CONTENT









INTRODUCTION
HISTORY
OBJECTIVE
ELEMENTS OF CRIME
SCOPE AND APPLICABILITY OF LAW OF CRIMES
STAGES OF CRIME
CASE LAWS
CONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY
INTRODUCTION
The Indian Penal Code is the main criminal code of India. It is a comprehensive code intended to
cover all substantive aspects of criminal law. The code was drafted in 1860 on the recommendations
of first law commission of India established in 1834 under the Government of India Act 1833 under
the Chairmanship of Thomas Babington Macaulay.[1][2][3] It came into force in British India during
the early British Raj period in 1862. However, it did not apply automatically in the Princely states,
which had their own courts and legal systems until the 1940s. The Code has since been amended
several times and is now supplemented by other criminal provisions.
After the partition of the British Indian Empire, the Indian Penal Code was inherited by its
successor states, the Dominion of India and the Dominion of Pakistan, where it continues
independently as the Pakistan Penal Code. The Ranbir Penal Code (RPC) applicable in Jammu and
Kashmir is also based on this Code.[2] After the separation of Bangladesh from Pakistan, the code
continued in force there. The Code was also adopted by the British colonial authorities in Colonial
Burma, Ceylon (modern
Sri
Lanka),
the Straits
Settlements (now
part
of
Malaysia), Singapore and Brunei, and remains the basis of the criminal codes in those countries.
Criminal law is a body of rules and statutes that defines conduct prohibited by the state
because it threatens and harms public safety and welfare and that establishes punishment to be
imposed for the commission of such acts. Criminal law differs from civil law, whose emphasis is
more on dispute resolution than in punishment. The term criminal law generally refers to substantive
criminal laws. Substantive criminal laws define crimes and prescribe punishments. In contrast,
Criminal Procedure describes the process through which the criminal laws are enforced. For
example, the law prohibiting murder is a substantive criminal law. The manner in which state
enforces this substantive law through the gathering of evidence and prosecution is generally
considered a procedural matter.
1
1. Universal's Guide to Judicial Service Examination. Universal Law Publishing. p. 2.ISBN 9350350297.
2. Lal Kalla, Krishan. The Literary Heritage of Kashmir. Jammu and Kashmir: Mittal Publications.p. 75.
Retrieved 19 September 2014.
3. "Law Commission of India - Early Beginnings". Law Commission of India. Retrieved19 September 2014.
If a person commits a crime voluntarily or after preparation the doing of it involves four
different stages. In every crime, there is first intention to commit it, secondly, preparation to commit
it, thirdly, attempt to commit it and fourthly the accomplishment.
HISTORY
The first civilizations generally did not distinguish between civil law and criminal law. The first
written codes of law were designed by the Sumerians. Around 2100-2050 BC Ur-Nammu,
the Neo-Sumerian king of Ur, enacted the oldest written legal code whose text has been
discovered: the Code of Ur-Nammu although an earlier code of Urukagina of Lagash ( 23802360 BC ) is also known to have existed. Another important early code was the Code
Hammurabi, which formed the core of Babylonian law. Only fragments of the early criminal
laws of Ancient Greece have survived, e.g. those of Solon and Draco.
In Roman law, Gaius's Commentaries on the Twelve Tables also conflated the civil and criminal
aspects, treating theft (furtum) as a tort. Assault and violent robbery were analogized to trespass
as to property. Breach of such laws created an obligation of law or vinculum juris discharged by
payment of monetary compensation or damages. The criminal law of imperial Rome is collected
in Books 47-48 of the Digest. After the revival of Roman law in the 12th century, sixth-century
Roman classifications and jurisprudence provided the foundations of the distinction between
criminal and civil law in European law from then until the present time.
The draft of the Indian Penal Code was prepared by the First Law Commission, chaired by
