A, on grave and sudden provocation from Z, fires a pistol at Z, does not die, A is guilty of L:

Related MCQs

• Y gives grave and sudden provocation to A. A on this fires from a pistol as a result Z is killed who is nearby, A has committed
• For grave and sudden provocation
• X on receiving grave and sudden provocation from Z intentionally causes the death of Y who is Z’s brother. X has committed the offence of
• Grave & sudden provocation is
• A attacks Z under such circumstances of grave provoca­tion that his killing of Z would be only culpable homi­cide not amounting to murder. B, having ill-will towards Z, and intending to kill him and not having been subject to the provocation, assists A in killing Z. Which of the following judgment under Section 38 of IPC applies to A and B?
• Give best response. Z, a pick-pocket attempts to take the purse of a gentleman who has a loaded pistol in his pocket. The thief touches the pistol and the trigger goes off, the gentleman is shot dead. The liability of the pick-pocket is as follows :
• Assertion (A): A servant removes wrist watch from the table and keeps it concealed under the carpet in the same room for fear of being detected. He is guilty of theft. Reason (R): To be guilty of the offence of theft, a person must move and take away the property stolen. Directions: - the following item consist of two statements, one labeled as Assertion A and the other labeled as Reason R. You are to examine these two statements carefully and decide if the Assertion A and the Reason R are individually true and if so, whether the reason is a correct explanation of the Assertion. Select your answers to these items using the codes given below and mark your answer
• Deceased did not actually die from the injuries but from the which set in consequence of sence duty substance because the injuries were not the cause of death, the person causing the injuries will be guilty of
• 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:
• There persons A, B and C went to a Post office, B & C entered the Post office and asked Post Master to hand over Money. C fired pistol at him, he was shot dead.