use of criminal force under indian law

Views:
 
Category: Education
     
 

Presentation Description

comprehensive

Comments

Presentation Transcript

FORCE : 

FORCE Under Section 349 of Indian Penal Code the term ‘Force’ has been defined. The term ‘Force’ defined in this section contemplates force used by one human being on another human being. The term Force here defined occurs in the English phrase" Vi Et Armis” – Exertion of energy producing change in the outer world.

In order to constitute force there must be at least:- : 

In order to constitute force there must be at least:- (i) Causing of a motion (ii) Change of a motion or (iii) Cessation of a motion.

In, Shadshiv Mondal v. Emperor : 

In, Shadshiv Mondal v. Emperor The court held that Force does not contemplate the use of force against inanimate objects. This is clear from the use of word “another” in this section. The word “another” refers to another human being in the ambit of this section.

In, Ramakant rajaram v. Manuel Fernandes : 

In, Ramakant rajaram v. Manuel Fernandes It was held in this case that , a motion or change of motion or cessation of motion caused to Property without affecting a human being is not the ‘Use of Force to Another within the meaning of this section.’

In, Chandrika sao v. State of Bihar : 

In, Chandrika sao v. State of Bihar Supreme Court in the case held that it would be clear from a Bare Perusal of the section that one person can be said to have used force against another if he causes motion or cessation of motion to that other. By snatching away the accused necessarily caused a jerk to the hand or the hands of official would be to affect the sense of the feelings of the hands of the official. Therefore the court held that the action of the accused amounts to use of force as contemplated by Section 349 of Indian Penal Code.

In, Jai Ram v. Emperor : 

In, Jai Ram v. Emperor In this case the Accused raises his stick to strike the Plaintiff, the plaintiff seeing the accused raising the stick moves away. It was held by the Court that A uses the force within the meaning of this section.

In, Sheo pratap singh v. Emperor : 

In, Sheo pratap singh v. Emperor It was held in the case that inducing an animal to move may amount to using force.

Criminal Force : 

Criminal Force The last Section defined ‘force’ which by itself is not an offence , for the use of force may take place under circumstances the most benevolent, as where a person pulls another out of a well to save him from being drowned in the well, such an act is not an offence.

When does force becomes Criminal Force? : 

When does force becomes Criminal Force? The previous section has defined Section 349, which can also be put to positive or good use. Force becomes criminal only when -- it is used without consent and in order of committing offence. when it is used to cause injury, fear or annoyance to another to whom the force is used.

The essential ingredients of this section are as follows:- : 

The essential ingredients of this section are as follows:- (i) Intentional use of force to any person. (ii) Such Force must have been used without the person’s consent (iii) The Force must have been used:- (a) In order to committing of an offence. (b) Intending to cause or knowing that is likely to cause Injury, fear or the annoyance to the person to whom the Force is used.

Criminal Force : 

Criminal Force Criminal Force is Equivalent to “battery” in English law which means the intentional infliction of force by one person upon another against latter’s consent. If A spits over B, then A would be liable for use of Criminal Force as it must have cause annoyance to B.

In, Haystead v. DPP : 

In, Haystead v. DPP In this case accused punched a Woman, as a result of which the child in her hand fell to the floor. His prosecution included the charge of “battery”, on the child. He contended that the battery required direct application of force which involved direct physical contact with victim either with the body or medium such as Weapon.

In, Haystead v. DPP : 

In, Haystead v. DPP The court rejected this contention and said that battery does not require direct infliction of violence. The accused was guilty because the child’s fall to floor had result directly from the assault of mother.

In, Bihari Lal v. Emperor : 

In, Bihari Lal v. Emperor In this case a person broke the house in the absence of the occupant, then it is clear that the accused had taken the possession of the house without any force or criminal force. But If, a person struck a pot which another person was carrying and which was in contact with his body, it constitutes the offence of criminal force. Thus the physical presence of a person makes a crucial difference, between an act amounting to criminal force or not.