Thomas Babington Macaulay in 1838 and was submitted to Governor-General of India Council
in 1837. Its basis is the law of England freed from superfluities, technicalities and local
peculiarities. Elements were also derived from the Napoleonic Code and from Edward
Livingston's Louisiana Civil Code of 1825. The first final draft of the Indian Penal Code was
submitted to the Governor-General of India in Council in 1837, but the draft was again revised.
The drafting was completed in 1850 and the Code was presented to the Legislative Council in
1856, but it did not take its place on the statute book of British India until a generation later,
following the Indian Rebellion of 1857. The draft then underwent a very careful revision at the
hands of Barnes Peacock, who later became the first Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court,
and the future puisne judges of the Calcutta High Court, who were members of the Legislative
Council, and was passed into law on 6 October 18602. The Code came into operation on 1
January 1862. Macaulay did not survive to see his masterpiece come into force, having died near
the end of 1859.
2 "history of IPC is provided in comments"
OBJECTIVE
Criminal law is distinctive for the uniquely serious potential consequences or sanctions for
failure to abide by its rules. Every crime is composed of criminal elements. Capital
punishment may be imposed in some jurisdictions for the most serious crimes. Physical
or corporal punishment may be imposed such as whipping or caning, although these punishments
are prohibited in much of the world. Individuals may be incarcerated in prison or jail in a variety
of conditions depending on the jurisdiction. Confinement may be solitary. Length of
incarceration may vary from a day to life. Government supervision may be imposed,
including house arrest, and convicts may be required to conform to particularized guidelines as
part of a parole or probation regimen. Fines also may be imposed, seizing money or property
from a person convicted of a crime.
Five objectives are widely accepted for enforcement of the criminal law
by punishments: retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation and restoration.
Jurisdictions differ on the value to be placed on eac.
Retribution: Retribution gives an offender a punishment equal to the crime they committed.
Offenders essentially surrender their rights to take advantage of certain laws upon committing a
crime. Therefore, an offender who commits a serious offense loses the right to be denied an
equivalent sentencing, such as a lawful execution.
Deterrence: Deterrence imposes a suitable penalty upon an offender with the goal
discouraging them committing criminal behavior again. This consequence has an effect on
society, with the goal of discouraging others from committing the same crimes as the offender.
Incapacitation: Incapacitation keeps offenders away from society, protecting the general public
from their disordered behavior. Prison sentences are the most common form of incapacitation
today.
Rehabilitation: Rehabilitation is the act of turning an offender into a valuable member of the
general public. The main goal is helping offenders learn their offending behavior was wrong,
preventing further offenses in the future.
Restoration: Restoration benefits the victim. It’s the act of repairing any injury inflicted to the
victim by an offender. This form of justice is combined with other criminal law objectives to
come to a conclusion for an offending suit.
The objective of this Act is to provide a general penal code for India.3 Though not an initial objective,
the Act does not repeal the penal laws which were in force at the time of coming into force in India.
This was so because the Code does not contain all the offences and it was possible that some
offences might have still been left out of the Code, which were not intended to be exempted from
penal consequences. Though this Code consolidates the whole of the law on the subject and is
exhaustive on the matters in respect of which it declares the law, many more penal statutes
governing various offences have been created in addition to the code.
3 "Preamble of IPC"
ELEMENTS OF CRIME

