Text
stringlengths 1
133
⌀ | INDIAN POLITY
stringlengths 1
95
⌀ |
---|---|
THE INDIAN PENAL CODE | null |
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION | null |
The Indian Penal Code was drafted by the First Indian Law Commission presided over | null |
by Lord Thomas Babington Macaulay. The draft underwent further revision at the hands | null |
of well-known jurists, like Sir Barnes Peacock, and was completed in 1850. The Indian | null |
Penal Code was passed by the then Legislature on 6 October 1860 and was enacted as | null |
Act No. XLV of 1860. | null |
Preamble. WHEREAS it is expedient to provide a general | null |
Penal Code for India; It is enacted as follows:— | null |
COMMENT.—The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC, 1860) exhaustively codifies the law | null |
relating to offences with which it deals and the rules of the common law cannot be | null |
resorted to for inventing exemptions which are not expressly enacted.1. It is not | null |
necessary and indeed not permissible to construe the IPC, 1860 at the present day in | null |
accordance with the notions of criminal jurisdiction prevailing at the time when the | null |
Code was enacted. The notions relating to this matter have very considerably changed | null |
between then and now during nearly a century that has elapsed. It is legitimate to | null |
construe the Code with reference to the modern needs, wherever this is permissible, | null |
unless there is anything in the Code or in any particular section to indicate the | null |
contrary.2. | null |
[s 1] Title and extent of operation of the Code. | null |
This Act shall be called the Indian Penal Code, and shall 3.[extend to the whole of | null |
India 4.[except the State of Jammu and Kashmir].] | null |
COMMENT— | null |
Before 1860, the English criminal law, as modified by several Acts,5. was administered | null |
in the Presidency towns of Bombay, Calcutta and Madras. But in the mofussil, the | null |
Courts were principally guided by the Mohammedan criminal law, the glaring defects of | null |
which were partly removed by Regulations of the local Governments. In 1827, the | null |
judicial system of Bombay was thoroughly revised and from that time the law which the | null |
criminal Courts administered was set forth in a Regulation6. defining offences and | null |
specifying punishments. But in the Bengal and Madras Presidencies the Mohammedan | null |
criminal law was in force till the Indian Penal Code came into operation. | null |
[s 1.1] Trial of offences under IPC, 1860.— | null |
All offences under IPC, 1860 shall be investigated, inquired into, tried and otherwise | null |
dealt with according to the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr PC, | null |
1973).7. | null |
[s 1.2] Overlapping Offences.— | null |
Where there is some overlapping between offences contained in IPC, 1860 and other | null |
enactments, the Supreme Court has held that it would not mean that the offender could | null |
not be tried under IPC, 1860. The Court concerned can pronounce on such issues on | null |
the basis of evidence produced before it. There may be some overlapping of facts in | null |
the cases under section 420 IPC, 1860 and section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments | null |
Act, 1881 but ingredients of offences are entirely different. Thus, the subsequent case | null |
is not barred.8. A "terrorist act" and an act of "waging war against the Government of | null |
India" may have some overlapping features, but a terrorist act may not always be an act | null |
of waging war against the Government of India, and vice versa. The provisions of | null |
Chapter IV of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and those of Chapter VI of | null |
the IPC, 1860 including section 121, basically cover different areas.9. The mere fact | null |
that the offence in question was covered by the Customs Act, 1962 did not mean that it | null |
could not be tried under IPC, 1860 if it also falls under it.10. | null |
