Explanation:

Let’s break down these statements and options so it’s crystal clear:

- Option 1: The doctrine of transferred malice means if you intend harm to one person but hurt someone else instead, your intent is “transferred.” It still counts as murder or culpable homicide, depending on the result.

- Option 2: This part gets technical with sections. The doctrine is *actually* found in Section 301 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which specifically talks about transferred intention in murders. Section 229 deals with another subject, and Section 300(4) is about murder generally—so this claim is only partly correct.

- Option 3: Says either 1 or 2 is correct. But really, only Option 1 is spot-on by itself.

- Option 4: Says both (a) and (b) are true. The thing is, only (a) is entirely accurate; (b) is a mix. Section 301 is relevant, but it’s not in 229 and only partially in 300(4).

So here’s the answer:

Option 1 is the correct answer.

There’s no need to include “both (a) and (b),” because (b) isn’t correct throughout.