Human Being

Mens Rea (Mental element or Evil intent).

Actus Reus (Act or omission)

Injury
HUMAN BEING: The first essential element of crime is that it must have been committed by a
human being. He/she must be under a legal obligation to act in a particular way and a fit subject
for the infliction of appropriate punishment. Generally both the wrong doer and aggrieved are
human beings. In olden days, animals also were punished for committing crimes.
MENS REA: Mens rea is Latin phrase, meaning "guilty mind". This is the mental element of the
crime. A guilty mind means an intention to commit some wrongful act. Intention under criminal
law is separate from a person's motive4 (although motive does not exist in Scots law).
A lower threshold of mens rea is satisfied when a defendant recognizes an act is dangerous but
decides to commit it anyway. This is recklessness. It is the mental state of mind of the person at
the time the actus reus was committed. For instance, if C tears a gas meter from a wall to get the
money inside, and knows this will let flammable gas escape into a neighbour's house, he could
be liable for poisoning. Courts often consider whether the actor did recognize the danger, or
alternatively ought to have recognized a risk. Of course, a requirement only that one ought to
have recognized a danger (though he did not) is tantamount to erasing intent as a requirement. In
this way, the importance of mens rea has been reduced in some areas of the criminal law but is
obviously still an important part in the criminal system.
Wrongfulness of intent also may vary the seriousness of an offense and possibly reduce the
punishment but this is not always the case. A killing committed with specific intent to kill or with
conscious recognition that death or serious bodily harm will result, would be murder, whereas a
killing affected by reckless acts lacking such a consciousness could be manslaughter.5 On the
other hand, it matters not who is actually harmed through a defendant's actions. The doctrine
of transferred malice means, for instance, that if a man intends to strike a person with his belt,
4 R v. Mohan [1975] 2 All ER 193
5 R v. Woolin [1998] 4 All ER 103
but the belt bounces off and hits another, mens rea is transferred from the intended target to the
person who actually was struck.
ACTUS REUS6: Actus Reus is Latin for "guilty act" and is the physical element of committing a
crime. It may be accomplished by an action, by threat of action, or exceptionally, by
an omission to act, which is a legal duty to act. For example, the act of A striking B might
suffice, or a parent's failure to give food to a young child also may provide the actus reus for a
crime.
Where the actus reus is a failure to act, there must be a duty of care. A duty can arise
through contract, a voluntary undertaking, a blood relation with whom one lives, and
occasionally through one's official position.7 Duty also can arise from one's own creation of a
dangerous situation.8 On the other hand, it was held in the U.K. that switching off the life support
of someone in a persistent vegetative state is an omission to act and not criminal. Since
discontinuation of power is not a voluntary act, not grossly negligent, and is in the patient's best
interests, no crime takes place. In this case it was held that since a PVS patient could not give or
withhold consent to medical treatment, it was for the doctors to decide whether treatment was in
the patient's best interest. It was never lawful to take active steps to cause or accelerate death,
although in certain circumstances it was lawful to withhold life sustaining treatment, including
feeding, without which the patient would die.
Causation is not broken simply because a victim is particularly vulnerable. This is known as
the thin skull rule. However, it may be broken by an intervening act (novus actus interveniens) of
a third party, the victim's own conduct, or another unpredictable event. A mistake
in medical treatment typically will not sever the chain, unless the mistakes are in themselves "so
potent in causing death.
INJURY: The fourth requirement of a crime is injury to another person or to the society at large.
Injury means to cause harm to any person in body, mind, reputation or property. The injury must
cause the harm to another human being or to the society in general or to the public at large. “The
injury should be illegally caused to any person in body, mind, reputation or property as
according to Section 44 of IPC, 1860 the injury denotes any harm whatever illegally caused to
6 Omprakash v. State of Punjab, AIR 1956AII,241.
7 R v. Dytham [1979] QB 722, where a policeman on duty stood and watched three men kicks another to
death.
8 R v. Miller [1983] 1 All ER 978
any person in body, mind, reputation or property.” 9 The act by which injury is caused must be
proximate, but not consequential.
Example: A digs a ditch in front of his house on the public way leaving it uncovered, causing
public nuisance. B, a motor cyclist fell in that ditch and received injury, it is a proximate injury.
In case, he takes diversion because of the ditch and fell down in the next street, the injury is
consequential.
SCOPE AND APPLICABILITY OF IPC
Punishment of offences committed within India (Sec 2, IPC)
“Every person shall be liable to punishment under IPC for every act or omission
contrary to the provisions thereof, of which, he shall be guilty within India”.

Foreigners:
The words “every person” are believed to have made it clear that a foreigner is

subject to Indian Penal Code for an act committed within Esop.
Foreign Sovereigns : Foreign Sovereigns are exempted by International Law which (in this

respect) is part of national law.
“Within India” : Section 2 focuses on operation of the Code “within India” .This limits its

