KES’ Shri. Jayantilal H.

Patel Law College, Mumbai

INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860

A project submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for

The VI Semester of the B.A., L L.B Course

By

Name-ARSHIYA SHAIKH.

ROLL NO – 16

Third Year B.A., L L.B

Division C

Under the Supervision of

Asst. Prof. Shivani Negi Mam

Date - 11/03/2024
 DECLARATION

I have conducted the work presented in this assignment/project under the guidance of Asst: Prof.
Shivani Negi Ma’am, Department of Humanities and Legal Science, KES’ Shri. Jayantilal H.
Patel Law College. The observations, analyses, and interpretations made in this study and the
conclusions arrived at and included in the assignment/project are entirely my own. The work
reported in this is original and, to my knowledge, has not been submitted in part/complete for
any other diploma or degree of KES’ Shri. Jayantilal H. Patel Law College, or any other
University or Institute.

ARSHIYA SHAIKH SHIVANI NEGI MAM

 INTRODUCTION
Drafted in 1860, the Indian Penal Code (IPC) serves as the bedrock of criminal law in India. This
all-encompassing code meticulously defines a broad spectrum of offences, from common crimes
like theft and assault to more serious offences like murder and treason. It also prescribes
corresponding punishments for these criminal acts, ensuring a uniform and fair application of
criminal law nationwide. This standardization helps to prevent arbitrary punishments and
upholds the principles of justice.

Before establishing the IPC, India grappled with a fragmented criminal law system. Different
regions adhered to their rules, leading to inconsistencies and often unfair punishments.
Recognizing this pressing need for reform, the British colonial government formed the First Law
Commission of India in 1834. Headed by Lord Thomas Babington Macaulay, this commission
meticulously drafted the IPC, drawing upon principles from English common law and other legal
systems. The resulting code brought much-needed uniformity and structure to India's criminal
justice system.

Having laid a concise foundation, the project will now delve in the intricacies of the general
exceptions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), correlating the same with some illustrations and
landmark cases for a better understanding. But first, let us explore the basic framework of the
general exceptions of the Indian Penal Code, also known as IPC.

The Indian Penal Code (IPC) is a comprehensive rulebook meticulously outlining various
criminal offences and their corresponding punishments. However, the legal landscape isn't
always black and white. There are situations where an act, though seemingly illegal on the
surface, can be justified or excused due to specific circumstances. This is where the concept of
"General Exceptions" comes into play.

Chapter IV of the IPC acts as a crucial bridge between the rigidity of the law and the
complexities of real-world situations. These exceptions provide legal justifications for acts that
might otherwise be crimes. Understanding them is vital for a well-rounded grasp of the IPC.
General Exceptions: Ensuring Fairness and Recognizing Nuance

The General Exceptions play a critical role in upholding fairness and proportionality within the
legal system. They ensure that individuals are not unfairly punished for actions taken under
specific circumstances. For instance, the right to self-defence allows individuals to defend
themselves against unlawful aggression. Similarly, "necessity" acknowledges situations where a
more significant harm might be prevented by breaking the law. These exceptions introduce
nuance into the application of criminal law, ensuring it adapts to real-world scenarios.

Beyond fairness, the General Exceptions also recognize situations where upholding a legal or
moral duty might necessitate an act that could be construed as a crime. For example, a police
officer apprehending a criminal might use force exceeding what an ordinary citizen could. These
exceptions acknowledge the complexities of upholding the law and the challenges those
entrusted with its enforcement face.

Understanding the skeleton of the general exceptions will help us discover the different sections
and their titles under the following act.

The general exceptions, as rightly said, are sheltered under Chapter IV of the Indian Penal Code,
which encompasses articles 76 to 106.

There are mainly seven exceptions:

o Mistake of fact (articles 76 and 79)

o Mistake of law (articles 77-78)
o Accident (article 80)
o Absence of criminal intention (articles 81-86, 92-94)
o An act done by consent (articles 87-91)
o Trifling act (article 95)
o Private defense (articles 96-106)

THE FOLLOWING PROJECT DEALS WITH SECTIONS 96-106 ONLY.

