Indian Penal Code Sections
Posted By admin On 24.10.19- Section 377 of the Indian penal code defines unnatural offences. The section reads as follows: “Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal, shall be punished”.
- The section states that whoever forges a document which purports to be either a valuable security or a will, or an authority to adopt a son, or []. Ipc 467: Section 467 Of The Indian Penal Code - Kaanoon IPC 467: Section 467 of the Indian Penal Code.
Sep 6, 2018 - The code was compilation of the then existing British laws governing punishment for crimes. Section 377 of the IPC was modeled on a 16th.
Article shared by Legal Provisions of Section 416 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. Cheating by personation: This section defines cheating by personation which is one of the ways in which the offence of cheating is committed. It says that a person is said to ‘cheat by personation’ if he cheats either by pretending to be some other person which he is not, or by knowingly substituting one person for another person, or representing that he is a person other than he really is, or representing that any other person is a person other than such other person really is. ADVERTISEMENTS: The explanation attached to the section states that the offence of cheating by personation is committed whether the individual personated is a real person or an imaginary person. The first illustration clarifies that it is not necessary to change one’s name to commit this offence, and that if there is any other person who also has the same name as that of the accused and the accused cheats by pretending to be that other person, he commits this offence. The second illustration shows that this offence can be committed even by pretending to be some other such person who is dead.
The section requires that the offender must cheat. He must cheat by pretending to be some other person, or by knowingly substituting one person for another, or representing that he is some other person than he really is, or representing that any other person is some other person than he really is. The explanation says that this offence is committed both when the individual personated is a real person and when the individual personated is an imaginary person. The law does not punish mere personation because it is of no consequence to the society at all. For instance, where A buys a kilogram of potato at a vegetable market and on being asked about his name gives his name as B. It is personation but not a punishable one. A personation is punishable only when one cheats by it, and so this definition under section 416.
ADVERTISEMENTS: The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that a person cannot be convicted merely because he secured an employment by giving out a fictitious name for himself but it must also be proved that he would not have got that job had he disclosed his true identity. Enjoying another’s benefit Where the accused was found using a railway season ticket issued in the name of another person by pretending to be that other person, he was held guilty of committing cheating by personation. Personation by a witness. ADVERTISEMENTS: The Bombay High Court was of the view that a witness who gave false evidence in the name of another person should be charged with giving false evidence under section 193 of the Code, and not with cheating by personation. Personation before Public Service Commission Where the accused, who did not belong to the scheduled caste category, took the Indian Administrative Service examination as a scheduled caste candidate and succeeded in it and in the interview and got an appointment on the basis of that false representation, he was held guilty of committing cheating by personation. Similarly, where the accused, one Mr. Rama Rao who was an overseer not possessing an engineering degree, falsely represented that he was Mr.
Rama Rao, an engineering graduate of Mysore University, and induced the Public Service Commission to select him for a government job in the appropriate cadre, it was held that he had committed cheating by personation. The same principles apply in University examinations. Personation before a public servant. Where the accused was not the payee mentioned in some money orders but falsely represented before the postman that he was the payee and produced false identity card also for identification and thus induced the postman to pay him the amounts, and he also signed in the money orders as the payee, it was held that he was guilty of cheating by personation. But where the accused under authorisation from his brother who was the payee of a money order, went to the post office, signed in the name of his brother and received the money, he could not be held guilty of cheating by personation as there was no dishonest intention on his part. An accused, by merely inducing an Oath Commissioner, by wrongful identification, to attest an affidavit does not commit cheating by personation as the act done by the Oath Commissioner of attesting the affidavit does not cause or is not likely to cause any damage or harm to him in body, mind, reputation or property.
False representation as to caste Where the accused, a Barna Brahmin, falsely represented to the mother of a girl that he was a Barendra Brahmin and thus induced the mother of the girl to get her married to him which she would not have agreed to had he disclosed his true caste, and as a result of this marriage the mother of the girl was excommunicated from her caste, it was held that the accused was guilty of cheating by personation. Similarly, where the accused falsely represented to a man that a girl of low caste was a Brahmin and thus induced him to pay to the accused some money as a consideration for marriage of the man’s brother with the girl, he was held guilty of committing cheating by personation. Accused professing to be a bachelor Where the accused dishonestly induced the complainant as well as his daughter to agree to her marriage with him by professing to be a bachelor which he was not is cheating by personation. It is not correct to say that simply because the accused did not change his name on any occasion or remained the very same person, although assumed a different status or character according to his representation, this offence could not be committed.
