collision was entirely or at least mainly due to rashness or negligence on the part of the

driver. It is not sufficient if it is only found that the accused was driving the vehicle at a fast
speed.
In Jagdish Chander vs State , the appellant suddenly turned his auto-scooter rickshaw to the
right without paying proper heed to the truck coming from the opposite and stuck it. He then
lost control of his scooter-rickshaw and crashed into a tree under which a woman was
standing with her baby in her arms. As a result, she received simple injuries and the child
received fatal injuries. The trial court and the High Court found the appellant guilty under
section 304A. In appeal, the Supreme Court held that as the appellant suddenly turned to the
right without paying proper heed to the truck coming from the opposite direction, in doing so
he was rash and negligent.

UNIT II

Question 6.: Define ―Hurt‖ and ―Grievous Hurt‖. What are its essential element‘s?
Distinguish between the two.
Answer :- Hurt generally means injury on the body of a person. It is such an injury which
causes bodily pain or disease or infirmity or fracture or disfigurement of face etc.
KINDS OF HURT: There are two kinds of Hurt:-
1. Hurt.
2. Grievous Hurt.
Hurt :- simple hurt is defined under section 319 of IPC whereas the grievous hurt
has been defined under section 320. Simple hurt causes simple injury with simple bodily
pain, while grievous hurt causes serious injury and serious pain in the body too.
Section 319 l.P.C. defines hurt. Hurt means causing bodily pain, disease, infirmity
to any person. Pulling a woman by hair is hurt. This is also 'trespass to the person.
Voluntarily causing hurt is punishable. In case of Amis Beg's Case ,Court held was guilty
of hurt, when he pulled out of a house, D to whom the court decree was not applicable
Infirmity may be permanent or temporary.

Section 319 contains the following ingredients:-

a) Bodily Pain:- The words show that there must be some pain in the body of a person. It
means mental paid does not come under bodily pain. Any such injury which causes pain on
any external part of body comes under simple hurt.
b) Disease : Disease means any illness. By such act which creates weakness and if a man
comes into contract of any disease then it will come under simple hurt.
c) Infirmity:- Infirmity means by illness. By such act which creates weakness in the body,
comes under simple hurt.

137 | P a g e

COPYRIGHT FIMT 2020

 d) To any other Person : The hurt must be caused to any other person not to himself. In this
way, in a simple hurt there is no need of physical contact. A hurt may be caused by any mean
or method. Such hurt must cause bodily pain or disease or infirmity. Such hurt must be
caused to another person and not to himself.
e) Section 319 does not show that there must be direct physical contact with another person
for committing simple hurt.

Grievous Hurt : There are various kinds of grievous hurt which have been defined in
section 320 in IPC. Thus a hurt is more than a slightly causing harm as defined in section 95
of IPC and less the culpable homicide. If the hurt results into death land fulfils the conditions
of section 299 then it becomes culpable homicide, otherwise it grievous hurt.
Grievous hurt : Under section 320 l.P.C. the following are declared as grievous :

a.) Emasculation : The destruction of private organ of a human being is known as

emasculation. Any injury which makes a person incapable for functioning of the private
organ, person comes under grievous hurt.
b.) Permanent privation of the sight of either eye if there is privation or separation or
destruction either eye of a person, is grievous hurt.
c.) Permanent privation of the hearing of either ear. Similarly the destruction or separation of
either ear is grievous hurt. Here the power of hearing must be affected. The eye and ears are
the main functional organs of a human being. They have is an important role in the life.
d.) Privation of any member or joint: Privation of any member or joint also comes under
grievous hurt.
e.) Destruction or permanent loss of the power of any member or joint:- If there is destruction
of any member of joint of the body then it is also a grievous hurt or if any member or joint
fails to work properly then also it will comes under grievous hurt.
f.) Permanent disfiguration of the head or face :- Permanent disfiguration of the head or face
means to cause such an injury on the head or face that they look bad or head becomes crucial.
g.) Fracture or dislocation of Bone or tooth:- When any bone or tooth is dislocated it means
they loss their original place. Fracture of any bones comes under grievous hurt.
h.) When there is an such hurt which endangers to life or which causes paid continuously for
a period of 20 days.
Endanger to life mean there must be death from such hurt. If the death
is caused by grievous then it will not be culpable homicide or murder because there is no
intention to cause death. So any hurt to create danger to life is also called grievous hurt. Mere
hospitalization for twenty days will not make the hurt grievous. That person must not be in a
position to attend his day to day work for twenty days. This is the test adopted by the courts.

