Advertisements
Advertisements
Question
Read the definition and elements of the attempt, apply them on the given fact situations and answer the question:
Definition of Attempt: Lord Blackburn has said that "there is no doubt that there is difference between a preparation antecedent to an attempt and the actual attempt, but if the actual transaction has commenced which would have ended in the crime if not interrupted, there is clearly an attempt to commit the crime."
1. Fault element· Intention or knowledge requisite for committing an offense: and
2. Conduct Element: does any act towards its commission and has crossed the stage of preparation. This act is so closely connected with and proximate to the commission that it falls in object because of facts not known to him or because of circumstances beyond his control.
'SINY' with an intention to pick-pocket puts his hand into MlNU's pocket. MINU had a Joaded pistol in his pocket The thief touches the pistol and trigger goes on, whereby MINU is shot dead.
Options
SINY will be liable only for attempting to pick-pocket and not for killing because she cannot be treated differently from all other pick-pockets who steal under exactly similar circumstances and same intention, with no r1skof causing death and with no greater care to avoid it.
SINY will be liable for attempting to murder
SINY will be liable for culpable homicide not amounting to murder as his intention was definitely not to kill
None of the above
Advertisements
Solution
SINY will be liable only for attempting to pick-pocket and not for killing because she cannot be treated differently from all other pick-pockets who steal under exactly similar circumstances and same intention, with no r1skof causing death and with no greater care to avoid it.
APPEARS IN
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.
Rule:
Whoever finds an unattended object can keep it unless the true owner claims that object. This does not affect the property owner's right to the ownership of the property on which the object is found. The right to ownership of a property does not include the right to ownership of unattended objects on that property.
Facts:
Elizabeth is the CEO of a global management services company in Chennai and is on her way to Ranchi to deliver the convocation address at India's leading business school on the outskirts of Ranchi. Flying business class on Dolphin Airlines, she is entitled to use the lounge owned by the airline in Chennai Airport while waiting for her flight. She finds a diamond ear-ring on the floor of the lounge and gives it to the staff of Dolphin Airlines expressly stating that in the event of nobody claiming the ear-ring within six months, she would claim it back. The airline sells the ear-ring after eight months and Elizabeth files a case to recover the value of the ear-ring from the airline when she is informed about its sale. To the original fact scenario, the following fact is added: In the lounge there are numerous signboards which proclaim 'Any unattended item will be confiscated by Dolphin Airlines'. In this case, you would:
Consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this Section. In other words, in answering these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles that are given herein below for every question.
Further, you must not assume any facts other than those stated in the question. The objective of this section is to test your interest in the study of law, research aptitude, and problem-solving ability, even if the 'most reasonable conclusion' arrived at may be absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of the law.
Therefore, to answer a question, the principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option.
Principle: Where one of the parties to a contract was in the position to dominate the decision of the other party, the contract is enforceable only at the option of the party who was in a position to dominate the decision of the other party.
Facts: A doctor asked his patient to make a payment of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Ten Lac Only) for treatment of his fever. The patient paid an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Five Lac Only) and promised to pay the remaining amount after the treatment. After treatment, the patient recovered from fever. The doctor demanded the remaining amount from the patient. The patient refused to pay.
The question consists of two statements, one labelled as Assertion (A) and other as Reason (R).
You are to examine the two statements carefully and select the best option.
Assertion: Custom per se is law, independent of prior recognition by the sovereign or the judge.
Reason: Custom is source of Jaw but by itself is not law.
The temporary release of a convicted prisoner from jail for a fixed period is called -
Mark the best option:
The word "due process of law" indicates
Mark the best option:
The right of a party to initiate an action and be heard before a Court of law is called
Mark the best option:
An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" relates to ___________ theory.
Mark the best option:
A nominal sum is given as a token, that the parties are eager about concluding the sale is called
Berne Convention was first established in
The following question consists of two statements, one labelled as. 'Assertion' and the other as 'Reason'. Read both the statements carefully and answer using the codes given below.
Assertion (A): International law is not law at all.
Reason (R): International law has no judicial system to enforce the law by applying sanctions.