territorial operation .But it is to be read with Section 3,4, 108A, etc. which (directly or indirectly)
provided for its extra territorial preparation.
“Every person”: The words “every person” highlight the universal application of the Code to all
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
persons. The expression “person” is defined in Section 11. Section 2 should, however, be read as
subject to provisions to the contrary, which may be found in various enactments or sources. Principal
examples are:
The constitution Articles, e.g Article 361.
Excepting provisions in the Indian penal Code (e.g. Chapter4).
Excepting or limiting provisions in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Excepting provisions in special laws in the nature of protective clauses.
Rules of International Law.
9 http://www.vuhelp.net/
Rules of public International Law: Certain rules of International Law, are regarded as part of the
national law also. One such rule is that foreign states and foreign sovereigns are not subject to the
jurisdiction of national courts.
In India, this rule continues to apply in regard to criminal proceedings. In regard to civil
proceedings, it has been slightly modified by Section 86, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. That
Section, while not totally abrogating the immunity conferred by Public International Law, provides
that a foreign sovereign cannot be sued except with the consent of the Central Government.
Punishment of offences committed beyond but which by law may be tried within India (Sec 3,
IPC)
Any person liable by any Indian law to be tried for an offence committed beyond India shall be dealt
with according to the provisions of IPC for any act committed beyond India in the same manner as if
such act had been committed within India.
Scope: The section provides for extra- territorial operation of Indian legislation relating to criminal
law, but only if the terms of the section are satisfied. A very important ingredient of the Section is
contained in the words. “Any person liable by any Indian law….”.
The Section operates only where an Indian Law specifically provides that an act committed outside
Indian may be dealt with under that law in India.
At the same time, if the “Indian Law” clearly provides for its own extra territorial application then it
is immaterial that the act or omission was not punishment in the foreign country.
Application: Section 3, IPC applies only to a person liable by any Indian Law to be tried for an
offence committed beyond India. If the Indian Law does not have extraterritorial operation then
Section 3 does not apply. At the same time if there is in force such law, it is not necessary that the act
mist be punishable where it was committed.
Extension of IPC to extra territorial offences (Sec 3, IPC)
The provisions if this Code apply also to any offence committed by(1) Any citizen of India in any place without and beyond India;
(2) Any person on any shop or aircraft registered in India wherever it may be.
In this Section the word “offence” includes every act committed outside India which, if committed
in India, would be punishable under this Code.
Illustration
A, who is a citizen of India, commits a murder in Uganda. He can be tried and convicted of murder
in any place in India at which he may be found.
Scope: Section 4, IPC defines the extra territorial application of the Code. Procedure for securing
surrender is governed by the Extradition Act,1962. It does not apply where the offender is not a
citizen of India.
Section 4 provides for the extra territorial operation of the Penal Code. Such operation is
conditioned by the nationality of the offender
Illegal arrest: Even if a person is arrested outside India illegally for trial in India , the trial is not
vitiated by the illegality of the arrest-Vinayak D. Saarkar,1920 ILR 35 Bom 225(arrest alleged to
be in violation of rules of Public International Law).
Basis of extra territorial jurisdiction:
The most fundamental principle of extra- territorial jurisdiction is nationality. As early as the first
authoritative commentator on jurisdiction, the Italian jurist Bartolus, himself a confirmed
territoriality, it has been admitted that a state’s laws may be applied extraterritorially to its citizens,
Individuals or corporations, wherever they may be found.
.
A much more controversial form of extraterritorial jurisdiction is the so called effects principle.
Extraterritorial though it may be in practice, in theory the effects principle is grounded on the
principle of territorial jurisdiction. The premise is that a state has jurisdiction over extraterritorial
conduct when the conduct has an effect within its territory.
The effects principle received its most notable enunciation in the Lotus case, where the
permanent Court of International Justice was asked to decide whether Turkey had violated “The
principles of international law” by asserting criminal jurisdiction over a French officer who had been
navigating a private French vessel, when it collided with, and sank, a Turkish ship on the high seas.
Certain laws not to be affected by this Act (Sec 3, IPC)
Nothing in this Act shall affect the provisions of any Act for punishing mutiny and desertion
of officers, soldiers, sailors or airman in the service of the Government of India or the provisions
of any special or local law.
Scope: Section 5 marks it clear that the Indian Penal Code is not exhaustive of the entire criminal
law of the country.
Section 5 saves the operation of two categories of laws, namely:(i) Enactments relating to armed forces, and
(ii) Special and local laws.
STAGES OF CRIMES