ILLUSTRATION: i) A with an intention to disfigure Z: s face hits him. Z suffer.-. for more
than twenty days in the hospital. There is grievous hurt.
138 | P a g e

COPYRIGHT FIMT 2020

 ii) A hits-hard with his fist on the left ear of B, with an intention to cause hurt, but B lost his
hearing permanently. Held A is guilty of Grievous hurt. Hurt becomes grievous, when it
endangers life.

In the case of Panduranga V. State , A blow on the head of B with an axe,

which made a deep half inch wound was likely to endanger life in Voluntarily Causing hurt is
punishable under Sn. 321. Voluntarily causing grievous hurt is punishable under Section 323
to 336

In the case of Palani Goudon v/s Emperor Madras. It was held by a full bench of
the Madras High Court that the accused was guilty of either murder or culpable homicide not
amounting to murder. However Their Lordship held that on the facts found the accused could
not be convicted either of murder or culpable homicide, he could of course be punished both
of his original assault on his wife and for his attempt to create false evidence by hanging her.
He was convicted under section 326 Of IPC.

Following are the difference between Hurt and Grievous Hurt:

.
HURT GRIEVOUS HURT
Simple hurt is defined in Section. 319 Grievous hurt defined in sec.320
In simple hurt injury is committed on the There may be injury of external or internal
external part of The body causing bodily part of the body.
pain.

Simple hurt is a form of simple Injury. Grievous hurt is a serious form of hurt

The types of injury are bodily Pain, disease, Important organs of the body like eye Ear,
infirmity etc joints, face dislocation or broken
Punishment is of one year or Fine. Punishment is of seven years with fine

Punishment for hurt & grievous hurt:

Section 323 : Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt is one year or fine or with both.
Section 325: For voluntarily causing grievous hurt, the punishment is 7 years with fine.
Section 326: Whoever except the case provided for by sec.335 voluntarily causes grievous
hurt by means or any instrument for shooting or cut or any instrument which is used as a
weapon of offence is likely to cause death or by means of fire. Punishment imprisonment of
life, it is ten years with fine.

139 | P a g e

COPYRIGHT FIMT 2020

 Question 7.what do you mean by Wrongful restraint and wrongful confinement? Distinguish
between the two.

Answer: The expression ―wrongful restraint‖ implies keeping a man out of a place where he
wishes. Wrongful restraint and wrongful confinement is given Sn339, and 340 The
fundamental rule is that 'every man's person is sacred and law visits penalties on the accused
who violates this rule and molests the person in his free movement. Wrongful restraint and
wrongful confinement are two offences according to the I.P.C. under Sn. 339" and 340,
which punish individuals for violation of a person's movements.

Wrongful restraint : A person who voluntarily obstructs another so as to

prevent him from proceeding in any direction in which that person had a right to go, is guilty
of wrongful restraint. Exception: A person who, in good faith, believes that he has a right to
pass.

1) A obstructs Z of his way 'A's intentions are not in good faith. Z is prevented from passing.
This is wrongful restraint.

2) A removed the ladder and prevented B from getting down the roof of a house.

3) A builds a wall across a path along which B had a right to pass.

4) A threatens to set his savage dog at Z, to prevent Z from passing along the road where he
had a right to pass.

5) B and his family were living in a house. A put a lock in thetemporary absence of the
family. Ahad locked without any good faith. in all these cases thee accused is guilty of
wrongful restraint.

Wrongful confinement: A person who wrongfully restraints any person in

such a manner as to prevent that person from proceeding beyond certain circumscribing
limits is guilty of wrongful confinement.

eg. a) A causes Z to go within a walled space and locks Z in. Z is thereby prevented from
proceeding in any direction beyond the circumscribing line of the wall. A is guilty.

b) A keeps his men with guns and warns Z that if he ever tries to leave the building they
would kill him. A is guilty. Punishment: This depends on how many days a person is
confined by the accused. In Shamlal's case, a police constable detained some persons for
several days as suspects; it was held that he was guilty under this section.

