Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence. Discuss.

Question: “Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence.” Discuss. [UPCJ 1997, 2006, 2013]

Or

Discuss the right of private defence of a person. When does it extend to the causing of death? When does it cease to exist? [M.P.C.J. 2006, 2011, U.P.C.J. 1984, 1987, 1991, 1997, 2003, Jharkhand J 2001]

Or

Discuss the right to private defence of property. When does it extend to the causing of death? [UPCJ. 1991, 2018]

Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [“Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence.” Discuss.]

Answer

Section 96, IPC states that nothing is an offence that is done in the exercise of the right of private defence. The idea of private defence is based on the natural instinct of self-preservation. The right of private defence is the right to protect one’s own person and property against the unlawful aggression of others. It is a right inherent in man and based on the fundamental principle that it is the first duty of man to help himself. In connection with the right of private defence the following propositions, must be noted:

1. There is no right of private defence under the code which is not itself an offence
2. The right of private defence is not available to the initial aggressor
3. It cannot be pleaded by persons who, believing they will be attacked, cause the attack
4. There is no right of private defence in retaliation or revenge.
5. The injury inflicted in self-defence must not be out of proportion to the injury with which he was threatened.

Section 97 of IPC provide the right of private defence of the body and of property, It states that “every person has a right, subject to the restrictions contained in section 99, to defend-

First– His own body, and the body of any other person, against any offence affecting the human body;

Secondly- The property, whether movable or immovable, of himself or of any other person, against any act which is an offence falling under the definition of theft, robbery, mischief, or criminal trespass, or which is an attempt to commit theft, robbery, mischief, or criminal trespass.”

According to section 99, the right to the privacy protection of a person or property must, therefore, be exercised under the following conditions:

1. if a public servant does not cause a reasonable apprehension of death or grievous harm to the person or damage to the property,
2. if there is insufficient time for recourse to public authorities, and
3. it does not cause more harm than is required to repel the attack.

In Patil Hari Meghji v. State of Gujarat [AIR 1983 SC 488], the accused continued to attack the deceased, even after he had fallen down and rendered harmless, it was held that the accused could not avail the benefit of the right of private defence.

In Mohinder Pal Jolly v. State of Punjab [AIR 1979 SC 577], there was a conflict between workers and management. The men hurled brickbats at the factory. The factory owner came out and shot one worker with a revolver killing him. The Supreme Court ruled that when murdering the worker, the owner violated his right of self-defence.

Section 100 in The Indian Penal Code- When the right of private defence of the body extends to causing death.

In certain cases, the body’s right to privacy protection stretches to the degree that it even causes the aggressor’s death. This is recognized by IPC section 100. This right is subject to the restrictions imposed under section 99, it must always be borne in mind. Therefore, pursuant to these conditions, the right to privacy protection applies to the aggressor’s death, subject to the additional conditions specified in section 100.

As per section 100, the right of privacy protection extends to causing the assailant’s death if any of the six conditions stipulated occur in the assailant’s commission of the offence. In other terms, it guarantees that the body’s right to privacy protection applies to the cause of the actual or potential assailant’s voluntary death if he induces reasonable and immediate fear of death or serious harm in the accused’s mind through either of the defined assaults.

The assault types listed in section 100 are:

1. assault to kill or inflict grievous harm;
2. assault on rape to fulfil unnatural lust;
3. assault on kidnapping or abduction; and
4. assault on wrongful imprisonment.

When death is caused by the exercise of the body’s right of privacy protection, the defender must show that: (a) the crime defended against was one of the six categories referred to in section 100, and (b) he behaved within the limits set out in section 99.

According to section 101 IPC, the body’s right to privacy protection must apply in all other circumstances to cause harm and not die except as given in section s 100. In other words, the body’s right to privacy protection would apply to the assailant’s death only in the circumstances described in section 100.

In all other circumstances, the body’s right of private defence will only apply to cause harm, short of death, but it is important to remember that in all of these cases, the right of privacy protection of the defender is subject to the limitations set out in section 99.

---

Important Mains Questions Series for Judiciary, APO & University Exams

1. IPC Mains Questions Series Part I: Important Questions
2. IPC Mains Questions Series Part II: Important Questions
3. IPC Mains Questions Series Part III: Important Questions
4. IPC Mains Questions Series Part IV: Important Questions
5. IPC Mains Questions Series Part V: Important Questions
6. IPC Mains Questions Series Part VI: Important Questions
7. IPC Mains Questions Series Part VII: Important Questions
8. IPC Mains Questions Series Part VIII: Important Questions
9. IPC Mains Questions Series Part IX: Important Questions
10. IPC Mains Questions Series Part X: Important Questions