Some persons may use the threat and others may receive the property. In such a case, all would be guilty of:

Related MCQs

• A, intending to cause theft instigates B, to take property belonging to Z out of Z’s possession. A induces B to believe that the property belongs to A. B takes the property out of Z’s possession in good faith, believing it to be A’s property. With reference to the above statement Assertion (A): A is guilty of abetment of theft even if B is innocent. Reason (R): Liability of abettor is not dependent on the liability of the principal accused. 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 sheet accordingly.
• Some militants are hiding in a house occupied by an individual. Militants are engaged in an attack on the police party by firing from the house. The police persons, to defend themselves, fire towards the house and an innocent person in the house is hit by the bullet and dies as a result. The police persons are guilty of
• 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
• Joint intention of the accursed was to give such a beating as would weak. the bones of arms and legs resulting in the death of A. All of the persons participating are guilty of the offence of
• Several persons assemble at the door of the house of one K and the appellant struck a blow with a kencha which fell on the left thigh of a workman working in the house of one K whom the appellant and others wanted to attack, and as the appellant struck at the very first person who opened the door and that was how that came to receive the injury.
• Give correct response. A, B and C three adults and D a boy were on a voyage in an open boat. They had no food after about 18 years of journey. C proposed to B and A to sacrifice the boy so that they may feed upon ut B did not agree. On 20th day C with the consent of A only killed the boy and all the three fed upon the boy for four days when they were picked up. It was found that the boy was in a weaker condition and was likely to die before others and also if the men would not have fed upon the boy, hey would not have survived. Held that:
• Assertion (A): X and Y had independently entertained the idea to kill Z. Accordingly each of them separately inflicted wounds on Z, who dies in consequence. X and Y are liable for murder with the aid of Section 34 IPC. Reason (R): When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of common intention of all, each of such persons is liable as if the whole act is done by him alone. Of the above statements.
• A is the executor of a will of a deceased person. As per the will, the property of the deceased is to be divided equally between X and Y. Instead of doing so, A dishonestly divides the property of the deceased equally between Y and Z. A is guilty of:
• When a criminal act is done by several persons, in furtherance of a common intention of all, each of such persons is liable
• 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