
| Theft | 378 | Dishonest taking of movable property |
| Voluntarily Causing Hurt | 319 | Causing bodily pain or disease voluntarily |
| Attempt to Commit Crime | 511 | Acts towards crime but incomplete |
RELATED Blog
0 comments