Following are the difference between Wrongful Confinement & Wrongful Restraint.
WRONGFUL CONFINEMENT WRONGUL RESTRAINT

140 | P a g e

COPYRIGHT FIMT 2020

 Wrongful confinement is a Form of wrongful Wrongful restraint is keeping a man Out of a
restraint It is keeping a man within Limits out place where he wishes to go and has a right
of which he wishes to go and has a right to to be.
go

A person is restrained from moving He is free to move anywhere other than to

Beyond a certain area within Which he is proceed in a particular Direction. In other
confined words there is

Full restraint in the movement Only partial restraint in the movement

It is a more serious offence In as much it This offence is also punishable with simple
prescribes Punishment with imprisonment imprisonment upto one month or with fine of
Simple or rigorous extending to with both Rs.500/- or
One year or fine up to Rs.1000/- or both

Question: 8. Discuss the essential element of force, criminal force and Assault. How criminal
force and assault related to each other.

Answer: Section. 349 define force and Section. 350 defines criminal force.

1) Force : A is said to use force to B, if A causes motion or change of motion to B, or if A

causes with any substance such motion or change of motion so as to make that substance
come in contact with the body of B or anything he is carrying so as to affect his sense of
feeling. The means adopted may be ^

a) By A, with his own bodily power or

b) By setting the substance in motion without further acting on it.

c) By inducing an animal to move

ii) Using criminal force is an offence punishable under l.P.C. Any person who intentionally
uses 'force' to another without his consent with a view to commit an offence or knowingly
uses force to cause injury, fear or annoyance to him, is guilty of using criminal force.

E.g. 1) Z is sitting on a boat that is moored. A to cause fear and annoyance to Z, releases the
mooring. The boat sets out down the stream. A is guilty, of using criminal force.

2) A intentionally pulls the veil (purdha) of a woman without her consent to annoy her. A is
guilty under this section.

3) A incites his dog to spring upon Z without Z's consent. This annoys Z. A is guilty.
141 | P a g e

COPYRIGHT FIMT 2020

 4) Z is carrying a pot of water. A, without Z's consent, intentionally to annoy Z, hits the pot
with a stone. The stone makes a hole and water rushes out causing annoyance to Z. A is
guilty.

5) A is riding a chariot. B lashes the house, without A's consent, to frighten or annoy A. B is
guilty.

6) A is on the palanquin on a visit to a place. Z holds the pole to rob A. Z has used force there
is use of criminal force. If A, the accused forcibly breaks open the lock of B' house &. enters,
there is no criminal force, as force should be against a person as defined in Sn. 349.

Section 351 of IPC provides Assault: Any person who intentionally or knowingly makes
any gesture or preparation to apprehend another with a preparation to use criminal force is
guilty of assault. Mere words do not amount to assault. But the words with the use of gestures
or preparations bring such a meaning that criminal force is about to be applied.

Eg. 1) A shakes his fist at Z, and moves towards Z in such a manner that Z believes that
criminal force is about to be used on him. This is assault.

2) A begins to let loose a ferocious dog to cause fear and annoyance to Z. This is assault.

3) A takes up a stick saying to Z '! will give you a good beating'. These words will not
amount to assault. But, if A with gestures moves towards Z to beat him, this becomes assault.
Actual beating is not necessary .

Q. No. 9: What do mean by kidnapping? Elaborate the provision of the two.

Answer :-: Kidnapping and abduction are particular types of offences under the law of crime.
Under these offences, a person is taken away secretly or forcible without his consent or
without the consent of authorised guardian. Under kidnapping a person is kidnapped from
lawful custody. Under section 359 of IPC, there are two types of kidnapping :-
1. Kidnapping from India.
2. Kidnapping from lawful guardianship.
Section 360 : defines that kidnapping from India and section 361 defines that kidnapping
from lawful guardian ship. The offence of abduction is defined under section 362 of IPC.
1. KIDNAPPING FROM INDIA:
Section 360 says that whoever conveys any person beyond the limit of India without the
consent of that person or of any person legally authorised to consent on behalf of that person,
is said to kidnap that person from India. Age limit is immaterial. This has two essentials :
(i) Convey any person beyond the limits of India.