Intentional : 

Intentional The word intentional excludes all Involuntary, accidental or even negligent acts. An Attendant at a bath, who from pure carelessness turns on the wrong tap and causes boiling water to fall on another, an illus. (g) to Sec.350, could not be convicted for the use of Criminal Force.

In, Mohd. Ishaq Khan v. Emperor : 

In, Mohd. Ishaq Khan v. Emperor A person raises stick for any purpose of his own and the other B, runs away because of sheer fright then the accused would not be liable for criminal Force. Though in this case the act of the accused A caused fear in the mindset of the other person B even then the accused will not be liable as the act was not done with an Intention to do so.

CONSENT : 

CONSENT The word Consent should be taken as defined in section90 of the Indian Penal Code. There is some difference between doing an act “without one’s consent” and “against his will”. The later involves active mental opposition of the act. MAYNE states :- Where it is an element of an offence that the act should have been done without the consent of the person affected by it , some evidence must be offered that the act was done to him against his will or without his consent.

Assault : 

Assault An assault is nothing more than a threat of violence exhibiting an intention to use criminal force, and the present ability and intention to carry the threat into execution. The Section basically requires two things :- (i) Making of any gesture or preparation by a person in the presence of another. (ii) Intention or knowledge of the likelihood that such gesture or preparation will cause the person present to apprehend that the person making it is about to use Criminal Force to him.

Gesture or Preparation : 

Gesture or Preparation According to this section , the mere gesture or preparation with the intention or knowledge that it is likely to cause apprehension in the mind of the victim, amounts to an offence of assault. The explanation to this section provides that mere words do not amount to assault , unless the words are used in the aid of the gesture or preparation which amounts to an assault.

Gesture or Preparation : 

Gesture or Preparation The following have been held to be instances of assault:- (i) Pointing of a gun, whether loaded or unloaded….. (ii) Fetching a Sword and advancing towards victim (iii) Lifting one’s Lathi (iv) Throwing brick into another’s house (v) Advancing with a threatening attitude to strike blows.

In, Read v. Cooker : 

In, Read v. Cooker An assault is constituted by an attempt to apply unlawful force to another or any threat which is accompanied by or consists of any act or gesture showing a present intent to use unlawful force and also accompanied by “ a present ability to carry the threat into Execution”.

In, Stephens v. Myers : 

In, Stephens v. Myers A advanced towards B in a threatening attitude and with the intent of striking B, but was stopped by any other person just before he reached B. The Court held in this case that A’s blow would almost immediately have reached B if it had not been stopped he had committed an assault.

In, Hunter v. Johns : 

In, Hunter v. Johns In this case A, the master of a board school, detained a child after school hours for not doing home lessons which, under the Elementary Educations Act, 1870 and 1876, he had no power to set. The court held that he was guilty of an Unlawful detention of the child and therefore an assault. Mere words cannot constitute an assault.

Defense to Assault : 

Defense to Assault The accused has got two defenses available to him:- (i) That the facts of the case do not constitute an assault or battery if it was an accident or done by consent. (ii) That he was justified and excused. He may, also, where the circumstances permit, specially plead the defense that the matter has already been disposed of by a court of summary jurisdiction .

Difference between Criminal force, Assault and Hurt :- : 

Difference between Criminal force, Assault and Hurt :- Section319 of the Indian Penal code defines Hurt. The word assault, criminal force and hurt have distinct meanings and definition in IPC. They deal with different stages of the commission of offence with different effects. Legally assault denotes the preparatory acts which cause apprehension of the use of criminal force against the person. Assault falls short of actual use of Criminal force.

Difference between Criminal force, Assault and Hurt :- : 

Difference between Criminal force, Assault and Hurt :- Now Criminal Force is causing motion, change of motion or cessation of the motion without the consent of the person, in order to commit an offence or intending to cause or knowing it will cause injury, fear or annoyance. When the use of such criminal force results in causing of bodily pain or injury, then it would amount to the offence of ‘Hurt’ under Section 323, Indian Penal Code.

authorStream Live Help