Hello friends, Today I will clear your concept with one question. And my topic is punishment to the third man in the quarrel between husband and wife. let’s understand this topic and clear the concept with one question. There are some questions whose answers cannot be given in one line. It is necessary to explain them, so today I have come with a similar question.
A, a passerby, sees B beating his wife mercilessly. A gives a blow to B who dies immediately on the spot. What offence, if any, has A committed?
A is a third man and punishment to the third man in a quarrel between husband and wife is not complicated to understand because it is totally dependent upon the private defence and for what purpose husband and wife were fighting with each other. (A’s hand will be of Dhai Kilos, due to which B died. Just funny……)
If this option comes in your paper like if this is Culpable Homicide, is it murder, is it a grievous hurt…then you keep getting worried about such options. So we understand today that, whether it is a crime or not? And if yes, so what type of crime it is? means Punishment to the third man in the quarrel of husband and wife is decide by the situation.
So to understand this we have a section of IPC Private Defense where you have to go and go to the section which gives you the right to kill someone for the private defence of your own or someone else’s body.
So only after reading these two sections will you be able to understand whether this is an office or not?
Right of private defence of the body and of property.—Every person has a right, subject to the restrictions contained in section
(First) — His own body, and the body of any other person, against any offence affecting the human body;
(Secondly) —The property, whether movable or immovable, of himself or of any other person, against any act which is an offence falling under the definition of theft, robbery, mischief or criminal trespass, or which is an attempt to commit theft, robbery, mischief or criminal trespass.
The problem that we have seen in my question is that wife is in danger because her husband B is also beating her.
When the right of private defence of the body extends to causing death.—The right of private defence of the body extends, under the restrictions mentioned in the last preceding section, to the voluntary causing of death or of any other harm to the assailant, if the offence which occasions the exercise of the right be of any of the descriptions hereinafter enumerated, namely:—
(First) — Such an assault as may reasonably cause the apprehension that death will otherwise be the consequence of such assault;
(Secondly) —Such an assault as may reasonably cause the apprehension that grievous hurt will otherwise be the consequence of such assault;
(Thirdly) — An assault with the intention of committing rape;
(Fourthly) —An assault with the intention of gratifying unnatural lust;
(Fifthly) — An assault with the intention of kidnapping or abducting;
(Sixthly) — An assault with the intention of wrongfully confining a person, under circumstances which may reasonably cause him to apprehend that he will be unable to have recourse to the public authorities for his release.
The problem that the firm saw in my question, it is written in it, beating his wife Mercy Leslie means such a beating which can have serious consequences and can either lead to the death of the wife. Even if there is no death, we can understand the meaning of mercilessly, mercilessly means that the Wife of B could be seriously injured by beating of B.
Here, the wife of B as well as A has the right of private defence and according to Section 100, if A has caused the death of B for defending the wife of B, he commits no offence. So the passerby will get the benefit of the section.
From all the above points the answer to my question (A, a passerby, sees B beating his wife mercilessly. A gives a blow to B who dies immediately on the spot. What offence, if any, has A committed? ) is…NO
No offence has been committed by that person ( A ).