Criminal Law

Criminal Law –III (2001)
Time : Three Hours                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Maximum Marks : 200

Answer any FIVE questions, out of which a minimum of two questions from Part I and atleast one questions from the other two parts.  All questions carry equal marks.

Part-I

Q.1.  Baladin, Mata Prasad, Devendra, Banwari and Brinda had been on look-out for one who was out destroying their crop at night.  On that fateful night they caught Jaikaran red-handed, with heavy chopper used for cutting down standing crop and a bag containing several kilos of unprocessed crop.  The five of them tied Jaikaran to a mango tree in the village centre and began pounding him with kicks and blows.  Since Jaikaran was not willing to own responsibility for the earlier incidents of destruction, Baladin brought a burning bamboo pole and torched him all over the body.  In order to compel Jaikaran to confess Baladin thrust the burning bamboo pole into his mouth causing extensive injuries to Jaikaran.  On the intervention of Sarpanch Jaikaran was untied, taken to hospital for treatment, where he died the next morning.  The doctor testified that the injuries were cumulatively sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature.
What offence has been committed by the five accused?
Can Baladin alone be prosecuted for murder under Section 302?  What clause of Section 300 is applicable in this case?

Q.2.  Ritender, a class XII student came from a rich family and was very friendly with Smitha, a class X student in the same school.  Retender and Smitha had jointly participated in several school dramas and youth camps.  As Smitha liked Ritender's company she often insisted that Ritender took her out to movies and restaurant during school hours.  Ritender was conscious that Smitha was minor, that is why he was very particular in reaching her home after every date.  In the last incident Ritender had thrown a birthday party to which several of his classmates including Smitha were invited.  After the party that lasted till the late hours of night, Smitha refused to return back home or leave Ritender's house.  This time Ritender did not persuade Smitha to return home.  Smitha was 17 years and 10 months on the day she decided to stay on.
Parents of Smitha are interested in prosecuting Ritender.  Can Ritender be held liable for the offence of kidnapping from lawful guardianship ?

Q.3  (a)  Someshwar, a domestic servant, was annoyed by the master's dilly-dallying in the payment of salary.  To teach a lesson to the master he removed a jewel box from the almirah and placed it in the cowshed in the same house.  The jewel box was located after searching for over a month.
Discuss the offence for which Someshwar can be prosecuted ? Would your answer be different if Someshwar had removed the jewel box with a view to ultimately stealing the jewels when the loss is forgotten ?
(b)    Rahmat knew about Gopalji's resolve not to sell his bullocks and cows to a butcher.  Life Traders, a modern meat export unit had offered to pay higher price and commission to any one who could arrange supply for their slaughter unit.  Rahmat who had procured animals for Life Traders earlier, took special pains in convincing Gopalji to sell his animals to the firm that earned valuable foreign exchange for the country.  Gopalji sold his two bullocks and five cows to Life Traders for a good price.  However, till after the sale Gopalji never knew that animals were actually meant for slaughter.
Can Rahmat be prosecuted for the offence of cheating ? Would your answer be different if Rahmat had conveyed to Gopalji that Life Traders is a firm that undertakes breeding of quality animals?
Q.4  The village Harijans who had been denied minimum wages for considerable period had marched in a procession to the house of the landlord to demand justice.  Some members of the procession were shouting abusive slogans and brandishing lathis to display their anger.  The house of the landlord was well protected by high boundary wall and iron gate.  On seeing the procession the guards closed the iron gate to keep away the approaching crowd.  The Harijan leaders were having heated arguments with the watchmen for having blocked their access to the landlord by closing the iron gate and some of them were using force against the gate.  Just then Raghuvendra, the youngest sons of the landlord, fired with his rifle two shots on the crowd and killed one person.
Discuss : (i)  whether Raghuvendra has a right of private defence under the situation ? (ii)  Was Raghuvendra justified in going to the extent of causing death?

Part-II

Q.5.  (a)  A was remanded to Police custody on his production before the Magistrate on May 1.  However, on May 10 the Police moved another remand application for a period of 15 days.  The Police also requested that since A was taken away from the town in connection with investigation his physical presence in the Court be dispensed with.  What order can the Magistrate pass in terms of the provision of Section 167 of the Cr. P.C.?
(b)  (i).  Why is investigation described as : "the executive stage in which there should be no judicial interference"?
(ii).  Can the police force any person to make a statement regarding the crime under investigation ? Is the maker of the statement bound to sign the statement recorded by the Police?
(iii).  Can the recorded statement be taken to trial stage as such?
Q.6.  (a)  A was arrested by a police party from his house and kept in a secluded building for three days, without informing any person about the arrest or the place of his detention.  For all these days A was neither told about the reasons or grounds of his arrest nor permitted to contact any person.  After three days confinement A was released and informed that he was free to go anywhere.  What are the illegalities involved in the above arrest process ?
(b)  X a woman employed as a cook in the hostel is caught pick-pocketing a purse containing Rs. 200/- and remanded to judicial custody after arrest.  Two months after her arrest some members of the Students Legal Services clinic move a bail application on her behalf before the Magistrate.  The Magistrate accepts to release her on bail on condition of producing two sureties for Rs. 25,000/- each.  X is from another State therefore she is not in a position to arrange two sureties for such a high amount.  What are the grounds that can be raised for securing X's release on bail/bond ?
Q.7.  (a)  Pritam was in an earlier case charged under Section 19(1) of the Arms Act for possessing a revolver without licence and acquitted as the prosecution could not prove that he was in possession of revolver.  The prosecution institutes a subsequent trial against Pritam on charge of murder by shooting with a revolver.  Will the finding of the earlier case under Arms Act affect the prosecution case?
(b)  A is tried for causing grievous hurt and convicted.  The person injured afterwards dies.  Can A be tried again for Culpable Homicide?

Part-III

Q.8.   Under what provisions of the Evidence Act are the following facts relevant or not relevant:
(a)  In a murder trial the prime accused pleads that on the date of the incident he was detained in the maximum security prison under Court orders.
(b)  In a case of theft of jewellery from the bed-room against the servant the fact that only the domestic servant had keys to the bed-room and knew that the jewellery was in the house that night.
(c)  In a murder trial the post-mortem report reveals the large intestines were more or less empty that shows the murder was committed 6 to 8 hours after the major meal.
(d)  In a conspiracy trial a letter recovered from the possession of one of the party members describing the golden days when every member worked in unison and desiring the same kind of resolve once again is sought to be adduced as evidence.
Q.9.  After his arrest X had made a confessional statement to the I.O. about the motive of the crime and the elaborate details of its execution.  X's statement read as follows : "I suspected his true intentions and before he could unfold his plan I killed him.  I left his body on the highway and left the dagger used in the crime somewhere nearby".  The police team is led to the highway and takes the body under its charge, but the dagger is handed over to the police by the alert and active neighbours.  Is the confessional statement admissible ? What part of the above statement can be made use of by resort to Section 27 ?
Q.10.  (a)  Before the alleged dowry death the bride had written fewletters apprechending fear of ill-treatment at the hands of her in-laws, but she hoped she will be able to win them over with her determination.
Can these letters be used as dying declaration in the subsequent dowry death trial ?
(b)   Can dying declaration alone be the basis of conviction ?  What are the cautions to be exercised before relying upon a dying declaration?