hackTheBox/cv · Datasets at Hugging Face

Text stringlengths 1 112
are used for any person whether male or female. Thus, in view of section 8, IPC, 1860
read with section 2(y), Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr PC, 1973) the pronoun 'his'
in clause (d) of section 125(1), Cr PC, 1973 also indicates a female.7.
7. Vijaya (Dr.) v Kashirao Rajaram Sawai, 1987 Cr LJ 977 : AIR 1987 SC 1100 [LNIND 1987 SC
200] ; M Areefa Beevi v Dr. K M Sahib, 1983 Cr LJ 412 (Ker) : See also Girdhar Gopal v State, 1953
Cr LJ 964 (MB) (Section 354 IPC, 1860).
THE INDIAN PENAL CODE
CHAPTER II GENERAL EXPLANATIONS
THIS Chapter is for the most part an elaborate interpretation clause. It is a key to the
interpretation of the whole Code. The leading terms used are here defined and
explained and the meanings thus, announced are steadily adhered to throughout the
subsequent chapters.
[s 9] Number.
Unless the contrary appears from the context, words importing the singular number
include the plural number, and words importing the plural number include the singular
number.
THE INDIAN PENAL CODE
CHAPTER II GENERAL EXPLANATIONS
THIS Chapter is for the most part an elaborate interpretation clause. It is a key to the
interpretation of the whole Code. The leading terms used are here defined and
explained and the meanings thus, announced are steadily adhered to throughout the
subsequent chapters.
[s 10] "Man" "Woman".
The word "man" denotes a male human being of any age; the word "woman" denotes a
female human being of any age.
COMMENT—
A female child of seven and a half months was held to be a "woman" for the purpose of
section 354 IPC, 1860.8.
8. State of Punjab v Major Singh, AIR 1967 SC 63 [LNIND 1966 SC 130] : 1967 Cr LJ 1 .
THE INDIAN PENAL CODE
CHAPTER II GENERAL EXPLANATIONS
THIS Chapter is for the most part an elaborate interpretation clause. It is a key to the
interpretation of the whole Code. The leading terms used are here defined and
explained and the meanings thus, announced are steadily adhered to throughout the
subsequent chapters.
[s 11] "Person".
The word "person" includes any Company or Association or body of persons, whether
incorporated or not.
COMMENT—
The term 'person' has been defined in section 11, IPC, 1860, and the same is in pari
materia with section 3(42) of the General Clauses Act 1897. Obviously, the definition is
inclusive.9. A natural person, an incorporated person or even an unincorporated
association or body of persons like a partnership can be a person under section 11 of
IPC, 1860.10. The Supreme Court has held in Standard Chartered Bank v Directorate of
Enforcement,11. that, as regards corporate criminal liability, there is no doubt that a
corporation or company could be prosecuted for any offence punishable under law,
whether it is coming under the strict liability or under absolute liability. A juristic person
has been held to come within the meaning of the word "person" for the purposes of
section 415 (cheating).12.
The State and its instrumentalities are juristic persons,13. but by implication, the State
stands excluded from the purview of the word 'person' for the purpose of limiting its
right to avail the revisional power of the High Court under section 397(1) of Cr PC, 1973
for the reason that the State, being the prosecutor of the offender, is enjoined to
conduct prosecution on behalf of the society and to take such remedial steps as to
deems proper.14. Chief Educational Officer is an artificial person/ juristic person falling
under section 11 of IPC, 1860.15.
[s 11.1] Accused person.—
Though the word "person" is defined in the Indian Penal Code section 11 and the
General Clauses Act section 3(42) which are identical and are not exhaustive but an
inclusive one. The words "accused" or "accused person" or "accused of an offence" are
not defined either in the Indian Penal Code or in the Indian Evidence Act or in the
General Clauses Act 1897.16.
[s 11.2] Complainant.—
A complaint can be filed in the name of a juristic person because it is also a person in
the eye of law. It is clear that complainant must be a corporeal person who is capable
of making a physical presence in the court. Its corollary is that even if the complaint is
made in the name of incorporeal person (like a company or corporation) it is necessary
that a natural person represents such juristic person in the court and it is that natural
person who is looked upon, for all practical purposes, to be the complainant in the
case. In other words, when the complainant is a body corporate it is the de jure
complainant, and it must necessarily associate a human being as de facto complainant
to represent the former in court proceedings.17. A company is a person in law and not
in fact. A person in law is always required to be represented by a person in fact. A
company can file a complaint for Defamation (section 500 IPC, 1860) through its
authorised representative.18.
9. Chief Education Officer, Salem v K S Palanichamy, 2012 Cr LJ 2543 (Mad).
10. B Raman v M/S. Shasun Chemicals and Drugs Ltd, 2006 Cr LJ 4552 (Mad); Target Overseas
Exports Pvt Ltd v A M Iqbal, 2005 Cr LJ 1931 (Ker).
11. Standard Chartered Bank v Directorate of Enforcement, AIR 2005 SC 2622 [LNIND 2005 SC
476] .
12. Reji Michael v Vertex Securities Ltd, 1999 Cr LJ 3787 (Ker).
13. Common Cause, A Registered Society v UOI, (1999) 6 SCC 667 [LNIND 1999 SC 637] : AIR
1999 SC 2979 [LNIND 1999 SC 637] .
14. Krishnan v Krishnaveni, AIR 1997 SC 987 [LNIND 1997 SC 1883] : 1997 Cr LJ 1519 : (1997) 4
SCC 241 [LNIND 1997 SC 1883] .
15. Chief Education Officer, Salem v K S Palanichamy, 2012 Cr LJ 2543 (Mad).
16. Directorate of Enforcement v Deepak Mahajan, AIR 1994 SC 1775 [LNIND 1993 SC 656] :
(1994) 3 SCC 440 : 1994 Cr LJ 2269 .
17. Associated Cement Co Ltd v Keshvanand, AIR 1998 SC 596 [LNIND 1997 SC 1634] : (1998) 1
SCC 687 [LNIND 1997 SC 1634] : 1998 Cr LJ 856 .
18. CM Ibrahim v Tata Sons Ltd, 2009 Cr LJ 228 (Kar).
THE INDIAN PENAL CODE
CHAPTER II GENERAL EXPLANATIONS
THIS Chapter is for the most part an elaborate interpretation clause. It is a key to the
interpretation of the whole Code. The leading terms used are here defined and
explained and the meanings thus, announced are steadily adhered to throughout the
subsequent chapters.
[s 12] "Public.".
The word "public" includes any class of the public, or any community.
COMMENT—

