The people of the village S having assembled proceeded to cut the bandh People of the village K resi...........

Indian Penal Code (IPC) 1860 Offences affecting the Human Body

The people of the village S having assembled proceeded to cut the bandh. People of the village K resisted but were turned back. Meanwhile a large crowd collected on both sides, armed with lathis, spears and garases. People of K seeing that the people of S were not likely to listen to their remonstrance, proceeded in a body to prevent the cutting of the bandh to drive them away. There was one man from village S who received fatal injuries and died.

the action is well within the bounds of the right to private defence of person and property

the conviction of the accused under Section 302 of the IPC, cannot be sustained

neither (A) nor (B)

both (A) and (B)

छोटे Courses बड़े Results

Master Offences affecting the Human Body

Prepare through Micro-courses

Try Now

Explanation:

Let’s break it down:

- Option (A): “The action is well within the bounds of the right to private defence of person and property.”

- Here’s the thing: The folks from village K were defending their property (the bandh) from being destroyed. Under Sections 96-100 of the IPC, private defence can mean defending both person and property, even to the extent of causing death if there’s a reasonable apprehension of serious harm or death. So, their response fits within the law as long as they didn’t go overboard.

- Option (B): “The conviction of the accused under Section 302 of the IPC cannot be sustained.”

- Section 302 deals with murder. If the act falls under the right to private defence, as discussed above, it pulls the conduct out of ‘murder’ territory. The law actually carves out an exception in such cases, so a conviction under 302 wouldn’t stick.

- Option (C): “Neither (A) nor (B).”

- This would make sense only if private defence didn’t apply—but here, it does.

- Option (D): “Both (A) and (B).”

- This lines up with the reasoning above: both the right to private defence and the un-sustainability of a 302 conviction apply here.

So, the correct answer here is:

Option 4—both (A) and (B).