LEGAL REASONING
Principle: When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone.
FACTS: On August 3rd, 1923, the Sub-Postmaster at Sankaritolla Post Office was counting money at his table in the back room, when several men appeared at the door which leads into the room from a courtyard, and, when just inside the door, called on him to give up the money. Almost immediately afterwards they fired pistols at him. He was hit in two places, in one hand and near the armpit, and died almost at once. Without taking any money the assailants fled, separating as they ran. Barendra Kumar Ghosh, though he fired his pistol several times, was pursued by a post office assistant and others with commendable tenacity and courage, and eventually was secured just after he had thrown it away. His defence was he was only standing guard outside the Post office, and he had no intention to kill the post master. In this case
(a) Barendra Kumar Ghosh is liable to be punished for murder since he also shared the common intention of other accused
(b) Barendra Kumar Ghosh not liable to be punished for murder since he did not attack the post master
(c) Barendra Kumar Ghosh is liable for harbouring offenders. (d) None of the above
Principle: Ignorance of law is not an excuse.
FACTS: George was a passenger from Zurich to Manila in a Swiss plane which left Zurich on 27.11. 1962. When the plane landed at Bombay airport 34 Kilos of Gold were found in the possession of the accused. He pleaded that he had no guilty intention since he was unaware of the new notification which imposed a ban on procuring gold through India
(a) George is not liable since he was going to manila
(b) George is not liable since he was not aware of the notification
(c) George is liable though he was not aware of the notification
(d) None of the above
<< Prev Page Next Page >>
FACTS: On August 3rd, 1923, the Sub-Postmaster at Sankaritolla Post Office was counting money at his table in the back room, when several men appeared at the door which leads into the room from a courtyard, and, when just inside the door, called on him to give up the money. Almost immediately afterwards they fired pistols at him. He was hit in two places, in one hand and near the armpit, and died almost at once. Without taking any money the assailants fled, separating as they ran. Barendra Kumar Ghosh, though he fired his pistol several times, was pursued by a post office assistant and others with commendable tenacity and courage, and eventually was secured just after he had thrown it away. His defence was he was only standing guard outside the Post office, and he had no intention to kill the post master. In this case
(a) Barendra Kumar Ghosh is liable to be punished for murder since he also shared the common intention of other accused
(b) Barendra Kumar Ghosh not liable to be punished for murder since he did not attack the post master
(c) Barendra Kumar Ghosh is liable for harbouring offenders. (d) None of the above
Principle: Ignorance of law is not an excuse.
FACTS: George was a passenger from Zurich to Manila in a Swiss plane which left Zurich on 27.11. 1962. When the plane landed at Bombay airport 34 Kilos of Gold were found in the possession of the accused. He pleaded that he had no guilty intention since he was unaware of the new notification which imposed a ban on procuring gold through India
(a) George is not liable since he was going to manila
(b) George is not liable since he was not aware of the notification
(c) George is liable though he was not aware of the notification
(d) None of the above
<< Prev Page Next Page >>