[Solved] A is attacked by mob who attempts to murder him. He cannot effectually exercise his right of P.D. without firing on the mob and without taking risk of the life of children mingled in the mob:

Q.	A is attacked by mob who attempts to murder him. He cannot effectually exercise his right of P.D. without firing on the mob and without taking risk of the life of children mingled in the mob:
A.	A did not commit offence if by firing he harms children.
B.	A is guilty if by firing he harm children without recourse to the police authorities.
C.	A is guilty of firing causes harms to children.
D.	None of the above.
Answer» A. A did not commit offence if by firing he harms children.

1.9k

Do you find this helpful?

View all MCQs in

Indian Penal Code (IPC 1860)

Discussion

No comments yet

Related MCQs

Give correct response. A is attacked by a mob who attempt to murder him. He cannot effectually exercise his right of private defence without firing on the mob and he cannot fire without risk of harming children who are mingled with the mob. One of the children is killed by such firing. In this case:
Give best response. A is attacked by a mob who attempt to cause grievous hurt to him. He cannot effectually exercise his right of private defence without firing on the mob and he cannot fire without taking the risk of harming young children who are mingled with the mob. In this case :
In a case the accused who was a widower led a homely life with his 12-year-old son, nephew and unmarried daughter. The accused suffered from no insanity. One day the accused accompanied by his son went with an axe in his hand to woods to gather siadi leaves. Sometimes after his nephew who had been working in the field discovered the accused sleeping under a tree with the blood stained axe beside him. There was no trace of the son of the accused. Later his son was found hacked to death. It transpired in evidence that the accused for the time being was seized of a state of mind in which he visualised that a tiger was going to pounce on him and as such mistaking his son as the tiger he cut him into pieces.
Point out incorrect response. In Barendera Kumar Ghose Vs. Emperor, 52 I.A. 40, the appellant was charged under section 302 read with section 34 of the I.P.C. with the murder of a sub-postmaster. Sub-postmaster was counting money in the backroom. Several persons appeared at the door of the office and demanded the post master to give up the money and immediately afterwards fired pistols at him. Postmaster died immediately and the assailants fled in different directions without taking money. On of them was chased and caught with a pistol in his hand. It was not clear as to who fired the fatal shot. While holding the appellant liable for murder the Privy Council laid down the following principles:
X sees Z committing what appears to X to be a murder. X in exercise, to the best of his judgement, exerted in good faith, of the powers, which the law gives to all persons of apprehending murderers in the act, seizes Z in order to bring Z before proper authorities. But it turns out that Z was acting in exercise of his right of self defence. X is guilty of
Give best response. A entered the house of B at the dead of night with the intention of committing theft. B struck him with a lathi in the dark and A fell down unconscious. B gave him one more blow which fell on A’s head, causing extensive bleeding and A’s death. B is prosecuted for murder and takes the plea that the death was caused in exercise of the right of private defence of property. Here :
Give correct response. A was charged with the murder of his wife, takes the defence of insanity and in the alternative of being drunk at the time of commission of the crime and being thus incapable of forming the intent required in murder. It is also pleaded in defence that the accused was a psychopath. The evidence further discloses that the accused had indicated an intention to kill his wife before taking alcohol. Here :
A scarified his son before his Goddess who according to him appealed him in dreams and asked for the sacrifice. On being charged for murder he set up the plea of unsoundness of mind. Can his plea be sustained?
Give correct response. A and his wife W went to have dinner with a friend. He carried his gun with him, and before going to dinner he discharged the gun and kept it in a private place in his friend’s house. A, then went to church after dinner and in the night returned home with his gun. He carried the gun in the room. He in taking it up touched the trigger and the gun went off and killed the wife. It was found that when A was away to church another man had privately taken the gun out to shoot and had returned it loaded to the place where it was put in the friend’s house. In this case :
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 to 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. Here if A alters his course without any intention to run down the boat C and in good faith for the purpose of avoiding the danger to the passengers in boat B. But in the course of this action A runs down boat C.