Advertisements
Advertisements
Question
LEGAL PRINCIPLE Any direct physical, interference with goods in somebody's possession without lawful justification is called trespass of goods.
FACTS Z purchased a car from a person who had no title to it and sent it to a garage for repair. X believing wrongly that the car was his, removed it from the garage.
Options
X can be held responsible for the trespass of goods
X cannot be held responsible for trespass of good as he was under a wrong belief
X has not committed any wrong
None of the above
Advertisements
Solution
X can be held responsible for the trespass of goods
Explanation:
Under section 441 of IPC which defines Criminal trespass that whoever enters into or upon property in the possession of another with intent to commit an offence or to intimidate, insult or annoy any person in possession of such property or having lawfully entered into or upon such property, unlawfully remains there with the intent thereby to intimidate, insult or annoy any such person or with intent to commit an offence.
APPEARS IN
RELATED QUESTIONS
Extortion is almost equal to the offence of
LEGAL PRINCIPLE Whoever delivers to another person as genuine any counterfeit currency which he knows to be counterfeit, but which that other person is not aware of at the time when he received it, is guilty of counterfeiting currency.
FACTUAL SITUATION While returning home one day, Roshni realises that the local shopkeeper has given her a fake note of ₹1000. Disappointed, she goes to the same shop and buys cosmetics worth ₹600. She then passes the same fake note to the shopkeeper. The shopkeeper while inspecting the note finds out that it is fake. Is Roshni guilty?
LEGAL PRINCIPLES
1. The crime of kidnapping involves taking someone away from the custody of their lawful guardian.
2. The crime of abduction involves inducing or forcing somebody to go away from someplace against their will.
FACTUAL SITUATION
A steals B's slave. Is it a crime?
DECISION
I. Kidnapping
II. Abduction
III. Neither
REASON
(A) Slavery is illegal.
(B) A bas taken him away from B's lawful custody.
(C) A bas forced somebody to go with him against his will.
The question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.
Principle: Whoever takes away with him any minor person less than sixteen years of age, if a male, or less than eighteen years of age, if a female out of the keeping of parents of such minor person without the consent of such parent, is said to kidnap such minor person.
Facts: A female born on January 01, 1995, got admitted to an undergraduate program of a reputed University on July 01, 2012. She became friendly with one of the boys, born on June 01, 1994, of her class. The boy and the girl decided to marry. The parents of the boy agreed but the family of the girl did not agree. On December 15, 2012, the girl made a call from her Blackberry to the boy. The girl told the boy to come in his car at a particular place and time. The boy reached the stipulated place before the stipulated time. He waited there for about half an hour. The girl reached the stipulated place. She opened the door of the car and sat beside the boy who was on the driving seat. Without exchanging any pleasantries, the boy drove the car to an unknown place. The father of the girl lodged an FIR in the nearest police on January 20, 2013.
The question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.
Principle: Ignorance of law excuses on one.
Facts: 'X' fails to file his income tax returns for a considerable number of years. The Income Tax department serves upon him a show-cause notice' as to why proceedings should not be initiated against him for the recovery of the income tax due from him with interest and penalty. Which of the following derivations is correct?
The question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.
Principle: When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone.
Facts: Roshan along with two of his friends, Tushar and Tarang proceeded to the house of Darshan in order to avenge an insult made by the brother of Darshan. They opened fire on the members of Darshan's family. It was found that the shots of Roshan did not hit anyone, but the shots of Tushar and Tarang succeeded in killing Darshan.
Given below is a statement of legal principle followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer.
LEGAL PRINCIPLE: A person is responsible for that which he could have reasonably foreseen or prevented.
FACTUAL SITUATION: A chemist sold a hair conditioner to Jyoti. The conditioner was locally manufactured and the contents, harmful chemicals. were listed on the bottle. The chemist, however, represented to Jyoti that the chemicals used were harmless and beneficial for the hair. On using it, Jyoti's hair was badly damaged and she had to get hair treatment done for the same. Jyoti filed a complaint against the chemist. Will the chemist be liable? DECISION:
Given below is a statement of legal principle followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer.
LEGAL PRINCIPLE: Nothing is an offense which is done by any person who is, or who by reason of a mistake of fact, in good faith, believes himself to be bound by law to do it.
FACTUAL SITUATION: A, soldier, fires on a mob by the order of his superior officer, in conformity with the commands of the law. B is killed due to such firing. Is A guilty of murder? DECISION:
Given below is a statement of legal principle followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer.
LEGAL PRINCIPLE:
1. Preparation to commit an offence is not an offence.
2. After one has finished preparation to commit an offence, any act done towards committing the offence with the intention to commit it, is an attempt to commit the offence which is by itself an offence.
FACTUAL SITUATION: Manish wanted to kill Nandini and had therefore gone to the market to buy explosives to plant in her house. Manish kept those explosives in his godown as he planned to plant them early next morning. But as the explosives were stolen in the night he could not plant them in Nandini's house. However, Nandini came to know about Manish's plan and therefore wants to file a complaint against him. Will she succeed? DECISION:
Actual-Reus and Mens Rea are essential elements of _____ law.
