Case Laws Related To Indian Penal Code [IPC] For Judiciary Exam

There are questions based on case laws in judicial services examination. You can gear up your preparation for Judiciary Exams by practising case laws questions provided here.

Our subject matter experts at legal Edge (a pioneer in providing the best online guidance for Judiciary Exams) have provided some of the Case Laws Related to the Indian Penal Code to ease out your preparation. 

So, what are you looking for? Check out the case laws from the post below and try to revise them every day to perform well in the exam.

Recent Case Laws Related to Indian Penal Code

Go through the case laws related to the Indian Penal Code from the post below and enhance your preparation for Judiciary Exams.

1. Mistake of Fact can Acts as a Good Defence (R vs Tolson case)

In this case, the accused contacted a second marriage within 7 years of desertion, under an honest and reasonable belief that her first spouse was dead though it was not actually so. 

Held that an honest and reasonable belief in the existence of circumstances, which, if true, would make the act an innocent act, for which the prisoner is indicated, has always been held to be a good defence.

Download Study Material For Judiciary Exams by Judiciary Gold

2. Mistake of Fact - Bad Defence (R v. Princes (1875) LR 2 CCR 154)

In this case, the accused was charged with unlawfully taking an unmarried girl of 16 years against her father's will.

Found that the accused was a bonafide and reasonable belief that the girl was older than 16 years. It held that the defendant was not valid because the act of abduction is wrongful and immoral.

Judiciary Mock Tests

Judiciary Mock Tests

3. Keso Sahu v. Saligram Shah (1977) Cri LJ 1725

In this case, the court held that the accused showed that he is in good faith and believing that the offence of smuggling rice was going on in the plaintiff's house, and thus he brings the cart and cartman to the police station.

Proved the said suspicion to be wrong. The accused can defend the mistake of fact as he is doing the act in good faith and believing it to be justified by law.

4. Accident Case Law: Jogeshwar v. Emperor (24 Cri LJ 789)

If the accident occurs while doing an unlawful act, the act will not attract Section 80 of IPC. In the above case, the accused was giving the first blow to the victim but accidentally hit his wife, holding her 2-month-old child. The blow hit the head of the child, which resulted in his death.

It was held that even though the child was hit by accident, the act was not lawful, not done by lawful means or in a lawful manner.

Read MoreImportant Judgements for Judiciary Exams

5. Necessity Case Law (R v. Dudley and Stephens (1884) 14 QBD 273 DC)

In this case, three adults and one minor were cast adrift in a ship following a shipwreck without food and water. Their food ran out 7 days before the storm and they had no water for 5 days.

Dudley suggested sacrificing the minor boy as he was too weak, to which Brook refused. On the 20th day, Dudley and Stephens, without the consent of Brooks, killed the boy as he was close to death and had no family.

All three fed on the boy and were rescued four days later. In this case, the defence of necessity was not held valid, and they were convicted for murder.

6. Insanity Case Law (Daniel Mc Naughten)

In 1843, Daniel, a woodturner from Glasglow, shot and killed Edward Drummond, mistaking him for Sir Robert Peel. Mc Naughten believed that the Tories persecuted him and brought evidence to show that he had been totally deluded on this subject for some time.

His state of mind was apparent from the outset when he had to be coaxed, and finally tricked, into pleading "not guilty.'' 

After hearing seven witnesses testify that he was completely insane, the judge stopped the trial; the jury brought in the special verdict without summing up and retiring. MC Naughten was forcibly committed to the Bethlem Hospital. 

Immediately thereafter, five propositions were drawn, which were called Mc Naughten rules.

Judiciary Online Coaching

Judiciary Online Coaching

Important Case Laws Related to Indian Penal Code

The following are some of the case laws that you need to focus on more for the Upcoming Judiciary Exams.

Section 76/79: Mistake of Fact

  • The state of Orissa vs Ram Bahadur Thapa
  • The state of Orissa vs. Bhagaban Barik

Section 80: Accident

  • Tunda vs Rex

Section 81: Act of Necessity

  • R vs Dudley

Read More: Most Important Essay Topics for Judiciary Exams

Section 81: Insanity

  • R vs Daniel
  • Queen-Empress vs K. N. Shah
  • Lakshmi vs State
  • Azharuddin Ahmed vs The King

Section 86: Drunkness

  • Shrikant AnandRao Bhosle vs The State of Maharashtra
  • Badusev vs. State of Pepsu
  • Rex vs Maekin
  • Director of Public prosecutions vs Beard

FAQ's

Is bare Acts knowledge enough for Judicial Services Exams?

Most of the questions asked in the Judicial Services Exams are from the illustrations of bare act. Hence, learning bare act is first step to clear the judicial services exam.

What is bare act?

Bare act is the exact text of a particular law enactment by the legislature.

Which are the best books to learn about Indian Case laws?

Code of Civil Procedure by Jatin Kumar Das and Code of Civil Procedure by T.P. Tripathi are the best books for reading about Indian laws.

How do I prepare for bare acts for Judiciary Mains Examination?

Start your preparation with bare acts as most of the questions in the mains exam are from bare acts. Make sure to study 5-10 bare acts everyday.

How to handle panic during the Judiciary Exam?

To avoid stress or any sort of panic during the exam, focus on what you know the best. Attempt the sections that you are confident about and start answering the ones you know the answers first.