Principle: Whoever with the Intent to Cause, Or Knowing that He is Likely to Cause Wrongful Loss Or Damage to the Public Or to Any Person - Legal Reasoning

Advertisements
Advertisements
MCQ

Principle: Whoever with the intent to cause, or knowing that he is likely to cause wrongful loss or damage to the public or to any person, causes the destruction of property, or any such change in any property or in the situation thereof as destroys or diminishes its value or utility, of affects it injuriously, commits mischief.

A went to B's house for dinner. He saw that B had a statue made of ice, which was kept in a freezer, A removed the statue from the freezer for a few minutes, which led to the hand of the statue changing shape.

Options

  • A has not committed mischief, since he did not have the intention to change the shape of the hand of the statue

  • A has committed mischief because he should have known that his act was likely to damage the statue

  • A has not committed mischief because the statue did not get destroyed

  • A did not commit mischief because the value of the statue has not diminished

Advertisements

Solution

A has committed mischief because he should have known that his act was likely to damage the statue

Explanation:

In the given case A is liable as he knew that his act is likely to cause wrongful loss and damage to the property and therefore it is mischief. 

Concept: Indian Penal Code (Entrance Exams)
  Is there an error in this question or solution?

RELATED QUESTIONS

In this Question problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the question. In answering the following question, you should not rely on any rule(s) except the rule(s) that are supplied for problem. Further, you should not assume any fact other than 'those stated in the problem. The aim is to test your ability to properly apply a rule to a given set of facts, even when the result is absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the aim to test any knowledge of law you may already possess.

Rules 
A. A person is an employee of another if the mode and the manner in which he or she carries out his work is subject to control and supervision of the latter.
B. An employer is required to provide compensation to his or her employees for any injury caused by an accident arising in the course of employment. The words 'in the course of the employment' means in the course of the work which the employee is contracted to do and which is incidental to it. 

Facts Messrs. ZafarAbidi and Co. (Company) manufactures bidis with the help of persons known as `pattadars'. The pattadars are supplied tobacco and leaves by the Company and are required to roll them into bidis and bring the bidis back to the Company. The pattadars are free to roll the bidis either in the factory or anywhere else they prefer. They are not bound to attend the factory for any fixed hours of work or for any fixed number of days. Neither are they required to roll up any fixed number of bidis. The Company verifies whether the bidis adhere to the specified instructions or not and pays the pattadars on the basis of the number of bidis that are found to be of right quality. Aashish Mathew is one of the pattadars of the Company. He was hit by a car just outside the precinct of the factory while he was heading to have lunch in a nearby foodstall. Aashish Mathew has applied for compensation from the Company. According to the facts and the rules specified, which of the following propositions is correct?


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.

Which of the following focuses on the mistake of the Home Ministry which issued the RFP?

Which of the following is an assumption on which the Sex offender registries are predicated?


Principle: Everyone shall be permitted to take advantage of his own wrong.

Facts: A legatee was heavily drunk and driving his car at a speed of 100 Km/per hour in a crowded market. All of a sudden his testator came on the road. There were other people on the road at that time. The car driven by legatee hit the testator and four other persons. All five persons hit by the car died. 


The principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option:

Principle: When a person falsifies something with the intent to deceive another person or entity is forgery and is a criminal act. Changing or adding the signature on a document, deleting it, using or possessing false writing is also considered forgery. In the case of writing/painting to fall under the definition, the material included must have been fabricated or altered significantly in order to represent something it is actually no.

Facts: David made a living travelling from city to city, selling paintings that he claimed were done by great artists. Since the artists’ signatures were in place, many people fell for them and purchased the paintings. One of these artists saw three of his alleged paintings in a City gallery containing his name. He knew these were not his works and he complained to the police. Police traced David and initiated legal proceedings. Is David guilty of any offence?


Mark the best option:
Principle:

  1. Every person has a right to defend his own body, and the body of any other person, against any offence affecting the human body.
  2. The right of private defence in no case extends to inflicting more harm than necessary for the purpose of defence.

Facts: Rajendra, a police inspector; saw two men on motorbikes; one armed with a stick and the other armed with a scythechasing a boy and warned them to stop harassing the boy however they continued pursuing the boy. Rajendra who was carrying a loaded revolver (and nothing else) shot the man carrying a stick on head thereby killing him instantly and the other carrying a scythe on his legs causing him to fall down. Decide Rajendra's liability based on the facts mentioned above.

Decide Rajendra's liability based on the facts mentioned above.


There is no offence of adultery if it is committed, with the consent of –


A does sexual intercourse with a widow below 16 years of age with her consent –


Sexual intercourse by a man with a woman even with her consent is rape if she is below the age of –


The following persons are not judge


Court of justice defined in sec_____ IPC


Public servant denotes a person under the followings


Under section 46 of IPC, death denotes


A intentionally causes Z’s death, partly by illegally omitting to give Z food, and partly by beating Z.


How many types of punishments have been prescribed under the Indian Penal Code


If a witness makes a statement in Court, knowing it to be false, he commits the offence of


A participant in commission of crime is popularly known as


X, the servant of Y, takes a hundred rupee note fro Y's pocket and hides it under the carpet in the houses of Y, X tells Z another servant of Y, about the currency note and both, agree to share the money when the currency note is taken by X from the hiding place. Before X could recover the note, it was found by Y. Decide if an offence was committed and if so who committed the offence?


Answer the question which follows form the application of the under mentioned legal principle.

Principle: An assault is an attempt to do a corporeal hurt to another, coupled with an apparent present ability and intention to do that act. A battery is the intentional and direct application of any physical force to the person of another A was sitting on a chair reading a book. His friend. B decided to play a practical joke on him. Accordingly, he pulled the chair from under him, as a result of which A landed on the floor.


Principle: Whoever with the intent to cause, or knowing that he is likely to cause wrongful loss or damage to the public or to any person, causes the destruction of property, or any such change in any property or in the situation thereof as destroys or diminishes its value or utility, of affects it injuriously, commits mischief.

A lent his laptop to B. When in possession of the laptop, B inserted a pen drive into the laptop. When he did a virus scan, he realised that the pen drive was infected. Since he urgently required a file that was on the laptop, he nevertheless opened the files on the pen drive, in the process infecting the laptop.


The question consists of two statements, one labelled as PRINCIPLE and other as FACT. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.

Principle: Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that person’s consent, moves that property with an intention to take it, is said to commit theft.

Facts: Y cuts down a tree on Z’s ground, with the intention of dishonestly taking it out of Z’s possession without Z’s consent. Y could not take away the tree.


Share
Notifications



      Forgot password?
Use app×