are used for any person whether male or female. Thus, in view of section 8, IPC, 1860

read with section 2(y), Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr PC, 1973) the pronoun 'his'

in clause (d) of section 125(1), Cr PC, 1973 also indicates a female.7.

7. Vijaya (Dr.) v Kashirao Rajaram Sawai, 1987 Cr LJ 977 : AIR 1987 SC 1100 [LNIND 1987 SC

200] ; M Areefa Beevi v Dr. K M Sahib, 1983 Cr LJ 412 (Ker) : See also Girdhar Gopal v State, 1953

Cr LJ 964 (MB) (Section 354 IPC, 1860).

THE INDIAN PENAL CODE

CHAPTER II GENERAL EXPLANATIONS

THIS Chapter is for the most part an elaborate interpretation clause. It is a key to the

interpretation of the whole Code. The leading terms used are here defined and

explained and the meanings thus, announced are steadily adhered to throughout the

subsequent chapters.

[s 9] Number.

Unless the contrary appears from the context, words importing the singular number

include the plural number, and words importing the plural number include the singular

number.

THE INDIAN PENAL CODE

CHAPTER II GENERAL EXPLANATIONS

THIS Chapter is for the most part an elaborate interpretation clause. It is a key to the

interpretation of the whole Code. The leading terms used are here defined and

explained and the meanings thus, announced are steadily adhered to throughout the

subsequent chapters.

[s 10] "Man" "Woman".

The word "man" denotes a male human being of any age; the word "woman" denotes a

female human being of any age.

COMMENT—

A female child of seven and a half months was held to be a "woman" for the purpose of

section 354 IPC, 1860.8.

8. State of Punjab v Major Singh, AIR 1967 SC 63 [LNIND 1966 SC 130] : 1967 Cr LJ 1 .

THE INDIAN PENAL CODE

CHAPTER II GENERAL EXPLANATIONS

THIS Chapter is for the most part an elaborate interpretation clause. It is a key to the

interpretation of the whole Code. The leading terms used are here defined and

explained and the meanings thus, announced are steadily adhered to throughout the

subsequent chapters.

[s 11] "Person".