INTRODUCTION: Murder is the unlawful killing of another human being without any justification or valid excuse with a malice intention. Murder is considered as one of the serious crime in our society which demands harsh punishments for the purpose of retribution, deterrence and incapacitation. In most of the countries a person convicted of murder generally faces a long term prison sentence in fact a life sentence where permitted. Death penalty for murder are also charged upon the criminals sometimes and at some places but this kind of punishment has been less in practice. DEFINITION OF MURDER: Before defining Murder we should know the definition of “ CULPABLE HOMICIDE”.
The Legal meaning of Murder is Homicide. So according to this concept let’s define what culpable homicide is: SECTION 299: CULPABLE HOMICIDE: Section 299 of IPC defines culpable homicide. It means Who ever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that his act is likely to cause death, commits the offence of culpable homicide. ILLUSTRATIONS:. A lays sticks and turf over a pit, with the intention of thereby causing death, or with the knowledge that death is likely to be thereby caused. Z believing the ground to be firm, treads on it, falls in and is killed.
A has committed the offence of culpable homicide. A knows Z to be behind a bush. B does not know it.
A intending to cause, or knowing it to be likely to cause Z’s death, induces B fires and kills Z. Here B may be guilty of no offence; but A has committed the offence of culpable homicide. SECTION 300: MURDER: Culpable homicide leads to murder when:. If the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death, or. If it is done with the intention of causing such bodily injury as the offender knows to be likely to cause the death of the person to whom the harm is caused.
Indian Penal Code Sections 420
If it is done with the intention of causing bodily injury to any person and the bodily injury intended to be inflicted is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. If the person committing the act knows that it is so imminently dangerous that it must, in all probability, cause death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, and commits such act without any excuse for incurring the risk of causing death or such injury as aforesaid. ILLUSTRATIONS:.
A shoots Z with the intention of killing him. Z dies in consequence. A commits murder. A intentionally gives Z a sword-cut or club-wound sufficient to cause the death of a man in the ordinary course of nature. Z dies in consequence. Here, A is guilty of murder, although he may not have intended to cause Z’s death. EXCEPTIONS WHEN CULPABLE HOMICIDE IS NOT MURDER:.
Indian Penal Code Pdf Download
CULPABLE HOMICIDE IS NOT MURDER: Culpable homicide is not a murder when the offender, whilst deprived of the power of self-control by grave and sudden provocation, causes the death of the person who gave the provocation or causes the death of any other person by mistake or accident. The above exception is subject to the following provisos– First– That the provocation is not sought or voluntarily provoked by the offender as an excuse for killing. Or doing harm to any person. Secondly– That the provocation is not given by anything done in obedience to the law, or by a public servant in the lawful exercise of the powers of such public servant. Thirdly– That the provocation is not given by anything done in the lawful exercise of the right of private defense. CULPABLE HOMICIDE IN EXERCISE OF GOOD FAITH: Culpable homicide is not amounted to murder if it’s done in exercise of good faith to protect the public or private property. If someone exceeds his power given by law and kills someone in order to save something or someone it cannot be amounted as Murder.
CULPABLE HOMICIDE IN CASE OF PUBLIC SERVANT: Culpable homicide is not murder if the offender, being a public servant or aiding. A public servant acting for the advancement of public justice, exceeds the powers given to him by law, and causes death by doing an act which he, in good faith, believes to be lawful and necessary for the due discharge of his duty as such public servant and without ill-will towards the person whose death is caused.
SECTION 301: CULPABLE HOMICIDE BY CAUSING DEATH OF A PERSON OTHER THAN A PERSON WHOSE DEATH WAS INTENDED: Culpable Homicide amounts to murder if any other person who was not intended to die, dies due to the conditions and acts done by the perpetrator even if he has planned the murder for someone else. SECTION 304 A: CAUSING DEATH BY NEGLIGENCE: Whoever causes the death of any person by doing any rash or negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
SECTION 307: ATTEMPT TO MURDER: Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine, and if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to 1imprisonment for life, or to such punishments decided by the court of law accordingly. ILLUSTARTIONS:. A shoots at Z with intention to kill him, under such circumstances that, if death ensued. A would be guilty of murder.
Indian Penal Code Sections Law
A is liable to punishment under this section. A, with the intention of causing the death of a child of tender years, exposes it in a deserted place. A has committed the offence defined by this section, though the death of the child does not ensure. SECTION 308: ATTEMPT TO COMMIT CULPABLE HOMICIDE: Whoever does any Act with such intention or knowledge and under such circumstances that, if he by that Act caused death, he would be guilty of culpable homicide not amount to murder and shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both, and if hurt is caused to any person by such Act, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both.