Change set
Pick exam & year, then Go.
Question map
'A' with the intention of murdering 'Z', instigates 'B', a child under seven years of age, to do an act which causes 'Z's death. 'B' in consequence of the abetment, does the act in the absence of 'A' and thereby causes 'Z's death. Here 'A' is liable under which one of the following Sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ?
Explanation
In this scenario, 'A' is liable under Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Although 'B' is a child under seven years of age and is legally protected under Section 82 (doli incapax), 'A' remains liable as an abettor. According to Section 108, Explanation 3 of the IPC, it is not necessary that the person abetted should be capable by law of committing an offence or have any guilty intention.
Since the act (the murder of 'Z') was committed in consequence of the abetment and 'A' was absent during the act, Section 109 applies. This section provides that if the act abetted is committed and no express provision is made for its punishment, the abettor shall be punished with the punishment provided for the offence (murder under Section 302). Section 115 is incorrect as it applies only if the offence is not committed. Section 120 relates to concealing designs to commit an offence.
SIMILAR QUESTIONS
A attacks Z under such circumstances of grave provocation that his killing of Z would be only culpable homicide not amounting to murder. B, having ill-will towards Z and intending to kill him, and not having been subject to the provocation, assists A in killing Z. Here
A, intending to murder Z by poison, purchases poison and mixes the same with food which he delivers to Z's servant to place it on Z's table. A is guilty of
A intentionally causes Z's death, partly by illegally omitting to give Z food, and partly by beating Z. A is guilty of
'A' is having joint property with 'Z' in a horse. 'A' shoots the horse with the intention to cause wrongful loss to 'Z'. 'A' has committed which one of the following offences ?