The word "person" includes any Company or Association or body of persons, whether

incorporated or not.

COMMENT—

The term 'person' has been defined in section 11, IPC, 1860, and the same is in pari

materia with section 3(42) of the General Clauses Act 1897. Obviously, the definition is

inclusive.9. A natural person, an incorporated person or even an unincorporated

association or body of persons like a partnership can be a person under section 11 of

IPC, 1860.10. The Supreme Court has held in Standard Chartered Bank v Directorate of

Enforcement,11. that, as regards corporate criminal liability, there is no doubt that a

corporation or company could be prosecuted for any offence punishable under law,

whether it is coming under the strict liability or under absolute liability. A juristic person

has been held to come within the meaning of the word "person" for the purposes of

section 415 (cheating).12.

The State and its instrumentalities are juristic persons,13. but by implication, the State

stands excluded from the purview of the word 'person' for the purpose of limiting its

right to avail the revisional power of the High Court under section 397(1) of Cr PC, 1973

for the reason that the State, being the prosecutor of the offender, is enjoined to

conduct prosecution on behalf of the society and to take such remedial steps as to

deems proper.14. Chief Educational Officer is an artificial person/ juristic person falling

under section 11 of IPC, 1860.15.

[s 11.1] Accused person.—

Though the word "person" is defined in the Indian Penal Code section 11 and the

General Clauses Act section 3(42) which are identical and are not exhaustive but an

inclusive one. The words "accused" or "accused person" or "accused of an offence" are

not defined either in the Indian Penal Code or in the Indian Evidence Act or in the

General Clauses Act 1897.16.

[s 11.2] Complainant.—

A complaint can be filed in the name of a juristic person because it is also a person in

the eye of law. It is clear that complainant must be a corporeal person who is capable

of making a physical presence in the court. Its corollary is that even if the complaint is

made in the name of incorporeal person (like a company or corporation) it is necessary

that a natural person represents such juristic person in the court and it is that natural

person who is looked upon, for all practical purposes, to be the complainant in the

case. In other words, when the complainant is a body corporate it is the de jure

complainant, and it must necessarily associate a human being as de facto complainant

to represent the former in court proceedings.17. A company is a person in law and not

in fact. A person in law is always required to be represented by a person in fact. A

company can file a complaint for Defamation (section 500 IPC, 1860) through its

authorised representative.18.

9. Chief Education Officer, Salem v K S Palanichamy, 2012 Cr LJ 2543 (Mad).

10. B Raman v M/S. Shasun Chemicals and Drugs Ltd, 2006 Cr LJ 4552 (Mad); Target Overseas

Exports Pvt Ltd v A M Iqbal, 2005 Cr LJ 1931 (Ker).

11. Standard Chartered Bank v Directorate of Enforcement, AIR 2005 SC 2622 [LNIND 2005 SC

476] .

12. Reji Michael v Vertex Securities Ltd, 1999 Cr LJ 3787 (Ker).

13. Common Cause, A Registered Society v UOI, (1999) 6 SCC 667 [LNIND 1999 SC 637] : AIR

1999 SC 2979 [LNIND 1999 SC 637] .

14. Krishnan v Krishnaveni, AIR 1997 SC 987 [LNIND 1997 SC 1883] : 1997 Cr LJ 1519 : (1997) 4

SCC 241 [LNIND 1997 SC 1883] .

15. Chief Education Officer, Salem v K S Palanichamy, 2012 Cr LJ 2543 (Mad).

16. Directorate of Enforcement v Deepak Mahajan, AIR 1994 SC 1775 [LNIND 1993 SC 656] :

(1994) 3 SCC 440 : 1994 Cr LJ 2269 .

17. Associated Cement Co Ltd v Keshvanand, AIR 1998 SC 596 [LNIND 1997 SC 1634] : (1998) 1

SCC 687 [LNIND 1997 SC 1634] : 1998 Cr LJ 856 .

18. CM Ibrahim v Tata Sons Ltd, 2009 Cr LJ 228 (Kar).

THE INDIAN PENAL CODE

CHAPTER II GENERAL EXPLANATIONS

THIS Chapter is for the most part an elaborate interpretation clause. It is a key to the

interpretation of the whole Code. The leading terms used are here defined and

explained and the meanings thus, announced are steadily adhered to throughout the

subsequent chapters.

[s 12] "Public.".

The word "public" includes any class of the public, or any community.

COMMENT—