Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A PROJECT ON
SUBJECT:CRIMINAL LAW I
SUBMITTED TO:
ARUNABH SHARMA
ROLL NO. 725 , 3RD SEM
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to enlighten my readers regarding this topic and I hope I have
tried my best to pave the way for bringing more luminosity to this topic.
At
finally
yet
importantly
would
INCOMMENSURABLE support.
like
to
thank
my
parents
for
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
SOURCES OF DATA:
The following secondary sources of data have been used in the project1
Articles
Books
Websites
METHOD OF WRITING:
The method of writing followed in the course of this research paper is primarily
analytical.
METHOD OF RESARCH:
The research work of this project is based on doctrinal method.
MODE OF CITATION:
The researcher has followed a uniform mode of citation throughout the course of
this research paper.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
CHAPTERS:
1 INTRODUCTION---------------------------------------------------Pg. 5-7.
7 CONCLUSION----------------------------------------------------Pg. 22-23.
INTRODUCTION
Right of Private Defence is the only right conferred to the people under the Indian Penal
Code, 1860. Section 96 to 106 codifies the entire law relating to private defence of person
and property including the extent of and limitation to exercise such right. The right of private
defence is now recognised in every free, civilized and democratic society. The right is,
however, preventive and not punitive. With this background the provisions of Sections 96106, dealing with the right of private defence, are to be construed. The fascicle of Sections 96
to 106 codify the entire law relating to right of private defence of person and property
including the extent of and limitation to exercise of such right. The law relating to private
defence is dealt with in the Penal Code in Sections 96 to 106. It is a right inherent in man and
is based on the premise that the foremost duty of man is to protect him. He would be justified
in resisting an attack by using such degree of force as is necessary and also to prevent its
repetition. The other consideration is that though it is the duty of the State to protect its
people, yet, since it cannot possibly post a policeman at every corner, it encourages its
citizens to protect themselves when attacked. Situations often arise when the ready help of
the State is not available and to meet such exigencies, the law has given the right of private
defence to every individual. The right of self-defence is a very valuable right with a social
purpose.The law does not require a law-abiding citizen to behave like a coward when
confronted with an imminent unlawful aggression. There is nothing more degrading to the
human spirit than to run away in face of danger. The right is designed to serve a social
purpose and deserves to be fostered within the prescribed limits.
Commenting on the right of private defence in Munney Khan v. State of M.P. the
Supreme Court said:
''The right of private defence is codified in Sections 96 to 106. IPC, which have all to be
read together in order to have a proper grasp of the scope and the limitations of this right.
By enacting these sections in the Code the authors wanted to except from the operation of
5
Section 106 of the Penal Code provides that if there is reasonable apprehension of death, the
defender, while exercising his right of private defence, can take the risk of harm to an
innocent person if the right cannot be effectually exercised without taking such a risk. It is a
case of extreme necessity, in which a person is entitled to run the risk of harming innocent
persons in order to save himself from mortal injury.
Section 104 talks about the extension of right of private defence of property to causing any
harm other than death. This section is enacted to legalize te infliction of any harm short of
27 AIR 2002 SC 520.
28 AIR 1986 SC 305.
29 AIR 1957 All 714.
16
The right of private defence of property commences with the reasonable apprehension of
danger to such property. It is lawful for a person who has seen an invasion of his right, to go
to the spot and object. It is also lawful for such person if the opposite party is armed, to take
suitable weapons for his defence. The person entitled to exercise that right can act before
actual harm is done. It is not a right of retaliation and hence he need not wait until the
aggressor has started committing the offence which occasions, the exercise of his right of
private defence.
22
CONCLUSION
Right of private defence is thus preventive and neither punitive nor vindictive and also it
should not be used maliciously, It is available in face of imminent dangers and can be used as
a shield to protect a person and property within the prescribed limits. The right can be used
not only to defend his own person or property but that of others also, Courts are also required
to take an overall view of the case and if a right of self-defence is made available from the
evidence on record, the right should not be construed narrowly as it has a social purpose. That
is why it is not available to the aggressor who seeks an attack on him by his own aggressive
attack. Similarly neither party can claim the right in case of a free fight between two warring
groups. It is so because it is not possible to determine as to who is attacking and who is
defending. The free fight started at the spur of the moment and the accused pleaded that he
joined the fight at a later stage in order to defend himself. The court ruled out his plea and
held that he was not entitled to this right.
This right is available to the accused even if he does not plead it before the court. If there is
material in evidence to indicate that in all probability the accused had used force in exercising
the right of private defence, then the accused is entitled to the benefits of this defence. The
burden of proving the defence is on the accused but if he fails to establish the same on a
balance of probabilities yet totality of facts and circumstances are still in his favour, then
court can give the benefit of this right to him.60 The accused can plead it at any stage. He can
plead it even during the trial if he has not done so during the investigation. The accused is
however, not required to prove his case beyond all reasonable doubts. Where one person of
accused party died but prosecution could not explain the injury on accused, it was held that
the accused could not be denied the right of private defence nor could it be said that they
exceeded the same. A person has a right of repelling an attack by use of such force as is
necessary but he does not have the right to come prepared for a fight and then after attacking
an unarmed victim claim the right of self-defence on being hit back by the victim or his
associate. He is not entitled to claim any right of private defence in such situations. The
burden of establishing the plea of private defence is on the accused and the burden can be
discharged by showing preponderance of probabilities in favour of that plea on the basis of
material on records. The accused can inflict injuries or cause the death of the aggressor in
23
24
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. The Indian Penal Code, 1860., Universal Law Pub., 2009.
2. Bhattacharyya T., The Indian Penal Code, 4th edn., Central Law Agency,
2004.
3. Mishra S.N., Indian Penal Code, 14th edn., Central Law Publications,
2006.
4. Ratanlal & Dhirajlal, The Indian Penal Code, 30th edn., Nagpur, Wadhwa
& Company, 2007.
5. Gaur K.D., Criminal Law: Cases & Materials, 5th edn., Lexis Nexis,
2008.
6. Gaur H.S., Indian Penal Code, 12th edn., Law Publishers (India) Pvt.
Ltd., 2005.
7. Gaur K.D., Indian Penal Code, 3rd edn., Universal Law Pub., 2006.
8. Pillai P.S.A., Criminal Law, 10th edn., Lexis Nexis, 2008.
25