Advertisements
Advertisements
Question
Legal Principle: The Latin maxim nemo bis punitur pro eodem delictomeans that nobody can be punished twice for the same offence.
Fact Situation: Sajan, a petty thief, is caught and thrashed thoroughly by the people before being handed over to the police. Sajan pleads before the magistrate that since he was already thrashed by the people he should not be again punished by the State.
Which of the following statements is the most appropriate in relation to the legal principle stated above?
Options
Sajan is right since nobody should be punished for the same offence twice.
Thrashing given by the people does not amount to legal punishment and so Sajan can be punished by the State.
Giving a good thrashing to the thief is the best form of punishment to prevent future theft.
The Magistrate should take into consideration the thrashing received by Sajan while fixing his punishment.
Advertisements
Solution
Thrashing given by the people does not amount to legal punishment and so Sajan can be punished by the State.
Explanation:
Nemo bis punitur pro eodem delicto means no person shall be twice punished for the same offense, that ancient right of appeal was gone when the punishment had once been suffered. The protection against the action of the same court in inflicting punishment twice must surely be as necessary, and as clearly within the maxim, as protection from chances or danger of a second punishment on a second trial.
However in the case presented before us thrashing given by people cannot be considered as legal punishment as it was not given by any court exercising its legal power, hence Sajan can be still punished by the court of law, leading it is most appropriate.
APPEARS IN
RELATED QUESTIONS
Principle: Whoever by words publishes any imputation concerning any person is said to defame that person.
Facts: During a marriage ceremony, A circulated a pamphlet saying the sister of the bride 'S‘ is a thief, she has stolen the shoes of the bridegroom.
Principles:
- An independent contractor is one who is employed to do some work of his employer. He is engaged under a contract for services. He undertakes to produce a given result, and in the actual execution of the work, he is not under the direct control or following directions of his employer. He may use his own discretion in execution of the work assigned.
- In general, an employer is not liable for the torts (wrongful acts) of his independent contractor. But, the employer may be held liable if he directs him to do some careless acts.
Facts: Ramesh hired a taxicab to go to Delhi Airport. As he started late from his home, he kept on urging the taxidriver to drive at a high speed and driver followed the directions; and ultimately due to high speed an accident took place causing injuries to a person.
In India, the literary work is protected until
Within the jurisdiction of which High Court does Lakshadweep fall
Andrew throws a baseball towards Barry, with whom he is playing pitch and catch. Andrew’s aim is bad and the ball hits Cassandra, who is walking nearby.
Aaron points a gun at Bridget and threatens to shoot her. Aaron knows that the gun is not loaded but Bridget does not. Which of the following most accurately states the likely outcome if Bridget sues Aaron alleging assault?
Which of the following is not an element of an intentional tort?
Given below is the 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: ln the employer-employee relationship, the employer is held liable for all the wrongs committed by his employees in the course of employment.
FACTUAL SITUATION: David was employed as a Driver in ABC & Co over the past 15 years and has been appreciated by the General Manager for his hard work and sincerity. He has been rewarded by the company for his accident-free record. David's younger brother wanted to join the same company as a driver. He obtained a Learner's Licence, joined a Driving School and was learning driving during the last three months. He was on the verge of completion of the training and appear for the Driving test. He wanted to have more practice before the test and requested his brother David for using the Company's car for two days. David also allowed him to use the office car for the practice. While he was practicing driving, a truck came from the wrong side, hit the company's car driven by David's brother, which in turn hit a pedestrian and injured him. The pedestrian sues the company for damages.
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 Principles:
Defamation means publication of a false and derogatory statement about another person without lawful justification.
Factual situation: A writes a defamatory letter to B containing defamatory remarks in reference of B in Urdu language. A is aware that B does not know Urdu. B goes C who knows Urdu and the letter is read over by C to him. B sues A for defamation. DECISION:
Principle: Where there is a transfer of ownership of one thing for the ownership of some other thing it is called an exchange, while the transfer of ownership for consideration of money is called a sale, whereas without consideration it becomes a gift.
Facts: 'A' transfers his house worth `50 lakh to 'B' for a shopping building worth the same amount, as consideration from 'B'.
