In case of theft the right of private defence of property is put to an end by the successful retreat of the thief if the thief is running away with the property, he cannot be said to have retreated. State, where the accused party after having taken possession of a disputed land possibly about a month before the occurrence had grown wheat crop on it and the complainant party tried to re-enter the land and destroy the crop. State of Haryana, the Supreme Court held that the right of private defence of property will not extend to the causing of death of the person who committed such acts if the act of trespass is in respect of an open land. Certain transfers to be null and void Where after the making of an order under sub-section 1 of section 105E or the issue of a notice under section 105G, any property referred to in the said order or notice is transferred by any mode whatsoever such transfers shall, for the purposes of the proceedings under this Chapter, be ignored and if such property is subsequently forfeited to the Central Government under section 160H, then the transfer of such property shall be deemed to be null and void. The Court observed that settled possession means such clear and effective possession of a person, even if he is a trespasser, who gets the right under the criminal law to defend the property against an attack even by the true owner.
The Supreme Court held that the use of deadly force by the accused was not justified merely to expel two persons. Illustrative Cases: i Mir Dad v. The accused used force resulting in death. See our for free automated testing, leader's guide and for unlimited students. Assistance in securing transfer of persons 1 Where a Court in India, in relation to a criminal matter, desires that a warrant for arrest of any person to attend or produce a document or other thing issued by it shall be executed in any place in a contracting State, it shall send such warrant in duplicate in such form to such Court, Judge or Magistrate through such authority, as the Central Government may, by notification, specify in this behalf and that Court, Judge or Magistrate, as the case may be, shall cause the same to be executed. It is only when he reaches his final destination that he can be said to have retreated. The accused party trespassed into that land fully armed with firearms and lathis for taking possession from the complainant party consisting of two persons.
Under the third clause the right exists for the offence of mischief by fire, or its attempt, committed on an any building, tent or vessel which is used as human dwelling, or as a place for the custody of property. सम्पत्ति की प्राइवेट प्रतिरक्षा के अधिकार का प्रारंभ और बना रहना--- सम्पत्ति की प्राइवेट प्रतिरक्षा का अधिकार तब प्रारंभ होता है, जब सम्पत्ति के संकट की युक्तियुक्त आशंका प्रारंभ होती है । संपत्ति की प्राइवेट प्रतिरक्षा का अधिकार, चोरी के विरुद्ध अपराधी के संपत्ति सहित पहुंच से बाहर हो जाने तक अथवा या तो लोक प्राधिकारियों की सहायता अभिप्राप्त कर लेने या संपत्ति प्रत्युद्धॄत हो जाने तक बना रहता है । संपत्ति की प्राइवेट प्रतिरक्षा का अधिकार लूट के विरुद्ध तब तक बना रहता है, जब तक अपराधी किसी व्यक्ति की मॄत्यु या उपहाति, या सदोष अवरोध कारित करता रहता या कारित करने का प्रयत्न करता रहता है, अथवा जब तक तत्काल मॄत्यु का, या तत्काल उपहति का, या तत्काल वैयक्तिक अवरोध का, भय बना रहता है । संपत्ति की प्राइवेट प्रतिरक्षा का अधिकार आपराधिक अतिचार या रिष्टि के विरुद्ध तब तक बना रहता है, जब तक अपराधी आपराधिक अतिचार या रिष्टि करता रहता है । संपत्ति की प्राइवेट प्रतिरक्षा का अधिकार रात्रौ गॄह-भेदन के विरुद्ध तब तक बना रहता है, जब तक ऐसे गॄहभेदन से आरंभ हुआ गॄह-अतिचार होता रहता है । Commencement and continuance of the right of private defence of property. The right of private defence of property commences when a reasonable apprehension of danger to the property commences. The right of private defence of property against robbery continues as long as the offender causes or attempts to cause to any person death or hurt or wrongful restraint or as long as the fear of instant death or of instant hurt or of instant personal restraint continues. Robbery is theft accompanied by violence. Where the deceased who was suspected to be carrying on an illicit relationship with the wife of the accused, committed lurking house-trespass by night, as defined under section 444 of the Indian Penal Code, into the house of the accused with the object of having sexual intercourse with his wife, the consequent use of force on him by the accused resulting into his death was held to be within the right of private defence under clause 4 of section 103 of the Code. The right of private defence of property against criminal trespass or mischief continues as long as the of fender continues in the commission of criminal trespass or mischief.
