When the Right of Private Defence of the Body extends to causing Death - Section 100

What is the punishment for IPC 100 Case?

Section 96 to Section 106 of the Indian Penal Code representing General exceptions of Private Defence and is proved in court, where the person cannot be held guilty of the Offence, since it is a defense it does not offer punishment but acts as a medium to save people who are not guilty under the law because they were defending themselves and in this particular Section, it represents how the defense can extend in situations to even causing death.

Is IPC 100 cognizable offence or non-cognizable offence?

A non-cognizable offence elaborates an offence wherein the police officer does not have the authority to arrest the person who is involved without a scheduled warrant and the cognizable offences primarily include the cases in which the Police hold the authority to arrest a person without a warrant.

Since IPC Section 100 is an extension to the right of Self Defence which is elaborated under Section 96 to Section 106 of the IPC and since private defense is a General exception it does not give a precise explanation of it being cognizable or non-cognizable.

How to defend or file your case for Section 100 of the Indian Penal Code?

To Defend the case under Section 100 of the Indian Penal Code: To defend a case under Section 100 of IPC, then primarily the defendant has to go to hire a lawyer and elaborate and explain the process of the very circumstances of the case and the defense of any case will primarily depend upon the circumstances of that case.

A well capable lawyer can defend the case primarily proving the defense, in either getting out of it or lessening the sentence of the punishment that was given.

What is the punishment for IPC 100 Case?

Section 104 under the Indian Penal Code is a General exception of Private Defence which is represented from Section 96 to Section 106 of IPC which is proved in court, the person cannot be held guilty of the Offence, since it is a general defense under IPC that it does not give any punishment but primarily tends to act as a medium to safeguard people who are not guilty for they were defending themselves and they are not guilty under the law.

Any famous judgment of Section 100 of the Indian Penal Code, if any?

Perumayee v. the State of Tamilnadu: In this particular case the question was basically about the criminal appeal which was as to if the given facts and the mentioned circumstances of the case, the accused had only acted in their right of private defence while committing the murder of the deceased of this particular case. In the case, both the accused and the appellant were made to face the trial and in the first trial the accused was found to be guilty of the offence under Section 302 IPC and the second accused guilty of the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and they were both sentenced with imprisonment for life.

The Section 96, 97, 98, 99, and 100 IPC were referred to and taken into consideration. The only limitation there was that the reasonable apprehension shouldn’t exceed the basic purpose and the exercise of power must not have vicious motives. The provisions of Section 100 of the Indian Penal Code, would be available only to a person who is to attack the other person.

Get in touch with the best lawyer online

The third clause to Section 100 represents self-defense; the provision must be given its full effect according to its plain meaning. Section 100 IPC contemplates that the right of private defence primarily extends, but also in restriction which is mentioned in the section before, which would mean the restriction under Section 99 deals with certain acts which are against no right of private defence. If so read and understood, a private defence that is implied by defending not just his own body but also the body of any other person and also against any offence which affects the human body to which an accused has entitled also to extend to him to voluntarily causing the death of a someone if a certain offence which primarily occurs in an exercise of the right by an assault with the very intention to commit rape. Even in case of a mere reasonable apprehension of danger to the body, such right is available to the accused and the third clause of Section 100 IPC could be extended to attempt molestation as well.

Considering all the reasons and views that both the accused and the other party had to offer, they have acted only in their right of private defence in order to save their daughter named Vasantha, from molestation, and also consistently they are entitled to the benefit of the right of private defence which is elaborated under the first clause and third clause of Sections 97 and 100 of the Indian Penal Code.