1. MC Verghese v Ponnan, AIR 1970 SC 1876 [LNIND 1968 SC 339] : (1969) 1 SCC 37 [LNIND | null |
1968 SC 339] : 1970 Cr LJ 1651 . | null |
2. Mobarik Ali v State of Bombay, AIR 1957 SC 857 [LNIND 1957 SC 81] : 1957 Cr LJ 1346 (SC). | null |
3. The original words have successively been amended by Act 12 of 1891, section 2 and Sch I, | null |
the A.O. 1937, the A.O. 1948 and the A.O. 1950 to read as above. | null |
4. Subs. by Act 3 of 1951, section 3 and Sch, for "except Part B States" (w.e.f. 1-4-1951). | null |
5. 9 Geo. IV, section 74; Acts VII and XIX of 1837; Act XXXI of 1838; Acts XXII and XXXI of 1839; | null |
Acts VII and X of 1844; Act XVI of 1852. See Pramod Kumar, Perspectives of the New Bill on | null |
Indian Penal Code and Reflections on the Joint Select Committee Report—Some Comments, | null |
(1980) 22 JILI 307. | null |
6. XIV of 1827. | null |
7. Section 4(1) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Also see commentary under section 3 of IPC | null |
infra. | null |
8. Sangeetaben Mahendrabhai Patel v State of Gujarat, AIR 2012 SC 2844 [LNIND 2012 SC 1473] | null |
: (2012) 7 SCC 621 [LNIND 2012 SC 1473] . | null |
9. Mohammed Ajmal Mohammad Amir Kasab v State of Maharashtra, (2012) 9 SCC 1 [LNIND | null |
2012 SC 1215] : AIR 2012 (SCW) 4942 : AIR 2012 SC 3565 [LNIND 2012 SC 1215] : 2012 Cr LJ | null |
4770 : JT 2012 (8) SC 4 [LNIND 2012 SC 1215] : 2012 (7) Scale 553 [relied on State (NCT of | null |
Delhi) v Navjot Sandhu @ Afsan Guru, AIR 2005 SC 3820 [LNIND 2005 SC 580] : (2005) 11 SCC | null |
600 [LNIND 2005 SC 580] : (2005) 2 SCC (Cr) 1715] | null |
10. Natarajan v State, (2008) 8 SCC 413 [LNIND 2008 SC 1093] : (2008) 3 SCC (Cr) 507. | null |
THE INDIAN PENAL CODE | null |
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION | null |
The Indian Penal Code was drafted by the First Indian Law Commission presided over | null |
by Lord Thomas Babington Macaulay. The draft underwent further revision at the hands | null |
of well-known jurists, like Sir Barnes Peacock, and was completed in 1850. The Indian | null |
Penal Code was passed by the then Legislature on 6 October 1860 and was enacted as | null |
Act No. XLV of 1860. | null |
Preamble. WHEREAS it is expedient to provide a general | null |
Penal Code for India; It is enacted as follows:— | null |
COMMENT.—The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC, 1860) exhaustively codifies the law | null |
relating to offences with which it deals and the rules of the common law cannot be | null |
resorted to for inventing exemptions which are not expressly enacted.1. It is not | null |
necessary and indeed not permissible to construe the IPC, 1860 at the present day in | null |
accordance with the notions of criminal jurisdiction prevailing at the time when the | null |
Code was enacted. The notions relating to this matter have very considerably changed | null |
between then and now during nearly a century that has elapsed. It is legitimate to | null |
construe the Code with reference to the modern needs, wherever this is permissible, | null |
unless there is anything in the Code or in any particular section to indicate the | null |
contrary.2. | null |
[s 2] Punishment of offences committed within India. | null |
Every person 1 shall be liable to punishment under this Code and not otherwise for | null |
every act or omission contrary to the provisions thereof, of which he shall be guilty | null |
within 11.[India] 12.[***]. 2 | null |
COMMENT— | null |
This section deals with the intraterritorial operation of the Code. It makes the Code | null |
universal in its application to every person in any part of India for every act or omission | null |
contrary to the provisions of the Code. | null |
Section 2 read with section 4 of the IPC, 1860 makes the provisions of the Code | null |
applicable to the offences committed "in any place without and beyond" the territory of | null |
India; (1) by a citizen of India or (2) on any ship or aircraft registered in India, | null |