It is the primary duty of the state to protect its citizens from harm. However, there may be circumstances where state aid is unavailable or the state is unable to provide assistance to protect an individual from impending harm or harm. In such a situation, the state grants a person the right to use force to defend himself against an imminent threat to his property or person or another person. This right is the right to self-defense or self-defense.
Experience everything in oneManagement software for law firms–Join Now!
right to private defence
The main rule of criminal law is self-help. Every country must grant its citizens the right to private defense to protect their life, liberty and property. This right also comes with numerous limitations and restrictions. Although the right to private defense was granted to citizens as a weapon of self-defense, it is often abused by people for their evil purposes.
In India, Sections 96 to 106 of theIndian Penal Code, 1860it contains provisions on the right to private defense of persons and property. This right can only be exercised when a person cannot turn to public authorities. One of the fundamental principles on which the right to private defense rests is the "adequacy" of the defense employed. The extent to which the right to private defense is exercised depends on the reasonableness of the fear of danger and not on the extent of the actual danger.
Also read - Section 100 of the Indian Penal Code
Self-Defense Law in India
Section 96 of the Indian Penal Code
This section talks about things done in private defense and explains that nothing committed in the exercise of the right of private defense is a crime.
The right to private defense is not a crime but rather an act of defense. The right to self-defense under Section 96 is not absolute, but is clearly limited by Section 99, which states that in no event does the right extend to inflict more harm than is necessary for the purposes of the defense. The burden of proof lies with the person defending the right to private defence.
Consequently, this right cannot be used as a shield to justify an action. A very careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of each case is required to determine whether the defendant actually exercised this right. There is no room for assumptions on the part of the defendant when exercising this right. In order to exercise the right to private defence, there must be a well-founded fear of the possibility of attack.
Also read - 7 Things You Should Learn Before Hiring a Criminal Law Attorney
Section 97 of the Indian Penal Code
Article 97 speaks of the right to private defense of the body and property. Every individual has the right to H. to defend his body or the body of another person. Likewise it hasRight to protect your property or the property of another person, whether movable or immovable, against an offense constituting theft, robbery, damage to or intrusion into property.
A criminal offense must have been committed or attempted against a person wishing to invoke the exception to the right to private defence. The harm done to a man concerned is not deemed necessary to settle the question of accumulation of the right to private defense. A well-founded fear of causing serious harm is perfectly sufficient for the exercise of the right to private defence.
Section 98 of the Indian Penal Code
This section deals with the right to private defense against acts of alienation, etc. There is also the right to private defense in cases that would result in a criminal offense due to lack of insight, mental weakness or notpoisoningof the person performing that act or for an error on that person's behalf. Every person has the same right to a private defense against the act as they would have if the act were a crime.
Also read - Criminal Attorneys: Complete Guide to the Subject
Section 99 of the Indian Penal Code
Article 99 restricts the exercise of the right to private defence. It sets out the various conditions under which the right to private defense must be exercised or invoked.
The first three paragraphs of Article 99 state that this right cannot be exercised if:
- a public official acting in good faith fulfills his legal duty without causing a reasonable fear of death or serious harm,
- any person acting under the direction of a bona fide public official fulfills his or her legal duty without causing a reasonable fear of death or serious harm,
- there is sufficient time to seek help from the public authorities.
- There must be sufficient grounds for assuming that the act performed was performed by a public authority.
Section 100 of the Indian Penal Code
Art. 100 specifies seven situations in the exercise of the right to private defense of the body that extend to the cause of death. The corporation's right of private defense extends to the voluntary cause of death or any other harm to the attacker when the crime is of the character here described:
- Such aggression can reasonably induce fear of death.
- Such aggression can reasonably induce a fear of serious harm.
- An attack with intent to commit rape.
- An attack for the gratification of unnatural lust.
- Attack with intent to kidnap or abduct
- An attack aimed at unduly imprisoning a person who has reasonable fears that they will not be able to secure the protection of the public authorities for their release.
- An act or attempt to throw acid.
Section 101 of the Indian Penal Code
This section dictates when the right to self-defense extends to causing harm other than death. If the offense is not one of those mentioned in the previous paragraph, the right of the corporation to private defense does not extend to the voluntary causing of the aggressor's death, but it does extend to the voluntary causing of damage other than the death of the aggressor. Aggressor.
Also read:Damage caused voluntarily: precaution and punishment
Section 102 of the Indian Penal Code
Article 102 deals with the initiation and maintenance of the corporation's right to private defence. The right to private defense begins as soon as there is reason to believe that there is a risk of bodily harm from attempting or threatening to commit a crime, even if the crime was not committed. And it lasts as long as the fear of danger to the body persists. This fear must be real and justified.
In the case of Kala Singh, the deceased was a strong man of dangerous character. Previously, in an argument with the accused, he had thrown the accused to the ground, squeezed him hard and bitten him. The defendant took a light ax and struck the animal three times on the head. The deceased died after three days of this fight. It was alleged that the circumstances raised in the defendant a strong fear of the risk that he would otherwise be killed. This fear was genuine and reasonable and not timid and imaginative, which is why his exercise of the right of private defense is justified.
Section 103 of the Indian Penal Code
This section regulates when the right to the defense of private property is extendedcauses death🇧🇷 During art. 100 provides that the exercise of the corpse's right of private defense extends to the bringing about of death. The right to private defense of assets also extends to death if it is caused voluntarily or damage is caused by a criminal offense. Provided that such offense is in the form of the following descriptions, namely:
- Home invasion at night
- Damage caused by fire in buildings, warehouses or ships, buildings, warehouses or ships used for human habitation or as a place for storing goods
- Theft, damage or trespassing
Section 104 of the Indian Penal Code
When committing or attempting to commit a crime results in the exercise of the right to self-defense, that right does not extend to willingly causing death, but to willingly causing harm to the criminal. than death, unless the violation is of a nature other than that provided for in the preceding number.
Section 105 of the Indian Penal Code
Article 105 prescribes the initiation and continuation of the right to private defense of property. The right to private defense of property begins when there is a reasonable threat to property. This right to theft continues to exist until the perpetrator withdraws with the goods or the goods are recovered. The right to private defense against theft survives as long as the perpetrator causes or attempts to cause death or harm to someone.
Section 106 of the Indian Penal Code
This section mentions private defense against mortal attacks when there is a risk of harming an innocent person. If, in exercising a person's right of private defense against an attack, it causes a reasonable fear of death, the defense counsel so located cannot effectively exercise the right of private defense without risk of an innocent person violating his or her right or rights is The private defense is extended to the perception of this risk.
The obstacle is the doubt that the defender has as to whether he is qualified to exercise his right, even if there is a possibility that some innocent people will be harmed by his actions. According to this section, in the event of aggression causing a reasonable fear of death when the defender is in a situation where he could harm an innocent person, there is no restriction on him exercising his right of defense and therefore you have the right to take that risk.
The right to private defense is a weapon for the citizens of India to defend themselves, but it is often used by many people for evil or illegal purposes. It is the duty of the court to determine whether or not the right has been exercised in good faith.
The extent to which the right of private defense is exercised depends on the actual apprehension of the danger and not the actual danger. This right can only be extended to a certain extent in some situations. The power used should be just enough to counterattack.
Try our comprehensive law firm management software START THE FREE TRIAL!
by Jaspreet Kaur Kohli •
private defenseself defense