 PRIVATE DEFENCE (SECTIONS 96-106)

Imagine a situation where a threat confronts you – someone attempts to assault you, steal your
belongings, or trespass on your property. The Indian Penal Code (IPC) recognizes your instinct
to protect yourself and your possessions. Sections 96 to 106 delve into the concept of private
defence, granting individuals the legal right to take reasonable measures to safeguard themselves
and their property from imminent harm.
This introduction serves as a springboard for a deeper understanding of private defence. We'll
explore the core principles that govern this right, ensuring you can exercise it while staying
within the legal boundaries.

ARTICLE 96 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) is a shield for actions taken in self-defence or
defence of property. It essentially states that anything done in the exercise of the right to private
defence (covered in Sections 99-106 of the IPC) isn't considered a crime. You won't face legal
repercussions if you take reasonable measures to protect yourself or your belongings from an
immediate threat. However, it's important to remember that private defence doesn't justify
excessive force or violence after the danger has passed. The key takeaway is that the law
recognizes your right to defend yourself but within the boundaries of proportionality and
immediacy.

ARTICLE 97 of the IPC throws a curveball at the right to self-defence (covered in Sections 96-
106). It says you can't claim self-defence if you started the trouble. If you provoke someone into
attacking you and then get hurt when they fight back, you can't claim self-defence for your
injuries.
There is a bit of leeway, though. If the person you provoked responds with WAY more force
than your initial action, their reaction might be excessive. Imagine a shove that results in a knife
attack - that wouldn't be okay. The law discourages people from picking fights and then trying to
claim self-defence when things get out of hand.
ARTICLE 98 of the IPC has your back in a sticky situation. It protects you if you take action
that might seem like a crime, but it's a reasonable response to someone who can't be held
criminally responsible for their actions. Why wouldn't they be accountable? There are three
reasons:
 Young and Reckless: If a child attacks you, they likely wouldn't be charged because
they're too young to understand the consequences. Article 98 steps in and says your act of
self-defence is justified.
 Mental Matters: Someone with a mental illness might not be able to form the intent to
commit a crime. If they try to hurt you, you can reasonably defend yourself without
facing charges under Article 98.
 Tricked and Tipsy: This one's a bit specific. If someone is forced to drink or take drugs
and becomes so intoxicated they don't understand their actions (think involuntary
intoxication), it might be a defence (but you'd need to prove it). Again, Article 98
protects your reasonable response in self-defence.

ARTICLE 99 of the Indian Penal Code deals with situations where someone acting in a public
service capacity tries to enforce the law, and you resist their actions. Here's the breakdown:
Public Servant's Actions: This applies when a public servant (police officer, government official,
etc.) acts in good faith and under their legal authority.
Right to Resist Removed: You generally don't have the right to physically resist a public servant
acting lawfully physically, even if their actions seem inconvenient or intrusive.
Exception: Serious Harm Feared: However, there's an exception. If the public servant's actions
cause a reasonable fear of death or serious bodily harm (grievous hurt), you can defend yourself
using reasonable force.
Knowing Their Role: It's important to note that you can only resist if you know, or have reason
to believe, that the person is a public servant acting in their official capacity.
Imagine a police officer conducting a lawful search of your property. You can't resist the search,
but if the officer threatens violence, you can defend yourself to avoid serious harm under Article
99.
ARTICLE 100 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) focuses on the right to private defence against
bodily harm caused by a private individual (not a public servant). It outlines the key principle of
proportionality in using force for self-defence. Here's the breakdown:
 Defense against Offences: This article applies when someone attempts to commit an
offence against your body, such as assault, kidnapping, wrongful restraint, or any act that
directly threatens your physical well-being.
 Reasonable Force: You can use reasonable force to defend yourself from these offences.
However, the force used must be proportionate to the threat faced.
 Proportionality Explained: You can't use excessive force that's more severe than the
danger itself. For example, using a deadly weapon against someone who throws a punch
wouldn't be considered reasonable force.
Essentially, Article 100 ensures your right to protect yourself, but it emphasizes the importance
of using a force proportionate to the threat.

