Advertisements
Advertisements
Question
Principle: A spouse is not permitted to put in evidence in any court, any communication during the marriage between the spouses without the consent of the person who made the communication.
Facts: X who is the wife of Y saw her husband (Y) coming out of the neighbour‘s house at 6.00 am in the morning. Y told his wife X that he has murdered the neighbour and handed over the jewellery of that neighbour to his wife.
Options
X is allowed to appear as a witness in court to depose that her husband has told her that he committed a murder
X is not allowed to appear as a witness at all in any court
X is not allowed to appear as a witness to depose what was told by the husband to her, however, she can depose what she saw
X is an independent woman and she can do whatever she wants
Advertisements
Solution
X is not allowed to appear as a witness to depose what was told by the husband to her, however, she can depose what she saw
Explanation:
According to the principle, a spouse is prevented from stating the communication between her and her husband without his consent. However, she is not prevented from stating what she saw.
APPEARS IN
RELATED QUESTIONS
Direction: The passage given below is followed by a set of question. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.
On May 14, the Ministry of Home Affairs issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) to select a private agency for creating a National Database of Sexual Offenders for India. The said RFP states that the purpose of establishing the database of sex offenders is to help in the early detection and prevention of crime against women, arrests of persons accused of criminal offences and to keep a watch on habitual offenders. Media reports suggest that the public will have access to the details regarding convicted sex offenders and law enforcement officials will have access to data about persons on trial for sexual offences. This registry seems to be one more knee-jerk and populist reaction to the problem of sexual violence against women and children in India.
The ministry seems to have launched this initiative without analysing the evidence on the limited efficacy of such registries in other jurisdictions in reducing rates of repeat offending and without examining its appropriateness in the Indian context. Various states in the US have had such publicly accessible registries for around 28 years and multiple studies have shown that they have limited public safety benefits and significant social costs. Sex offender registries are predicated on the assumption that convicted sex offenders have a high likelihood of committing offences after serving their sentences. This assumption is not borne out by data. In India, the percentage of recidivism among arrested persons according to data collected by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) for 2016 is only 6.4%.
The registry is being proposed in response to widely-reported horrific incidents of rape. The logic seems to be that if the police have a list of offenders living in the area, investigation becomes simpler and people, especially parents, can be more vigilant if they are aware of offenders living around them. However in India, as per the NCRB data for 2016, in 94.6% of reported cases of rape against women and children, the perpetrator is known to the victim. Such a registry offers little protection from such offenders. In fact, the fear of the offender being included in the registry may exacerbate the problem of underreporting by making people apprehensive about reporting sexual violence involving family members and acquaintances.
Once the general public has unfettered access to data about sex offenders online, it can open a Pandora's Box. The fears of offenders being ostracised and vilified become very real. Among a host of foreseeable problems, they will find it particularly tough to find employment or housing. India has already witnessed cases of lynchings of people suspected to be child kidnappers. It is not paranoid to expect the public reaction to convicted offenders to be much worse. Once offenders are pushed into the margins, their access to treatment, supervision and support systems becomes diminished, which may be quite counterproductive. If the state imposes restrictions on where such offenders can live, the housing crisis they will face will be exacerbated. They may become homeless or be compelled to live in areas far from home where they may face less scrutiny. The stigma and ostracisation that such offenders will face will invariably extend to their families. Studies in the US have shown that a combination of social ostracisation, lack of psychiatric support and the inability to find a job or housing, can even increase chances of recidivism; thus, defeating the very purpose of the registry. In such circumstances, registration in such a database can turn into a 'scarlet letter' like badge of shame that can punish offenders much beyond their sentences and make their rehabilitation and reintegration into society next to impossible.
As per the National Family Health Survey (NFHS) data from 2015-2016, we know that 85% of cases of sexual violence against women, which excludes cases of marital rape and assault, go unreported. Such a registry does not begin to address this problem.
Before implementing this registry, the Ministry of Home Affairs must create a research base on recidivism among sex offenders and the risk factors and hold a much broader public debate on the need for the registry. This is not to say that sexual offences are not an urgent problem. In the Indian context, the focus needs to be shifted to tackling barriers to reporting, training law enforcement officials and providing support to survivors rather than this ill-conceived registry.
The author gives which of the following suggestions to the concerned ministry?
The next three questions consist of two statements, one labeled as 'Assertion' (A) and other as 'Reason' (R). You are to examine these two statements carefully and select the correct answer.
Assertion (A): The essence of joint liability under section 149 of the IPC is that the criminal act must have been done with a view to fulfill the common object of an unlawful assembly.
Reason (R): Any sudden and provocative act done by a member of an unlawful assembly would render the other members of that assembly liable.
Mark the best option:
Principle:
- If one threatens another to commit any act forbidden by the Indian Penal Code likely to harm anyone thereby causing him(one who is thus threatened) to enter into an agreement with anyone; the agreement thus entered into is void.
- An attempt to commit suicide is an act forbidden by the Indian Penal Code.
Facts: Gopaldas who is very fond of his nephew Jitendra, a bright law graduate; promises to gift him a plot of land if the latter joined his friend Atmaram’s law firm as an associate. Jitendra joins Atmaram’s firm but before Gopaldas could proceed, his elder son Akash who was in need of money threatened to commit suicide if Gopaldas did not sell the plot of land. Gopaldas entered into an agreement to sell the plot of land and gave the money he received as advance; to Akash.
What punishment may be awarded to the person, whose act is covered under general exceptions?
Who is the author of the ancient book on economics, Arthashastra?
The punishments to which offenders are liable under the provisions of this code are
Answer the question which follows from the application of the undermentioned legal principle:
LEGAL PRINCIPLE: Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of right of private defence. This right also extends to lawfully causing the death of the assailant, if the offence which occasions the exercise of the right of private defence, be
(i) An assault which reasonably causes the apprehension of death or grievous hurt (Very serious hurt)
(ii) An assault which causes reasonable apprehension of rape
(iii) An assault which causes reasonable apprehension of kidnapping This right is available for protecting one’s own body, as well as the body of any other, provided the assault is not self-invited.
Decide whether the right of private defence is available in the following situations.
FACTUAL SITUATION:
A was holding the birthday party of his daughter. Some of his friends decided to present her with a car. To create an element of surprises, they decided to kidnap her for a few minutes while the party was in full swing and then get her back in the new car. They put the plan into action. While they were kidnapping, A got very alarmed and asked the guards to open fire. The guards killed all the five friends. A is
If a witness makes a statement in Court, knowing it to be false, he commits the offence of
X, a shopkeeper, leaves a sealed 5 kilogram bag of a branded wheat flour at the door of Y with a note you will like this quality wheat flour and pay Rupees 100 for this bag' without being asked to do so. Y on coming back collects the bag from his door, opens the seal of the bag, and uses a quarter of kilograms for making chapattis (unleavened bread). But next day returns the bag. Is he bound to pay for the bag? He is
Principle: Whoever intentionally puts any person in fear of any injury to that person, or to any other, and thereby dishonestly induces that person so put in fear to deliver to any person any property, commits extortion.
A entered B's house, caught hold of B, S daughter C and threatened to stab her if A did not give him ₹10,000 immediately. B did so. A is prosecuted for extortion.
