Law and You > Criminal Laws > Indian Penal Code > Situational Problems on Jurisdiction of IPC (Ss. 1 to 5 of IPC)
In this article, we shall study situational problems based on Sections 1 to 5 of IPC. Most of the problems are based on Section 2 of IPC.
Problem No. 01:
The fishers of village ‘A’ lawfully fixed fishing stakes in the sea within three miles from the shores. The fishers of village B, annoyed with their act, removed all the fishing stakes. On prosecution accused pleaded that their act could not come within the purview of the Indian Penal Code. Check the validity of the plea of the accused.
Territorial waters of India extends up to a distance of twelve nautical miles from the shores towards the sea. The offence took place within three miles from the shores and was covered within the territory of India. Hence the accused can be tried in Indian Court under Sections of IPC.
This Situation relates to Kastya Rama v. State, (1871) 8 BHC.
Problem No. 02:
A German national was on his way from Zurich to Manila on a Swiss aircraft that arrived in Bombay while in transit. He remained within the aircraft and did not come out. He did not file a declaration under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947, regarding the gold he was carrying. During the checking, the customs found the gold on the aircraft. The accused was booked under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947. The cause of action arose in India. The accused pleaded that he was unaware of such Indian Law. Is accused liable under IPC.
Yes, He is liable under IPC. According to Section 2 of IPC “Every person shall be liable to punishment under this Code and not otherwise for every act or omission contrary to the provisions thereof, of which he shall be guilty within India”. It is not necessary for Indian law to be published outside India so that foreigners can know about them. Thus Ignorance about the Law or any change in it cannot be pleaded.
This situation relates to Mayer Hans George v. the State of Maharashtra (AIR 1965 SC 722) case.
Problem No. 03:
A foreigner commits an offence in India. He pleaded that he is a stranger to the law and the act in question was not an offence under the law of that person’s home jurisdiction. Can he be punished by the Indian Court?
Yes, under section 2 of the IPC. According to Section 2 of IPC “Every person shall be liable to punishment under this Code and not otherwise for every act or omission contrary to the provisions thereof, of which he shall be guilty within India”
This Situation relates to R v. Esop, (1836) 173 E.R. 203.
Problem No. 04:
‘A’ who is a citizen of India, commits a murder in Uganda. Can he be punished in India?
Yes, ‘A’ can be punished in India. Section 4 of the Code gives extra-Territorial Jurisdiction to the Code. According to Section 4(1) of the Indian Penal Code “The provisions of this Code apply also to any offence committed by any citizen of India in any place without and beyond India and can be tried and convicted of the offence in any place in India at which he may be found”.
This situation relates to illustration appended to Section 4 of IPC.
Problem No. 04:
‘A’ a citizen of India, commits a murder in Australia and returned to India and landed at Chennai Airport, where he was detained by Chennai Police. Can he be punished under the IPC?
Yes, ‘A’ can be punished under IPC. Section 4 of the Code gives extra-Territorial Jurisdiction to the Code. According to Section 4(1) of the Indian Penal Code “The provisions of this Code apply also to any offence committed by any citizen of India in any place without and beyond India and can be tried and convicted of the offence in any place in India at which he may be found”. Thus he can be tried under IPC at Chennai.
This situation relates to the illustration appended to Section 4 of IPC.
Problem No. 05:
An Indian was murdered by another Indian in a foreign country. The local police did not register it. Can Indian Courts try the case?
Yes, Indian Courts can try this case. Section 4 of the Code gives extra-Territorial Jurisdiction to the Code. According to Section 4(1) of the Indian Penal Code “The provisions of this Code apply also to any offence committed by any citizen of India in any place without and beyond India and can be tried and convicted of the offence in any place in India at which he may be found”.
This situation relates to Remia v. Sub Inspector of Police, Tanur, 1993 Cri LJ 1098 (Ker) case.
Problem No. 06:
The accused committed an offence in Gulf countries, and came back to India. Can he be punished under IPC?
Yeshe can be punished under IPC. Section 4 of the Code gives extra-Territorial Jurisdiction to the Code. According to Section 4(1) of the Indian Penal Code “The provisions of this Code apply also to any offence committed by any citizen of India in any place without and beyond India and can be tried and convicted of the offence in any place in India at which he may be found”.
This situation relates to Mohamed Sajeed v. the State of Kerala, (1994) 1 KLT 464 case.
Problem No. 07:
‘A’, a citizen of India, committed murder in India and absconded to Pakistan. Whether ‘A’ is liable or not under IPC.
‘A’ is liable under IPC. Section 4 of the Code gives extra-Territorial Jurisdiction to the Code. According to Section 4(1) of the Indian Penal Code “The provisions of this Code apply also to any offence committed by any citizen of India in any place without and beyond India and can be tried and convicted of the offence in any place in India at which he may be found”.
This situation relates to Dawood Ibrahim Kaskar’s case.
Problem No. 08:
‘A’, a rice merchant in Karachi, promised to supply 2000 tons of rice and received the maximum amount from ‘B’, a rice merchant in Goa, but ‘A’ did not supply. ‘A’ and his partners absconded from Pakistan and settled in London. Can ‘A’ be tried in India.
‘A’ is liable under IPC. According to Section 2 of IPC “Every person shall be liable to punishment under this Code and not otherwise for every act or omission contrary to the provisions thereof, of which he shall be guilty within India”. Under S. 2 is the locality where the offence is committed and that the corporeal presence of the offender in India is immaterial.
This situation relates to Mobarik Ali v. The State of Bombay, AIR 1957 SC 857 case.
Problem No. 09:
A foreigner, committed and offence in South Africa, and has been staying in India. Can the Indian Courts have jurisdiction to try A.
No, Indian courts have no jurisdiction in this case. If the South African Government requests the Indian Government and there is an extradition treaty between the two countries, then he can be extradited under the Indian Extradition Act, 1962.
This situation relates to Jameson case, 1896 2 QB 425
Problem No. 10:
‘A’, a foreigner, abets a criminal act to be done in India. As the result of the abetment of A, that criminal act is committed in India. Can Indian Courts have jurisdiction to try ‘A’?
Yes, A is liable under IPC. According to Section 2 of IPC “Every person shall be liable to punishment under this Code and not otherwise for every act or omission contrary to the provisions thereof, of which he shall be guilty within India”. Under S. 2 is the locality where the offence is committed and that the corporeal presence of the offender in India is immaterial.
This situation relates to Chhotalal Baber, (1912) 36 Bom 524