Question

PRINCIPLE Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at the time of doing it, is, by reason of intoxication, incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law: provided that the thing which intoxicated him was administered to him without his knowledge or against his will.

FACTUAL SITUATION 'A' was having a get together with his old friends and on his friend's suggestions, he consumed some alcohol. On his way back home at, night, 'A' heard some footsteps and turning back, he imagined he saw a figure moving towards him with a spear. In fact, it was only a man, 'B' with an umbrella. who was telling 'A' to walk carefully since 'A' appeared to be unsteady?

However, 'A' proceeded to attack 'B' with an iron rod leading to grave injuries to 'B', Is 'A' guilty of causing grievous hurt to 'B'?

Options

• No, 'A' is not guilty because in his intoxicated state the umbrella appeared a spear to him and he exercised his right of private defence

• No, 'A' is not guilty because 'B' could have attacked 'A' with his umbrella

• No, 'A' is not guilty because he was intoxicated on the suggestions of his friends and was incapable of knowing that he was savagely attacking a man who was carrying only an umbrella 

• Yes, 'A' is guilty because he got intoxicated voluntarily and under the effect of this voluntary intoxication, he attacked and caused grievous injuries to 'B' -who posed no threat to him in fact

Answer 1

Yes, 'A' is guilty because he got intoxicated voluntarily and under the effect of this voluntary intoxication, he attacked and caused grievous injuries to 'B' -who posed no threat to him in fact