mukesh gupta (advocate) 12 February 2012
A and B are friends. but A is inimical towards B and with intend to kill B , purchases poison from chemist. but by mistake chemist give to A suger poder. A taking it to be poison mixes it in the milk of B and serves this milk to B with intent to kill B. B drank the milk, but did not die, as it was innocuous suger powder.A is prosecuted for attempt to murder u/s 307.
Q. whether prosecution would able to convict A ?
Adv.R.P.Chugh (Advocate/Legal Consultant (rpchughadvocatesupremecourt@hotmail.com)) 12 February 2012
Affirmative - It is an attempt - it's all about the intention. He had completed preparation - as per his own subjective satisfaction (flawed though) - in in the stages of attempt - had done an act towards the commission - which due to a supervening factor - could not succeed, in fact was the penultimate act - reflecting his mens rea. in other words he had done all he could.
mukesh gupta (advocate) 12 February 2012
WHAT IF, HAD IT NOT BEEN THE MISTAKE OF CHEMIST AND HAD THE CHEMIST GIVEN THE POISON, AND IT WERE DUE TO MISTAKE OF THE B HIMSELF THAT HE HAD EXCHANGED THE POISON WITH THE SUGER AND THAT HE HAD MISTOOK THE SUGER POWDER FOR THE POISON. HERE IT IS NOT SUPERVENING EVENT AND WHETHER THIS FACT REALLY MATTERS AND ENTITLE OR DISEENTITLE B FROM ACQUITTAL?
Member Strength 9,46,568 and growing..
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