ARTICLE 102 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) dives into when the right to private defence for
the body commences. It tells you when to legally use force to protect yourself from physical
harm. Here's the critical point:
The right to private defence of the body starts as soon as you reasonably apprehend danger.
This means you don't have to wait for an attack to begin before defending yourself. As soon as
you genuinely fear imminent harm from another person's attempt or threat to commit an offence,
the law allows you to take reasonable measures to protect yourself.
Imagine someone raises a weapon and threatens to attack you. Even if they haven't struck you
yet, the threat creates a reasonable apprehension of danger, and you would be justified in using
reasonable force to defend yourself under Article 102.
This right to defend you continues as long as the apprehension of danger continues. Once the
threat has subsided, you can no longer use force under private defence.
ARTICLE 104 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) delves into the right to private defence for
property. It clarifies the extent of permissible force you can use to protect your belongings from
offences like theft, robbery, criminal trespass, or mischief. Here's a breakdown of the key points:

 Proportionality for Property: Similar to private defence for the body, the force used
must be proportionate to the threat to your property. You can't use excessive force that's
more severe than the property's value or the offence's nature.
 Offences Covered: This article applies to offences where someone tries to take your
property without your consent, damage it, or interfere with your peaceful possession.
 Protecting Against Theft: If someone is trying to steal your belongings, you can use
reasonable force to stop them. However, you can't cause grievous harm (serious bodily
harm) to the thief unless they use violence themselves or are trying to steal property with
a reputation for causing death or grievous hurt (e.g., explosives).
 Protecting Against Damage: You can use reasonable force to prevent someone from
damaging your property. The force used should be proportionate to the potential damage.

Remember, you are responsible for proving that your actions fall under private defence. You
must convince the court that the force used was reasonable and necessary.

ARTICLE 105 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) sets the time limit for exercising the right to
private defence of property. It answers the question: how long can you use force to protect
your belongings?
Here's a breakdown of the key points:
The right to private defence for property continues as long as the offence is in progress. This
means you can use reasonable force to protect your belongings from theft, robbery, trespass, or
damage while the act is happening.
Here are some additional details:

 Offence Must Be Ongoing: You can't use force under Article 105 after completing the
offence. For instance, if someone has already stolen your phone and escaped, you can't
chase them down and use force to get it back.
  Hot Pursuit: However, there's a slight exception for hot pursuit. If you're chasing
someone immediately after they've committed the offence and still possess your property,
you might be able to use reasonable force to retrieve it. But this would depend on the
specific circumstances.

Remember, the law prioritizes preventing harm over retrieving stolen property. Once the offence
is complete, you should focus on reporting the crime to the authorities.

ARTICLE 106 of the IPC walks a tightrope between protecting your life and preventing
unnecessary harm. It allows deadly force, but only as a last resort. You can use it when facing
extreme danger to your life, with no other way to escape. There are strict conditions: a genuine
fear of death or serious injury, no other reasonable options, and defending yourself against a
grave threat. The law doesn't give a free pass for deadly force – the situation must be severe and
immediate. Remember, the burden of proving self-defence using deadly force lies with you.
 CONCLUSION

The Indian Penal Code (IPC) recognizes situations where actions that might otherwise be
considered crimes can be justified. These "general exceptions" outlined in Sections 81-106
provide a legal framework for defending yourself, your loved ones, or your property.

The Right to Self-Defense: A cornerstone of these exceptions is the right to private defence
(Sections 96-106). This allows you to take reasonable measures to protect yourself from physical
harm (bodily defence) or your belongings (property defence). However, the law emphasizes
proportionality - the force must be proportional to the threat faced. Additionally, the right to
defend yourself generally doesn't extend to situations where you provoked the attack or the threat
comes from someone incapable of criminal responsibility (like a child).

Beyond Self-Defense: The general exceptions go beyond self-defence. Acts done by mistake
(Section 76), acts done in good faith to prevent harm to property (Section 81), and acts done by a
child or someone mentally incapable of understanding the nature of their act (Section 84) are all
potentially excused under the IPC. These exceptions acknowledge that sometimes well-
intentioned actions can have unintended consequences, and the law considers these
circumstances.

The Burden of Proof: It's important to remember that the burden of proving that your actions
fall under one of these exceptions lies with the accused. This means you'll need to convince the
court that your actions were reasonable and necessary under the circumstances.

Understanding these general exceptions can be crucial in navigating challenging situations.

However, it's always advisable to consult with a lawyer if you're unsure about the legal
parameters of your actions.
Sr. No. Topic Page No.
1 Introduction 1-2
2 Articles 96 and 97 3
3 Articles 98 and 99 4
4 Articles 100 and 102 5
5 Articles 104 and 105 6
6 Articles 105 and 106 6-7
7 Conclusion 8