Skip to content

CS Executive · Jurisprudence, Interpretation and General Laws · Laws relating to Crime and its Procedure

A, a jailor, intending to cause prisoner Z's death, illegally omits to give Z food, and also beats Z. Z dies from the combined effect. What is A's liability under the General Explanations?

A has committed murder. The Sanhita treats causing an effect partly by an act and partly by an illegal omission as the same offence as causing it by either alone, so combining starvation with beating does not reduce liability.

  1. AA is not liable for murder because death resulted partly from omission
  2. BA is liable only for the beating, since omissions are not acts
  3. CA has committed murder, as causing an effect partly by an act and partly by an omission is the same offenceCorrect
  4. DA is guilty only of attempt to commit murder

Explanation

Section 3(7) says that where causing an effect by an act or omission is an offence, causing it partly by an act and partly by an omission is the same offence. The illustration states A has committed murder. Section 3(4) also extends acts to illegal omissions.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Laws relating to Crime and its Procedure shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Laws relating to Crime and its ProcedureFree diagnostic mock

More Laws relating to Crime and its Procedure questions