A' instigates 'B' to cause grievous hurt to 'Z'. 'B', in consequence of the instigation, causes grievous hurt to 'Z'. 'Z' dies in consequence. 'A' knew that the grievous hurt abetted was likely to cause death of 'Z'. 'A' has committed:

A' instigates 'B' to cause grievous hurt to 'X'. In consequence of the instigation 'B' causes grievous hurt to 'X' 'X' dies in consequence. 'A' is guilty of abetment of:

A

Murder if 'A' knew that the grievous hurt abetted was likely to cause death

B

Grievous hurt as 'A' had instigated to commit grievous hurt and not murder

C

Murder even if 'A' did not know that the grievous hurt and not murder

D

Culpable homicide not amounting to murder as death had resulted as a consequence of the grievous hurt

Which of the following among item A and item B are correct?
The right of private defence extends, subject to Section 99, to the causing of death of the assailant or aggressor in the following circumstances:
Item A: For defence of body:
1. Against an act which reasonably causes the apprehension of an assault to outrage the modesty
2. Against an act which reasonably causes the apprehension that the assailant will kill his children living in another city
3. Against an act which reasonably causes the apprehension that grievous hurt would otherwise be the consequence
Item B: For defence of property:
1. While the trespasser is engaged in house breaking during day time.
2. Against a thief who reasonably causes the defender to believe that he would lose his property
3. Against a person who commits mischief under such circumstances as may reasonably cause apprehension that grievous Hurt would be a consequence
Select the correct answer:

A

1 and 3 of both items

B

2 and 3 of both items

C

3 alone of both items

D

1 and 2 of both items

A' with the intention of murdering 'Z' instigates 'B' a child below seven years at age, to do an act which causes 'Z's death. 'B', in consequence of instigation, did the act in the absence of 'A' thereby causes 'Z's death. What offence has been committed by 'A'?

A

No offence, because 'A' was not present at the time of murder

B

Committed simple offence of causing hurt

C

Committed offence of attempt to murder

D

Committed murder

Consider the following statements.
To constitute abetment, it is:
1. Necessary that the act abetted must be committed
2. Not necessary that the act abetted must be committed
3. Necessary that the person abetted must have the same intention or knowledge as that of the abettor
Which of the statements given above represent(s) the correct position of law?

A

Only B

B

Both B and C

C

Only A

D

Only C

Consider the following statements:
To constitute abetmentit is
1. Necessary that the act abetted must be committed.
2. Not necessary that the act abetted must be committed.
3. Necessary that the person abetted must have the same intention or knowledge as that of the abettor.
Which of the statement given above represent(s) the correct position of law?

A

2 only

B

2 and 3

C

1 only

D

3 only

A instigates B to resist by force a distress made by a public servant, knowing full well that B most likely will cause hurt in the process. Hence B in consequence, resists that distress. In offering the resistance, B voluntarily causes grievous hurt to the officer executing the distress.

A

B is liable to punishment for resisting the distress only

B

B is liable to punishment for causing hurt

C

Both A and B are liable to punishment for resisting the distress

D

Both A and B are responsible for resisting the distress and causing hurt to A

A, a jailor, has the charge of Z, a prisoner. A, intending to cause Z's death, illegallyomits to supply Z with food; in consequence of which Z is much reduced in strength, but the starvation is not sufficient to cause his death. A is dismissed from his office, B succeeds him. B, without collation with A, illegally omits to supply Z with food, knowing that he is likely thereby to cause Z's death. Z dies. Which of the following judgment applies to both A and B under Section 37 of the Indian Penal Code?

A

A is only guilty of an attempt to commit murder while B is guilty of murder

B

A is guilty of murder while B is guilty of an attempt to murder

C

Both A and B are guilty of murder

D

Both A and B are guilty of attempt to murder

X, a jailor, has the charge of Z, a prisoner. X, intending to cause Z's death, illegally omits to supply Z with food; in consequence of which Z is much reduced in strength, but the starvation is not sufficient to cause his death. X is dismissed from his office, and Y succeeds him. Y, without collusion or co-operation with X, illegally omits to supply Z with food, knowing that he is likely thereby to cause Z's death. Z dies of hunger. What will be position under Indian Penal Code, 1860?

A

X and Y are guilty of Murder

B

X is guilty of an attempt to commit Murder

C

Y is guilty of an attempt to commit Murder

D

Y is guilty of an attempt to commit culpable homicide

E

None of these

Consider the following provision in Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code:
Several culpable states of mind are referred to with the:
1. intention to cause death
2. knowledge that the act is so imminently dangerous that it must in all probability cause death
3. intention to cause such bodily injury as the offender know to be likely to cause death of the person to whom harm is caused
4. intention of causing such bodily injury as is sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death.
The correct order of the sequence in which they are placed in the provision is:

A

1, 2, 3, 4

B

1, 3, 4, 2

C

1, 4, 3, 2

D

2, 3, 4, 1

A' intended to cause death of 'B' caused death of 'C' whose death he neither intended nor knew himself to be likely to be caused and it happened in the description of his intention to cause death of 'B'. 'A'

A

Is guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder

B

Is guilty of murder

C

Is entitled to plead defence of accident

D

Can be given benefit of doubt