The punishment under Section 379 is extended up to:

Related MCQs

• Section 379 of IPC defines:
• Assertion (A): Where sister of X was being abducted by force from her parents house by her husband, X caused death of sister’s husband in defence of the sister against an assault with intention of abducting her by force, it was held that the private defence of body extended in the above circumstances to the causing of death. Reason (R): The word abducting in Section 100 IPC includes abduction simpliciter. Direction: The following four items consist of two statements, one labeled the Assertion (A) and the other labeled the 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 answer to these items using the codes given below and mark your answer sheet accordingly.
• Section 392 of IPC describes the punishment for robbery:
• A gives Z fifty strokes with a stick. Here A may have committed the offence of voluntarily causing hurt to Z by the whole beating and also by each of the blows which make up the whole beating. As per Section 71 of IPC which of the following should be the punishment?
• A is beating Z and Y jumps in to stop the beating. In the process A intentionally strikes Y. As per Section 71 of IPC which of the following should be the punishment?
• Operation of consent to all offences, short of causing death intentionally, has been extended under:
• How many types of punishment have been prescribed under the Indian Penal Code:
• Abetment of any offence, if the act abetted is committed in consequence, and where no express provision is made for its punishment is dealt under-
• Section 34 of I.P.C. provides for liability based on common intention. Consider the following situations: 1. The weapon used in the offence was found in A’s house. 2. A has procured the weapon of offence voluntarily to aid the criminal gang. 3. A was compelled under threat to his life to procure the weapon of offence. 4. The weapon was supplied on receipt of value of the weapon (sale). Which of the situation given above reflect (s) the correct ingredients with regard of Section 34?
• 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: