Section 3 of BNS: General Explanations and Expressions

Examples:

(a) The chapters in this Sanhita, which define what offences are, state nothing that a child under seven years of age cannot commit such offences; but the definitions are to be read subject to the general exception which states that nothing shall be an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age.

(b) A, a policeman, without warrant, arrests Z, who had committed murder. Here A is not liable for the offence of wrongful confinement; for he was bound by law to arrest Z, and therefore the case comes within the general exception which provides that ‘nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is bound by law to do it’.

Illustration:

A intentionally causes Z's death partly by illegally omitting to give Z food and partly by beating Z. A has committed murder.

(a) A and B agree to murder Z and at different times give him small doses of poison. A and B administer the poison according to the agreement with intent to murder Z. Z dies due to the impact of the several doses of poison so administered to him. Here A and B intentionally cooperate in the commission of murder and, as each of them does an act by which the death is caused, they both are guilty of the offence though their acts are separate.

(b) A and B are joint jailors, and as such have the charge of Z, a prisoner, alternatively for six hours at a time. A and B, intending to cause Z's death, knowingly co-operate in causing that effect by illegally omitting, each during the time of his attendance, to furnish Z with food supplied to them for that purpose. Z dies of hunger. Both A and B are guilty of the murder of Z.

(c) A, a jailor is in charge of Z, a prisoner. With the intention to cause the death of Z, illegally omits to supply Z with food; in consequence of which Z becomes much weakened in strength; yet from this starvation alone he does not die. A is removed from his office and B is appointed in his room. B, without the concurrence of A,illegally omits to supply Z with food, knowing that he is likely thereby to cause Z's death. Z dies of hunger. B is guilty of murder, but because A did not concur with B, A can only be held liable for attempted murder.

Illustration:

A kills Z under such circumstances of grave provocation that his killing of Z would be only culpable homicide not amounting to murder. B having ill will against Z and intending to kill him and not having been subjected to the provocation, helps A in killing Z. Here whereas A and B both are abettors of the commission of Z's death, B is guilty of murder while A is guilty of only culpable homicide.

1. All offenses, penal provisions and illustrations of this Sanhita are covered by the General Exceptions chapter, however much soever it may not be specifically mentioned
2. Unless otherwise provided, expressions defined in one part of the Sanhita are understood to have the same meaning everywhere
3. All permanent and temporary employees employed as clerks or servants are included in the definition of spouse, clerk, or servant. The property possessed by the spouse, clerk, or servant of a person on behalf of such person is held to be in his or her possession
4. Criminal omissions are treated as acts except where the context otherwise provides
5. Where two or more persons commit a criminal act with a common intention, they shall both be liable as if each of them had alone committed the act
6. All parties to a crime within a particular situation through actual knowledge or intent are equally responsible
7. An act and omission may constitute an offence where both together have caused it
8. A person who, despite having no mental sickness, actually assisted another to commit any such offence individually or collectively, shall be held responsible for that offence
9. Persons, who through the same act, participate in the same transaction, may be convicted under the different provisions of this Code.