Intention
Preparation
Attempt
Accomplishment
INTENTION: Intention is the mental condition of a person about the act to be done. It
is direction of conduct towards the object chosen. Intention is a necessary element and a prestige
of crime. Without intention no act can be committed. But mere intention is not in itself a crime.
If there is intention and in furtherance of intention act has been done then the act is punishable as
crime. But if no act has been done, then mere intention does not constitute an offence.
Intention cannot be manifested; it can only be inferred by surrounding.
Preparation: Preparation is the second stage in the commission of a crime. It means to
arrange the necessary measures for the commission of the intended criminal act. Intention alone
or the intention followed by a preparation is not enough to constitute the crime. Preparation has
not been made punishable because in most of the cases the prosecution has failed to prove that
the preparations in the question were made for the commission of the particular crime.
For example, if A purchases a pistol and keeps the same in his pocket duly loaded in order to kill his
bitter enemy B, but does nothing more. A has not committed any offence as still he is at the
stage of preparation and it will be impossible for the prosecution to prove that A was carrying the
loaded pistol only for the purpose of killing B.
Preparation When PunishableGenerally, preparation to commit any offence is not punishable but in some exceptional cases
preparation is punishable, following are some examples of such exceptional circumstancesi
ii
Preparation to wage war against the Government - Section 122, IPC 1860
Preparation to commit depredation on territories of a power at peace with Government of IndiaSection 126, IPC 1860
iii
iv
Preparation to commit dacoity- Section 399, IPC 1860
Preparation for counterfeiting of coins or Government stamps- Sections 233-235, S. 255
and S.257; Possessing counterfeit coins, false weight or measurement and forged documents.
Mere possession of these is a crime and no possessor can plead that he is still at the stage
of preparation- Sections 242, 243, 259, 266 and 474.
ATTEMPT: Attempt is the direct movement towards the commission after the preparation is
made. It is the last stage of the crime. If the attempt is successful then the actual crime which was
intended can be said to be completed. On the other hand if the attempt is not successful then we
cannot say that the crime has been committed which was intended.
However under the IPC attempt to commit any crime is also punishable and considered as a
crime.
Attempt is intentional preparatory act for the commission of crime. If the act completes in its
object then we can say that crime has been completed. On the other hand if the act does not
achieve its object because of existence of some circumstances independent to the will of the
accused, then it can be said that actual crime or intended crime has not been committed. In such
case only attempt can be said to be committed. However attempt is also an offence punishable
under IPC.
There are two types of classification of attempt.
 Attempt under specific sections
 Attempt under other offences
In first type of case specific attempts has been punished under some specific section. For e.g.
Under section 307, attempt to commit murder is punishable. On the other hand if there is no
specific section of any attempt then such attempt is made punishable under section 511 of IPC.10
ACCOMPLISHMENT: The last stage in the commission of an offence is its accomplishment or
completion. If the accused succeeds in his attempt to commit the crime, he will be guilty of the
complete offence and if his attempt is unsuccessful he will be guilty of an attempt only. For
example, A fires at B with the intention to kill him, if B dies, A will be guilty for committing the
offence of murder and if B is only injured, it will be a case of attempt to murder.
10 BARE ACT; The Indian Penal Code(45 of 1860)
CASE LAWS
1
Sandeep Kumar v. Pooja [2015 STPL (Web) 1568 Del]
Criminal Law – Quashing of FIR- Criminal Procedure Code, 1973- Section 482, Indian Penal
Code, 1860, Section 498A, 406, 34- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Section 3 and 4- Matter arose out
of matrimonial dispute and has been settled between the two parties- Less likelihood is there of
prosecution succeeding in this matter- Held therefore, FIR quashed and proceedings emanating
there from also quashed.
2
Avinash v. State [2015 STPL (Web) 1566 DELHI (Del)]
Criminal Law- Anticipatory Bail- Cruelty- Indian Penal Code- Sections 498-A, 406, 34,
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973- Section 438- In this present case bail was granted to husband along
with condition to pay Rs. 50,000 to wife for meeting day to day expenses of the child- Question that
arose was whether that this compensation to be paid as a condition to the bail can be termed as
unreasonable which can have the effect of buying the bail- Held, that the complainant being lady,
dependent on her parents- suggestion by court for making provisions for the immediate need of the
child can not be described as buying the bail- Condition imposed.
3
