The house of a person was raided by a gang of five dacoits. One of them was armed with a gun. Mean while a number of villagers had assembled outside the house and compelled dacoits to retreat with out the booty. The dacoits fired a shot resulted in the death of a villager

Related MCQs

• 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 :
• Five persons went to the house of K armed with clubs to beat K. Among those one A was carrying a pistol concealing it underneath his clothes. During beating A fired a shot resulting death of K. In such case
• 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:
• Give correct response. Eight dacoits attack a bank and take away currency notes of the value of 50,000 rupees. In the course of the dacoity, two of the dacoits shoot dead the cashier of the bank. A, B and C, three of the dacoits merely keep watch at the gate of the bank about 50 feet away from the scene of actual killing, and do not take part in the shooting of the cashier by their accomplices. The liability of A, B and C is as follows:
• Where a small compact body of men armed with lathis and headed by a person carrying Gun, endeavour to take forcible possession of a land, in the fight one person is shot dead by the head. They all were held guilty of murder the decision of court ------
• G’s party was engaged in the peaceful pursuit of worship at their own takhat was busy attending to the Puja for the Nepali pilgrim. At that point of time they were not members of an unlawful assembly. It was the party of A who left their place and came to G’s takhat, presumably raising a dispute over the offerings made by the Nepali pilgrim. They came armed with deadly weapons and one of them inflicted a severe blow on the S and G’s side which resulted in his death and others received as many as 27 serious injuries.
• A,B,C & D sent armed with guns to the house of K to commit robber. K being absent D with minor son of K went to the field where K was working . C stood a guard outside the house. A & B in the meanwhile shot dead two sons of K.
• X and his four associated attempted to commit theft at the place of Y and caused hurt to Y. They were forced to retreat without collecting the booty because of stiff resistance by the inmates. They are guilty of
• Mr. V, an appellant is an owner of a house in City A. The wife of the first respondent Y, was tenant of a part of the first floor in that house. On January 17, 1966, one R a servant of the appellant, called the wife of the first respondent a thief and Halkat. On the following day, the first respondent slapped R on his face which was followed by heated exchange of abusive words and between the first respondent and the appellant’s husband. The first respondent was annoyed and threw at the appellant’s husband a file of papers. The file did not hit the appellant’s husband, but it hit the elbow of the appellant causing a scratch. The appellant lodged information to the police complaining that the first respondent had committed a house trespass in order to the committing of an offence punishable with imprisonment, had thrown a shoe at her and had slapped her servant R. During the course of the investigation the appellant and R refused to be examined at a public hospital, claiming that a p
• Assertion (A): A person compelled by threats, from another, which reasonably cause apprehension of his instant death, commits murder of the third person, can plead the defence of compulsion. Reason (R): Consent of the deceased (above 12 years) is a defence to the charge of murder if the act causing death is done in good fait for the benefit of the deceased without intention to kill. Of the above statements.