Browse by Stream
QnA
Home
QnA
Go To Your Study Dashboard

Get Answers to all your Questions

header-bg qa
  • Home
  • Law
  • Read the following passage and answer the question. The right of private defence of people is recognized in all free, civilised, and democratic societies within certain r

Read the following passage and answer the question.

The right of private defence of people is recognized in all free, civilised, and democratic societies within certain reasonable limits. Those limits are dictated in two considerations:

Every member of society can claim this right- That the state takes responsibility for the maintenance of law and order-This right of private defence is preventive and not punitive.

Supreme Court said that the right of private defence is a defensive right surrounded by the law and is available only when the person is able to justify his circumstances. This right is available against an offence and therefore, where an act is done in the exercise of the right of private defence, such an act cannot go in favour of the aggressor. The legal position which has been crystallised from a large number of cases is that the law does not require a citizen, however law-abiding he may be, to behave like a rank coward on any occasion. This principle has been enunciated in Mahandi v. Emperor. In Gotipulla Venkatasiva Subbrayanam & Others v. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Another (1970) 1 SCC 235, this court held that "the right to private defence is a very valuable right and it has been recognized in all civilized and democratic societies within certain reasonable limits. 

The extent to which the right may be exercised. - The right of private defence in no case extends to the inflicting of more harm than it is necessary to inflict for the purpose of defence. The extent to which the right may be exercised. - The right of private defence in no case extends to the inflicting of more harm than it is necessary to inflict for the purpose of defence. The main question that arises for adjudication, in this case, is whether the accused-appellants had the right of private defence and this is the case of exceeding the right of private defence meaning thereby, inflicting more harm than it was necessary for the purpose of defence.

Question :

Jai, a forest officer having his residence inside the protected zone, fenced his quarter with electric wire as a protective measure against wild animals. One fellow officer, unaware of the fact, got electrocuted and suffered severe injuries. Decide on the liability of Jai.

Option: 1

Jai is liable to pay damages to his fellow officer

 


Option: 2

Jai is not liable for any damages as he did not have the intention to hurt the officer


Option: 3

Jai is protected by the right of private defence


Option: 4

None of the above


Answers (1)

best_answer

Jai exceeds the extent to exercise his right to private defence in the present case the measures are excessive and hence cannot be termed as a mere private defence. Therefore Jai is liable to pay damages to his fellow officer for the injuries sustained by him.

Posted by

Gunjita

View full answer

Similar Questions

Trending Articles/News

anam-khan

Conducting CLAT exam in English can't be barrier for students: Delhi High Court
anam-khan

CLAT 2025 SC Judgement: Supreme Court suggests transferring case to Punjab, Haryana High Court
anam-khan

CLAT 2025 Result Revision: Supreme Court to hear Consortium of NLUs' pleas over case transfer today

Latest Question