Ramki v. State of Tamil Nadu [2015 STPL (Web) 1565 MADRAS (MAD) ( DB)
Criminal Law- Preventive detention- non supply of copy order in translated
language- T.N Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest
Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates
Act (14 of 1982), Section 3- The Detenu provided with illegible copy of document due to which he
failed to comprehend terms of detention order and could not comply with order of court – Court
failed to provide translated copy of document – Held that preventive detention order quashed due to
non supply of report in vernacular language.
4
Richpal Kharra V. State [2015 STPL (Web) 1578 Rajasthan (RAJ)
Criminal Law- Rape- DNA Test of accused mandatory in nature- Criminal procedure code,
1973, Section 53 A- DNA Test of accused- in this present case the complainant who alleged rape on
her self told the police that she was not interested in pursuing the matter and that no offence of rape
had taken place with her- Police filed negative report- Held that Section 53-A of CrPC is mandatory
in nature. Accused was directed to provide sample for DNA testing to be sent by investigating officer
to the FSL and then FSL to bring the report to the court and court may pursue the matter further , if
necessary.
5
Manohar Singh vs. State of Rajhasthan and Ors. [ Criminal Appeal no. 99 of
2015 arising out of SLP (CRL) No. 1491 or 2012]
Criminal Law- Rehabilitation of victim- Indian Penal Code, Section 323- In the present case the
appeal was preferred against the order of the High Court for setting aside the sentence of
imprisonment of the accused- the honorable Court has held that the accused has to pay
compensation to the accused in addition to the imprisonment and it can be said to rehabilitate the
victim- Stress was laid on the reparation of Human Rights of the victim- Held the accused to pay a
compensation of Rs. 50,000 and in case of failure to pay he has to undergo rigorous imprisonment
for three months.
6
Mansoor Alam v. State of Utar Pradesh & ANR [ Criminal Appeal No. 91 of 2015
arising out of SLP (CRL) no. 9247 or 2013]
Criminal Law- Grant of Bail– Indian Penal Code Section 302, 34 and 120 B- In instant case
accused shot a bullet and killed another, the High court granted bail to accused on the ground that
there were only two fatal injuries and the rest were injuries on non-vital parts of the body- Held, that
order of high curt is set aside and accused to remain in prison.- Bail refused.
7
Ahmed Shah & ANR. v. State of Rajhasthan [ Criminal Appeal no. 17/2009]
Criminal Case- Conviction under Section 302/ 34 of IPC or Section 304– In the present
case the accused being 7 in number formed an unlawful assembly armed with weapons to take
possession of the fields of the claimant- on spot due to a scuffle they caused injuries on complainant
and his partners- 2 died as a result of those injuries- Court held that the conviction would be under
Section 304 instead of Section 302 because this case fell within the fourth exception of Section 300
of murder, which states murder in case of sudden fight, which is to be without premeditation, sudden
in nature, without the offender having taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel manner, the fight
must have been with the persons killed- The accused inflicted injuries on the neck etc, knowing it
would cause death rest they fell within the fourth exception of Section 300- Held – no reason to
interfere with the order of the High of conviction only the sections were changed.
CONCLUSION
Criminal law is a body of rules and statutes that defines conduct prohibited by the
state because it threatens and harms public safety and welfare and that establishes
punishment to be imposed for the commission of such acts. Criminal law differs from
civil law, whose emphasis is more on dispute resolution than in punishment. The term
criminal law generally refers to substantive criminal laws. Substantive criminal laws
define crimes and prescribe punishments. In contrast, Criminal Procedure describes
the process through which the criminal laws are enforced.
For example, the law prohibiting murder is a substantive criminal law. The manner in
which state enforces this substantive law — through the gathering of evidence and
prosecution — is generally considered a procedural matter.
If a person commits a crime voluntarily or after preparation the doing of it
involves four different stages. In every crime, there is first intention to commit it,
secondly, preparation to commit it, thirdly, attempt to commit it and fourthly the
accomplishment.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
REFERENCE BOOKS :

"Law Commission of India - Early Beginnings". Law Commission of India. Retrieved19
September 2014.

Prof. S.N.Mishra; Indian Penal Code; Central Law Publications, Allahabad, Tenth
Edition(September) 2001.

K.D. Gaur; A Text Book of The Indian Penal Code, Universal Law Publishing Company
Pvt.Limited, New Delhi, Third Edition 2004

O.P. Srivastava; Principles of Criminal Law, Eastern Book Company, Lucknow, Fifth
Edition, 2010
INTERNET SOURCES :

www.vakilno1.com
www.lexisnexis.com/academics
www.indiakanoon.com
www.indialawjournal.com
www.wikipedia.org
www.thelegaldictionary.com