Skip to main content

Criminal Attempt

 CRIMINAL ATTEMPT


INTRODUCTION:

An attempt to commit a crime is an act which could constitute the offence if it were not interrupted. Once a criminal act reaches the stage of attempt the liability starts, as attempt takes the person closer to a successful commission of an offence. 

TYPES OF ATTEMPTS: 

  1. Unsuccessful act

  2. Interrupted so couldn’t happen

  3. More than mere preparation 

ATTEMPT AND IPC

  1. General Attempt

  2. Specific Attempt: 

  • Section 307: Offence of attempt murder.

  • Section 308: offence of attempt culpable homicide.

  • Section 309: offence of attempted suicide.

  • Section 393: offence of attempted robbery. 

  1. Attempt along with abetment or commission as offence. 

THEORIES OF CRIMINAL ATTEMPT:

  1. Impossibility: legal impossibility arises when a defendant completes all of his intended acts, but the sum of his acts does not constitute a crime. It was laid in the case Queen Vs. Collins 1884, where it was held that a pickpocket was not guilty of attempt even when he put his hand into the pocket of someone with an intention to steal but did not find anything. 

  2. Interruption/but for interruption: if the action proves that the person would have gone through with the plan if not for the interruption, then it is an attempt. That means if a person has not been interrupted, he would have committed the crime, he is guilty of attempt even though the past step of the crime has not been performed. 

        Exception: voluntary backing out = Doctrine of Locus Penitentiae/Abandonment – Malkiat Singh Vs. State of Punjab AIR 1970 SC 713.

  1. Last step test: as per this test, anything short of last step is preparation and not attempt. However, if proved the culprit reached at last step then it is an attempt. This is because as long as there is a step remaining for completion of the crime, the person can abandon it. This is also known as Proximity Rule. 

       Example: Abhavanand Mishra Vs. State of Bihar AIR 1961 SC 1698.

  1. Unequivocality test: it is similar to Res ipsa Loquitor that has been developed recently by American Judiciary. If a person does something that shows his commitment to follow through and commit the crime then it is an attempt. So, attempt is done when the offender takes deliberate and overt steps that show an unequivocal intention to commit the offence even if the step is not the penultimate one. It is not followed in India. 

  2. Social Danger Test: in this test the accused conduct is not examined only partially but the consequences of the circumstances and the fullness of the facts are taken into consideration. For example, A administers some pills to a pregnant woman in order to procure abortion. However, since the pills are innocuous, they do not produce the result. In spite of this A would be held liable for an attempt from the view point of the social danger test, as his act would cause an alarm to society causing social consequences. It is also not applied in India 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

POONAM VERMA VS. ASHWIN PATEL & ORS (10 MAY, 1996)

     POONAM VERMA VS. ASHWIN PATEL & ORS (10 MAY, 1996) INTRODUCTION The medical profession is perhaps the noblest profession among any remaining professions in India. For a patient, the specialist resembles God. What's more, God is trustworthy. In any case, that is the patient's opinion. As a general rule, doctors are individuals. Furthermore, to fail is human. Doctors might submit a slip-up. Doctors might be careless. The care staff might be imprudent. Two demonstrations of carelessness might bring about a lot more pressing issue. It very well might be because of gross carelessness. The sky is the limit. In such a situation, it is basic to figure out who was careless, and under what conditions. For this situation, the Supreme Court separated carelessness, impulsiveness, and foolishness. An individual is supposed to be a careless individual when he/she unintentionally submits a demonstration of exclusion and disregards a positive obligation that he/she ought to ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur ...
1 comment
Read more

Effects of Non-Registration

 Effects of Non-Registration The Companies Act, 2013 evidently highlights that the main essential for any organization to turn into a company is to get itself registered. A company cannot come into existence until it gets registered. But no such obligation has been imposed for firms by the Indian Partnership Act, 1932. If a firm is not registered it does not cease to be called as a firm, it still exists in the eyes law. Certainly, such a big advantage is not absolute but is subjected to a lot of limitations which we will study further. Non-registration of a firm simply means that the business skips the formalities of incorporation and ceases to exist in the eyes of the law. section 58 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 deals with the procedure of incorporation. Likewise, the meaning of non-registration is the exact opposite of registration, meaning when a firm does not go through the procedure of incorporation or start carrying on activities without getting registered. Effects of ...
Post a Comment
Read more