State the deceased worker and some of his colleagues were shouting slogans in support of their demands outside their factory premises. Mischief has been defined under section 425 of the Code. With the view in mind section 99 of the Code states, inter alia, that there is no right of private defence in cases in which there is time to have recourse to the protection of public authorities. The Patna High Court held that the accused were entitled to the right of private defence even to the extent of causing death as the fourth clause of this section was applicable. The circumstances under which even death may be caused have been enumerated under four clauses and the section clearly state that the right is available where any of the offences mentioned under any of these clauses has either been committed or attempted.
The right of private defence of property against house-breaking by night continues as long as the house-trespass which has been begun by such house-breaking continues. The right of private defence of property against theft continues till the offender has effected his retreat with the property or either the assistance of the public authorities is obtained, or the property has been recovered. When the right of private defence of property extends to causing death: This section relates exclusively to private defence of property only. Right of trespasser even against the true owner One of the tricky questions that has been coming up before the Courts has been as to whether a trespasser over a property has any right of private defence with respect to the property he has trespassed upon, and also whether this right is available even against the true owner of that property. Seizure or attachment of property 1 Where any officer conducting an inquiry or investigation under section 105D has a reason to believe that any property in relation to which such inquiry or investigation is being conducted is likely to be concealed, transferred or dealt with in any manner which will result in disposal of such property, he may make an order for seizing such property and where it is not practicable to seize such property, he may make an order of attachment directing that such property shall not be transferred or otherwise dealt with, except with the prior permission of the officer making such order, and a copy of such order shall be served on the person concerned. The right of private defence of property against robbery continues as long as the offender causes or attempts to cause to any person death or hurt or wrongful restraint or as long as the fear of instant death or of instant hurt or of instant personal restraint continues.
Identifying unlawfully acquired property 1 The Court shall, under sub-section 1 , or on receipt of a letter of request under sub-section 3 of section 105C, direct any police officer not below the rank of Sub-Inspector of Police to take all steps necessary for tracing and identifying such property. Contact 847-597-2872, or , for more details. . Assistance in relation to orders of attachment or forfeiture of property 1 Where a Court in India has reasonable grounds to believe that any property obtained by any person is derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by such person from the commission of an offence, it may make an order of attachment or forfeiture of such property, as it may deem fit under the provisions of sections 105D to 105J both inclusive. The first clause says that in case of commission of the offence of robbery or its attempt the defence extends to cause even death of the wrong-doer. The right of private defence of property against house-breaking by night continues as long as the house-trespass which has been begun by such house-breaking continues.
The right of private defence of property against criminal trespass or mischief continues as long as the offender continues in the commission of criminal trespass or mischief. The moment the offender quits the premises the right too ceases. Where the deceased persons who were unarmed were harvesting certain crop under police protection and they were attacked suddenly by the accused party armed with guns and other dangerous weapons who had first managed to send away the police protecting the deceased party away from there, it was held by the Supreme Court that the accused party were liable for the deaths caused by them as there was no robbery being committed by the deceased party. If criminal trespass and mischief are attended by violence the right would be enlarged. State, the complainant had encroached upon certain public land.
In the altercation that followed one of the accused suffered multiple injuries because of the assault. But this right must be held to have exceeded when there was no fear that otherwise death or grievous hurt would ensue, and as such it was a case of exceeding the right and the accused was convicted under section 304, Part I of the Code. Forfeiture of property in certain cases 1 The Court may, after considering the explanation, if any, to the show-cause notice issued under section 105G and the material available before it and after giving to the person affected and in a case where the person affected holds any property specified in the notice through any other person, to such other person also a reasonable opportunity of being heard, by order, record a finding whether all or any of the properties in question are proceeds of crime: Provided that if the person affected and in a case where the person affected holds any property specified in the notice through any other person such other person also does not appear before the Court or represent his case before it within a period of thirty days specified in the show-cause notice, the Court may proceed to record a finding under this sub-section ex parte on the basis of evidence available before it. Management of properties seized or forfeited under this Chapter 1 The Court may appoint the District Magistrate of the area where the property is situated, or any other officer that may be nominated by the District Magistrate, to perform the functions of an Administrator of such property. In this respect the provision has a similarity with section 100 which deals with the same problem with respect of private defence of body. The question whether or not there was enough time for the injured party to have recourse to the protection of the public authorities is always a question of fact depending on the circumstances of each case.
It enumerates those circumstance under which the defender is entitled to cause even death of the wrong-doer while exercising right of private defence of property. The Supreme Court held that he had first degree of right of private defence. As countries differ in their requirements, travelers should always check with their destination prior to attempting to charter. Only a house- trespass committed under such circumstances as may reasonably cause death or grievous hurt is enumerated as one of the offences under section 103. You can get the International Proficiency Certificate today by completing our. Member Support Department For questions relating to document orders, including order placement, changing orders, order payment, shipping policies, credit on returned documents, contact.