142 | P a g e

COPYRIGHT FIMT 2020

 (ii) Such conveying must be without the consent of that person or of the person legally
authorised to give consent on behalf of that person.
2. KIDNAPPING FROM LAWFUL GUARDIANSHIP : SEC.361
Sec. 361 says that whoever takes or entices any minor under sixteen years of age if a male or
under eighteen years of age if a female, or any person of unsound mind, out of the keeping of
the lawful guardianship of such minor or person of unsound mind, without the consent of
such guardian is said to kidnap such minor or person from lawful guardianship. The word
lawful guardian here mans any person lawfully interested with care or custody of such minor
or other person.
3. EXCEPTIONS :- There is one exception of this section, this section does not extend to the
act of any person who in good faith believes himself to be the father of an illegitimate child,
or who in good faith, believes himself to be entitled the lawful custody of such child unless
such act is committed for an immoral or unlawful purpose.
Take or entice away:- Take away or entice away means to induce a person for going to
another place. The object of this Sec. Is to protect minor children from being reduced ( to
corrupt) for improper purpose.
Guardians consent:- The kidnapping must be without the consent of the guardian. The
consent may be expressed or implied. Thus, to attract this sec. there must be taking or
enticing away any minor or unsound mind person out of lawful guardianship.
ABDUCTION: Section 362 says that whoever by force compels or by any
deceitful induces any person to go from any place, is said to abduct that person. This section
may read with section 364, 365 and 360.
This section contains two essentials for the offence of abduction :-
1. Forcible compulsion or inducement by deceitful means.
2. The object of such compulsion or inducement must be going of a person from any
place. Thus abduction is an offence under sec.362. If by force a person compels or even by
fraudulent means induce any other person to go from any place taken is called abduction.

Punishment for kidnapping under sec363 :

Whoever kidnaps any person from India or from Lawful guardianship shall be punished with
imprisonment or either description for a term which may extend to seven years and shall be
liable to fine.

Question10. What are the difference between Kidnapping and Abduction?

Answer: following are the Difference between Kidnapping and Abduction

KIDNAPPING ABDUCTION
1. It is committed only in respect of A 1.) It is committed in respect of any person of
143 | P a g e

COPYRIGHT FIMT 2020

 minor under 16 years of age if, A any age
male and 18 years of age if a Female,
or a person of unsound mind.
2. In kidnapping consent of the Person 2.) Consent of the person removed, if Freely
enticed is immaterial and voluntarily given Condones the offence.
3. In kidnapping the intention of The 3.) In abduction intention is a very Important
offender is irrelevant factor.
4. It is not a continuing offence The 4.)It is a continuing offence A when he is
Offence is completed as soon as first taken from one Place to and also when
person is being abducted both The he is Removed from one place to Another.
minor is removed from the Custody
of his or her guardian

UNITIII

Question No. 11 What is bigamy? Under what circumstances would a woman, who in the
life-time of one husband marries another, not be guilty of bigamy?

Answer: Offences Relating To Marriage:- The following are the provisions in the Indian
Penal Code dealing with the offences relating to marriage.
Under section 494 defines the offence of bigamy as under: ―Whoever having a husband or
wife living, marries in any case in which such marriage is void by reason of its taking place
during the life of such husband or wife, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.‖
In Bigamy case, the second marriage as a fact, that is to say, the essential ceremonies
constituting it must be proved. Admission of marriage by the accused is not the evidence of it
in bigamy case. Under section 494 and 109 of IPC the evidence of witness called to prove
the marriage ceremonies showed that the essential ceremonies had not been performed. On
admission of the accused in a written statement that the parties married after the first
marriage was dissolved & was not justified, In a case Kanwal Ram v/s Himachal Pradesh
Administration 1966.
An another case of Shanti Dev Barma v/s Kanchan Prava Devi 1991 Orissa,―it was held that
No plea was raised that the second marriage was performed as per custom which dispensed
with ‗saptapadi‘ oral evidence was adduced that the accused and his alleged second wife were
living as husband and wife. It was not found sufficient to draw an inference as to
performance of ceremonies essential for valid marriage. The accused was entitled to be
acquitted.
144 | P a g e

COPYRIGHT FIMT 2020