- Principle: Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that person's consent, moves that property in order to such taking is said to commit theft".
Facts: Kumud went into a jewellery shop with a view to finding a match for her bangle. She selected the bangle which matches with the bangle which she was wearing; and when she saw the price tag, she gave it up. But meanwhile, she inadvertently took the valuable bangle of the shop and left her less valuable bangle in the casket of the valuable bangle. Nobody in the shop noticed it and she discovered it only after reaching home. (NLSIU 1995)
State whether Kumud can be prosecuted for theft?
A. Kumud committed theft, because she took the valuable bangles out of the shop.
B. Kumud committed theft, because she left behind her less valuable bangles in the casket
C. Kumud did not committed theft, because her intention was not dishonest.
D. None of the above
2. Principle: Whoever delivers to any other person as genuine any counterfeit currency which he knows to be counterfeit currency which he did not know to be counterfeit at the time when he received it is guilty of an offence.
Facts: Mr. Ramachandran is a cashier in a School. One evening his wife returned home from market. While she was counting the remaining money, Mr. Ramachandran noticed counterfeit currency note of Rs. 100. His wife told him that it was given to her by way of change when she gave a Rs. 500 note in the grocery shop by the person at the cash counter. Mr. Ramachandran goes to the same shop with a view to get rid of the counterfeit note. He buys a shaving cream worth Rs. 32.50 and gives the counterfeit note at the cash counter. The cashier inspects the note and realizes that it is counterfeit. He calls the police.
A. Mr. Ramachandran is not guilty of any offence because he neither manufactured the counterfeit note nor did he circulate it with a view to deceive anybody.
B. Mr. Ramachandran is not guilty because he was attempting to return the counterfeit note to the same person from whom he received it.
C. Mr. Ramachandran is guilty because he attempted to deliver a counterfeit currency note as genuine which he knew was counterfeit.
D. None of the above.
3. Principle: Every person has a right to defend his own person, property or possession against an immediate harm, and to that end, may use reasonable amount of force.
Facts: Mr. Kaul was passing by Mrs. Mattoo's house. At that time, Mrs. Mattoo's dog ran out and bit Mr. Kaul's overcoat. Mr. Kaul turned around and raised the pistol he was carrying in the pocket of his overcoat. The dog ran away, and Mr. Kaul shot the dog as it was running away. Mr. Kaul knew that the dog had attacked so many other people in that locality of Jammu. Mrs. Mattoo claims that her dog was of a rare breed and it was worth Rs. 5000/-. She is planning to bring a legal action against Mr. Kaul for compensation. (NLSIU 97)
A. She will succeed in getting compensation from Mr. Kaul because he killed the dog which was not actually attacking him at the time of shooting.
B. She will not succeed because Mr. Kaul was justified in shooting the dog to protect himself.
C. She will not succeed because Mr. Kaul took the action to protect himself as well as many other members of public in future.
D. None of the above.
4. Principle: Whoever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death commits culpable homicide; punishable under Indian Penal Code.
Facts: Bandipur is a protected area wherein hunting is totally forbidden. Kannan, a poacher, stealthily entered this area and he shot at a deer. He missed the target and the bullet hits the forest guard relaxing nearby, whom Kannan had not seen. The forest guard was killed. Decide whether Kannan is guilty of culpable homicide. (NLSIU-1998)
A. Kannan is liable for Culpable Homicide
B. Kannan is not liable for Culpable Homicide
C. Kannan is liable for Murder
D. Kannan is liable for Culpable Homicide as well as under Wildlife Protection Act.
5. Principle: Law does not take notice of trifles.
Facts: A proposes to his neighbor B that they both should go together for a morning walk. B agrees to the proposal and it is decided that both of them would meet at a particular point 6 A.M. from where they would set off for the morning walk. In spite of the agreement, B does not turn up. A waited for him at 6 a.m. every day, for a continuous period of seven days. Thereafter he files a suit against B claiming damages for the agony and mental torture suffered by him. Decide. (NLSIU-1999)
A. B is guilty of breach of contract and is liable to pay damages.
B. There is intention to enter into legal relations and the court will ask B to pay compensation.
C. The matter is too small and the court will refuse to go into it.
D. None of the Above.